We could have built a swimming pool,
​
We could have built a tennis court,
​
Instead, we want to share one of the best neighborhoods in Pittsburgh with 4 new families.
​
But what happened to the project?
WHAT HAPPENED
In January 2022, the City approved the by-right development proposed by Yang Zhang, owner of 6629 Northumberland Street, to construct a by-right multi-unit dwelling (with 5 off-street parking spaces) on the vacant lot of the property. A neighbor living on Ridgeville street (who is also a local attorney), has since filed multiple appeals against the decision by Pittsburgh Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA).​ The Zoning Board of Adjustment, the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County have both denied the appeal.
​
NEW! In April 2025, the Commonwealth Court of PA reversed the above decisions, and concluded the following:
​
-
The Court agreed with the neighbor that the Pittsburgh Zoning Code does not permit “Unit Group Development” in the RM-M zoning district.
-
It emphasized that, while Unit Group Development is explicitly allowed in downtown districts, it is not authorized in RM-M residential zones.​​
Timeline of Events
Nov 21, 2021
Group community meeting (over zoom) with 10+ neighbors on Northumberland and Ridgeville Street.
Jan 4, 2022
Project was granted a Record of Zoning Approval (No. DCP-ZDR-2020-05624).
Jan 11, 2022
Project was presented at Squirrel Hill Urban Coalition Public Meeting (slides)
Oct-Dec, 2021
Initial outreach to neighbors. Individual communications through text and email. (See "our efforts" section for details)
Feb 2022
The neighbor filed a protest appeal with the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Jul 12, 2022
The neighbor filed an appeal to the Court of Common Pleas, requesting to reverse ZBA’s decision.
Dec 20, 2022
The Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County denied and dismissed the neighbor’s appeal.
Jun 13, 2022
The Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) issued the decision denying the neighbor's protest appeal.
April 13, 2022
(after appeal was filed)
Final meeting with the neighbor and two other neighbors. Yang proposed a concession to address neighbor's concern on height and privacy with the hope of reaching concensus. (slides)
Jan 19, 2023
The neighbor filed a further appeal to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.
April 2025
The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has reversed the decision of the Court of Common Pleas. For more details, read here.
​​
After consulting with relevant parties, Yang has decided to respect the ruling and will not pursue any further appeals. The future of the side lot remains to be determined.
By-right Development
Facts on Zoning
The site is located in Squirrel Hill, Pittsburgh, within the zoning code RM-M, which refers to "multifamily residential with moderate density". Read more here.
​
The RM-M zoning district covers 5.59% of the city.
-
Minimum lot size: 3,200 sq ft
-
Minimum lot size per unit: 1,800 sq ft
-
Minimum front setback: 25 ft
-
Minimum rear setback: 25 ft
-
Minimum exterior/street side setback: 25 ft
-
Minimum interior side setback: 10 ft
-
Maximum height: 55 ft, not to exceed 4 stories
What makes it "by-right"?
The proposed development was designed in collaboration with Indovina Associates. The newly designed building conforms to all code requirements, including set back, parking, unit # and building height.
The project did require an Administrative exception (AE), due to the location of the new garage. In Pittsburgh, an Administrator Exception is sometimes required by the Zoning Code based on the project location and scope of work for certain requests that are allowed by right.
​
The presence of this AE later became the basis of the neighbor's appeals.
Efforts to Bridge the Gap
We started engaging with the neighbors since October 2021. More details can be found here:
Engagement with the Appellant neighbor
During our initial conversation with the neighbor, the main concern was around the design of the garage, given its proximity to the property line and its height. We iterated on the design and added trees to enhance the privacy and even provided simulated renderings on the impact of this improvement.
The neighbor then questioned the validity of the development (due to lot consolidation), and asked for proof that the lot has been consolidated. We obtained multiple letters from the city stating that lot consolidation was not required for this project.
​
.jpg)
After we sent the garage improvement plan and city letter on lot consolidation to the neighbor, we learned about his main concern:
​
"My primary concern is the height/location of the building. Assuming that it meets the zoning code, its location at the far rear of the property is going to make it look much larger and intrusive from our property. "
(Email exchange on Oct 20, 2021)
Initial Email introducing the project (Oct 4, 2021)
In the appeal the neighbor submitted, it was stated that "There has been some confusion around the processing of this zoning permit." with no mention of "building height and location".
On April 13, 2022, after the neighbor filed the initial appeal, we tried our last effort to save the project by presenting more facts on the building height, and even proposed 3 different modification schemes to address the privacy concern (more details). However, it was communicated to us that the appeal won't be dropped unless the building is reduced to only 3 stories.
Hearing what Yang has to say
The previous sections were meant to present objective facts with no subjective opinions. The truth should be able to speak for itself. In this section, let's hear from the owner.
Q: Why did you pursue this development? And after nearly two years of legal battle why are you still pursuing the development?
A: Honestly, 4 years ago when I bought the house I did not know that I would pursue with a housing development. I just knew that it has a double lot and we needed to do "something" with it. We looked into many options, and as I mentioned on this site, building a swimming pool, tennis court or sand volleyball court, or leaving it as is were options. However, I do not favor any of those options (even though I'm an avid tennis / beach volleyball player), as they don't serve the best use of the land (in my opinion). Together with my architect we came up with the modern condo development scheme and went through multiple iterations to make the appearance as contextually fitting as possible to the neighborhood. Our thoughts were to design modern living units for empty nesters who are looking to downsize and value single-story living with elevators. The 4 new units are not affordable housing, but the new residents will downsize their home and their original home could be great starter homes for young families.
​
Unfortunately, the appeals from the backstreet neighbor had devastating impact on the project. We lost our pre-committed buyer (who was downsizing from a big home in the same neighborhood), and we had to spend thousands of dollars on legal fees to go through 2 years of court battles. Not to mention that the project has been delayed by 24 months and dragged into a high-interest rate environment. On the other hand, the neighbor, who is an attorney themselves, filed for all the appeals almost at no cost. Even if I eventually win the battle (which I believe so), our system is set up in the way that there is no recourse on the appellant side.
​
After 2 years I have not given up because: 1) I still strongly believe that more housing is the best use of this lot, and as the owner of this lot it's my duty to make sure it lives up to its best use, 2) this is a by-right development with no variances needed, for me it's important to stand up and fight for what's right.
Q: Two years ago during the Squirrel Hill Urban Coalition Meeting one of the Ridgeville Street neighbors asked you "Mr Zhang, what's your current affiliation with Squirrel Hill?", what's your answer now?
A: I remembered it was a weird question, especially since that meeting was mainly aimed to talk about the project itself. In 2023 my answer is: I'm a local resident of Squirrel Hill and have been living here since 2019. I temporarily moved to Friendship neighborhood while the house has gone through renovation and I have recently moved back to 6629 Northumberland Street. As a US citizen and Squirrel Hill resident, I'm proudly supporting our newly elected county executive who advocates for more affordable housing and property tax reform.
​
Q: Looking back is there anything you could have done better throughout the process?
A: This has been a question I have been thinking throughout the past 2 years. I think my answer is I wish I have done a more extensive community engagement meeting early on. I failed to do it partially because of my inexperience (I'm not a seasoned developer at all). The other reason this did not happen is because when we were planning for the project, it was in 2020/2021 during the COVID pandemics and the communication channels were very limited. Because of the by-right nature of this project, we theoretically do not need to officially notify the neighborhood. I only have the chance to engage with 3 direct neighbors (1 on Northumberland and 2 on Ridgeville, including the one who appealed). By the time the neighborhood knew about the development, people who were against the project already started to spread out words and physical mails around the neighborhood and lots of information were biased and not 100% true. It was not until the community meeting that some neighbors got to know me and the project that they started to understand what we really tried to bring to the neighborhood. I still remember one neighbor at the end of the meeting told me "Yang, thanks for presenting the information, we hate you less now". It became an uphill battle when the community sentiment started a little biased and definitely took extra effort to undo the damage.
​
Q: For you, what's the most frustrating part of the story?
A: Believe it or not, despite the appeals which caused significant damage to the project, this is not the most frustrating part. In my opinion, the neighbor who appealed and I both exercised our rights as citizens of this country - I have the right to build what the zoning code allows and they have the right to follow the legal procedure and conduct appeal. However, one thing I do appreciate about this neighbor is that they were not the ones that ran around the neighborhood fanning the flames throughout the process, which was actually more frustrating.
​
I later learned that, one of the other neighbors who opposed the project and I had many overlapped years living in San Francisco, the capital of Nimbyism. She and I probably both had first hand experience witnessing the negative consequences of Nimbyism: sky-high housing prices, low affordability, and young people priced-out to leave California for somewhere more affordable. We both left San Francisco, moved to Pittsburgh and bought a house in Squirrel Hill, only one street apart. However, the story ended with one person wanted to create more housing for the neighborhood while the other person chose to become a local Nimbyist and led the force against new housing development. It's very ironic. And this has honestly frustrated me the most.
​
We could have built a swimming pool,
We could have built a tennis court,
Instead, we want to share one the best neighborhoods in Pittsburgh with 4 new families.
Yes, in my backyard.
