Corey O'Connor

Should Pittsburgh Continue Funding and Using ShotSpotter?

Posted on November 23, 2025 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

A ShotSpotter sensor mounted to a telephone pole at Susquehanna and Rosedale streets in Homewood. Photo by Bobbie Fan.

Pittsburgh has spent almost $8.5 million on a gunshot-detection system called ShotSpotter over the past 10 years. The city’s contract with SoundThinking, ShotSpotter’s California-based parent company, is set to expire at the end of 2025.

Supporters claim ShotSpotter allows police to arrive at crime scenes sooner, which leads to more arrests in gun-related crimes and gunshot victims getting help faster. Critics question its effectiveness and raise concerns about mass surveillance in Black neighborhoods and increasing bias in policing.

With Pittsburgh City Council preparing to discuss whether to renew the ShotSpotter contract, we analyzed an August 2025 audit of the system by City Controller Rachael Heisler’s office. Despite the report’s positive tone, a closer look prompted several disturbing questions.

How (and why) is ShotSpotter being compared to 911 emergency services?

Ms. Heisler’s report fails to address whether ShotSpotter has reduced gun violence, instead evaluating the system against 911. The report’s first result is that “ShotSpotter alerts tend to be just as productive as 911 calls.” Considering ShotSpotter’s $1.2 million per year price tag, shouldn’t the results be more solidly favorable compared to a service the city is not paying for?

In Pennsylvania, the 911 system is run by counties and funded with a statewide $1.95 surcharge on monthly phone bills or, for pre-paid phones, at the point of sale.

How often does ShotSpotter cause Pittsburgh police to respond to false alarms?

Ms. Heisler’s report did not include documentation of ShotSpotter’s false alarm rate, but the system has been known to classify fireworks or other loud sounds as gunfire. This increases the likelihood of wasting emergency resources. Pittsburgh’s police scanner logs reveal multiple examples of false alarms from sources including roofing work; gas explosions; and tires, balloons, or plastic soda bottles popping.

Why have 911 calls in Pittsburgh dropped by 50%?

The biggest mystery comes from the report’s assertion that, “Following the deployment of ShotSpotter, 911 calls decreased dramatically, a 50% drop from 2014.” The report does not list decreasing 911 calls as a goal of using ShotSpotter, but it does refer to the decrease as a “result.”

It seems unlikely that the reasons for 911 calls have undergone an equally dramatic decline. So it’s hard to see this finding in a positive light.

One clue lies in the report’s comparison of 911 and ShotSpotter response times. Charts 9 and 10 on page 16 show ShotSpotter significantly outperforming 911 in this area, although ShotSpotter’s response times got longer each year.

A pair of audits released by Ms. Heisler’s office and Allegheny County Controller Corey O’Connor’s office in September pointed out slowing response times for police and emergency medical services. They recommended increased staffing for the county’s 911 call center and improvements to programs that ensure first responders’ well-being.

While Ms. Heisler’s ShotSpotter report suggests the technology is cutting police response times, a study from the University of California Santa Barbara Economics Department concluded that ShotSpotter dispatches take away from the time police have to respond to 911 calls—effectively worsening their response times to calls of distress made by residents.

These are questions that should be answered before Pittsburgh commits to another long and expensive contract for ShotSpotter.

Questionable benefits, documented harms

According to SoundThinking’s website, more than 180 cities have purchased ShotSpotter. While some cities, like Pittsburgh, have stuck with the technology, others canceled their ShotSpotter contracts or chose not to renew them because of cost, a low confirmation of shootings, and a lack of effect on gun violence.

The most pressing concern about ShotSpotter is that it deepens racial bias in policing. In 2024, Chicago ended its relationship with ShotSpotter after years of controversy and high-profile tragedies. In 2021, a 13-year-old boy named Adam Toledo was chased, shot and killed by a Chicago police officer responding to a ShotSpotter alert. A lawsuit filed against the City of Chicago around misuses of ShotSpotter names Danny Ortiz, a 36-year-old father who was arrested and jailed by police who searched him while responding to a ShotSpotter alert.

In Pittsburgh, ShotSpotter has been deployed in every Black neighborhood. As the American Civil Liberties Union pointed out in a 2021 report, this creates a situation where “the police will detect more incidents (real or false) in places where the sensors are located. That can distort gunfire statistics and create a circular statistical justification for over-policing in communities of color.”

The risk of ShotSpotter misclassifying loud sounds is compounded by the risk of the loss of life in police-based violence—to which Pittsburgh is no stranger.

Furthermore, as a for-profit company, SoundThinking has an incentive to collaborate with its law enforcement clients. This creates an environment ripe for other abuses and lack of accountability.

This was the case with 65-year-old Michael Williams, who was wrongfully charged with murder after Chicago police asked a ShotSpotter analyst to move the location of an alert to match the crime scene. Though the charges were dropped, Mr. Williams spent 11 months in jail and contracted COVID-19 twice during that time.

In 2016, Silvon Simmons was shot at by a Rochester, NY, police officer in a case of mistaken identity. The officer claimed that Mr. Simmons shot at him instead. The trial against Mr. Simmons revolved around ShotSpotter alerts as evidence, which ShotSpotter analysts reclassified at the requests of the police department.

In 2020, Pittsburgh repealed its predictive policing following calls by Black activists to end the surveillance of Black people. In passing legislation regulating the use of predictive policing and facial recognition by the police, Mr. O’Connor—who was District 5’s city council representative at the time—spoke to the technology’s role in perpetuating bias.

“We have seen how this hurts people of color and people in low-income areas,” he told Pittsburgh CityPaper. Much of the same argument applies to the ShotSpotter system. But Ms. Heisler’s analysis glosses over these problems.

“The [city] controller’s analysis is the latest example of a city searching for any excuse it can find to retain ShotSpotter rather than invest in community programs that address the root causes of gun violence,” Ed Vogel, a researcher with Lucy Parsons Labs, said on Nov. 15. “This is an insult to every Pittsburgh resident whose life has been impacted by gun violence.”

Pittsburgh has multiple projects aiming to prevent gun violence, and Mayor Ed Gainey’s Plan for Peace includes a commitment to a public health model and community partnerships to accomplish this.

Tell City Council what you think

Pittsburgh’s budget hearings are well under way; the one on public safety happened on Nov. 18. The public will have a chance to comment on the budget again at a Dec. 11 public hearing. As of this writing, no date has been set for the council’s vote on renewing ShotSpotter’s contract.

P-G editorial admits: No shuttle road, no flood relief

Posted on August 7, 2025 by Junction Coalition op ed 0

Note: Junction Coalition became aware of a recent P-G editorial that blamed residents of Four Mile Run and allies for Pittsburgh Water’s defunding of flood control efforts in the neighborhood. The editorial labels us “conspiracy theorists,” then concludes that residents should have allowed the community-erasing Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) project to proceed if they wanted relief from dangerous 75-year floods on their streets. This is exactly the outcome residents have warned of for years.

Junction Coalition stands in solidarity with striking P-G writers. However, we need to correct the record in answer to their attack. The P-G rejected our response, so we are publishing it here. Please share widely!

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette’s July 13 editorial, “The real reason Four Mile Run is still a flood trap” ignores or mangles basic facts in an effort to rewrite history and preemptively blame the victims of potential catastrophic flooding in The Run. Which, indeed, could happen at any time—but not because our community exposed an attempted land grab by privateers operating behind closed doors.

The Junction Hollow Trail is part of Schenley Park. The P-G blandly labels the proposed MOC route a “corridor” to obscure its true nature: a private road through a public park.

Flood control remained unfunded long after the MOC was announced. After decades of being told Pittsburgh lacked funds to address flooding in our neighborhood, Run residents learned of the roadway from an Aug. 29, 2015, P-G article. The city planned to spend $26 million to connect Oakland university campuses and the ALMONO development in Hazelwood, eliminating The Run’s only community green space. Privately-operated “driverless shuttles” serving only university personnel and students would run every five minutes, 24/7.

The total absence of communication with affected residents about this major project violated Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act. In addition, the P-G article reported that a newly formed public-private partnership of the URA, CMU, and Pitt filed a $3 million grant application for the project with the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED). Their application contained numerous false statements, which the application form states is “punishable by criminal prosecution.” Eventually, the DCED deemed the application “incomplete” and let it expire. Documents received through Right-to-Know requests prove this.

City officials assured residents that the multimodal grant would contain flood-control measures. The claim was quickly proven false, as that specific grant could not be used for anything other than road construction.

Then, in August 2016, a devastating flood caught on camera (and reported by Brian O’Neill) showed our need for flood control in graphic detail. Only then were officials shamed into announcing the $41+ million 4 Mile Run Watershed Improvement Plan the following year, going so far as to call it “the gold standard” for flood mitigation going forward. The catch? Any flood control plan had to be built around the MOC—yet city and Pittsburgh Water representatives rushed to insist these were “two separate projects” happening “in tandem.”

It’s hard to “generate solutions” while being deceived. Several stormwater management professionals offered ideas that were discarded because they did not accommodate the MOC. Pittsburgh Water spent eight years and $8.7 million designing for 10-year floods in a neighborhood that experienced multiple 25- and 75-year floods over the course of one decade.

Only $14 million of the project budget was slated for flood control in the “core area.” According to a 2020 email from senior manager of public affairs Rebecca Zito, “The remaining funding can go towards future projects in the upper portions of the watershed, provide opportunities to collaborate with the universities and other community organizations on future stormwater projects.”

Within six months of Mayor Gainey canceling the MOC in February 2022, Pittsburgh Water removed all green infrastructure elements from their stormwater project. But they continued to promise Run residents, “We are going to do the stormwater project no matter what” until defunding their proposed solution without public discussion at the end of 2024. Pittsburgh Water didn’t inform the public for another few months.

We are going to do the stormwater project no matter what. If the roadway stopped being planned, we would have to amend our permit, which would result in a paperwork review for PA DEP and some timing changes, but we would still do our project. For the stormwater project, the money is committed, the PWSA board has approved it, the design is essentially complete, and we are moving forward with it. We combined the stormwater project with the mobility corridor project because we wanted to limit the number of conflicts from a construction perspective and to make sure the costs were reasonable for our ratepayers and city taxpayers.
—Four Mile Run Stormwater Improvement Project Virtual Community Meeting Minutes (September 15, 2020)

Despite its “zombie status,” the MOC enjoyed a healthy budget well into 2022. The P-G implies that former city councilor Corey O’Connor dealt the MOC’s death blow by removing $4.15 million from its budget in 2020—although the same amount reappeared in the 2022 MOC budget, which totaled about $7 million. By the time Mayor Gainey campaigned against it, the MOC had supposedly become a non-issue. So which is it—did Mayor Gainey doom The Run to languish without a private roadway bulldozed through it, or did he merely glom onto Mr. O’Connor’s heroic pantomime of destroying the MOC?

Opposition to the MOC was never confined to a handful of Run residents. As the P-G admits, the MOC became a defining issue of former mayor Bill Peduto’s second term—and Mr. Peduto became Pittsburgh’s first incumbent mayor to be unseated since 1933. Pittsburgh’s taxpayers and voters have thoroughly vetted and rejected the shuttle road.

No one—including the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP)—believes the MOC was essential to successful flood control in The Run. In fact, the PA DEP’s technical deficiency letters in response to Pittsburgh Water’s joint permit application contained questions about how including the MOC in the project furthered Pittsburgh Water’s stated goal of managing stormwater in the area.

The MOC hobbled flood control from the beginning, and the stormwater project could be far more effective without it. Dedicated public servants would seize this opportunity to improve on the existing design—if they prioritized residents’ safety above the dreams of universities, foundations, and developers.

The Remaking Cities Institute of CMU stated its intentions for The Run in its 2009 “Remaking Hazelwood” report: “The urban design recommendations proposed in this document extend beyond the boundary of the ALMONO site. The end of Four Mile Run valley, the hillside and Second Avenue are all critical to the overall framework. Some of these areas are publicly-held; others are privately-owned. A map is in the section Development Constraints. The support of the City of Pittsburgh and the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) will be critical to the success of our vision. The ALMONO, LP could try to purchase these sites. Failing that, the URA can support the project by purchasing those properties that are within the scope of the recommendations and making them available for redevelopment in accordance with the proposed strategy.”

The P-G dismisses the idea that moneyed interests would hinge public safety on the MOC—then proceeds to sell this “conspiracy theory” as the solution. In doing so, they echo what we “development constraints” in The Run have warned for years: No shuttle road, no flood relief.

Four Mile Run Residents Talk Next Steps on Defunded Stormwater Project

Posted on June 10, 2025 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

Mon Water Project Founder Ann Quinn, left, addresses Four Mile Run and Greenfield residents at Zano’s Pub House on June 9. To her right, speakers (and Homepage contributors) Ziggy Edwards and Ray Gerard listen. Photo by Marianne Holohan

by Marianne Holohan

Residents of The Run and community partners met at Zano’s Pub House on June 9 to discuss next steps for addressing ongoing flooding problems in the neighborhood. The meeting was called because Pittsburgh Water recently announced that they were pausing the long-awaited flood mitigation project slated to begin in 2025.

Anne Quinn, a Greenfield resident who leads the Mon Water Project, a water advocacy nonprofit, led the June 9 meeting.

She started with an overview of why The Run continues to flood. She explained that stormwater from uphill communities — Oakland, Greenfield and Squirrel Hill — flows through The Run toward the Mon River. When heavy rainfall occurs, the volume of stormwater overwhelms the system, leading to destructive flash flooding. The Run has two “bowls” where flash flooding occurs: one near the playground on Boundary Street and the other on Saline Street near Big Jim’s restaurant.

Ms. Quinn pointed out that Panther Hollow Lake in lower Schenley Park poses a threat to The Run. The dam intended to contain the lake does not meet legal requirements and is in danger of failure. Should the dam fail, water from the lake would rush into Panther Hollow and The Run, further overwhelming the stormwater system and endangering residents.

The Run has been plagued by destructive flooding for decades. Periodic flash floods block access to the neighborhood and threaten residents’ safety. Pittsburgh Water initiated a flood mitigation project in 2017 that was slated to include the installation of high-capacity piping as well as green infrastructure. In 2022, Pittsburgh Water announced that they had scaled back the project to remove green infrastructure components, and in April 2025, they announced the indefinite pause of the project.

At the June 9 meeting, Ms. Quinn said the installation of bigger pipes is the main solution to The Run’s flooding problem. Building a new stream through Junction Hollow would also allow excess water to flow from Panther Hollow Lake to the Mon River without pooling in The Run. Both of these solutions were included in the initial project design that has now been paused. She also urged residents of uphill communities to mitigate their contributions to stormwater runoff with more green space and permeable surfaces.

After Ms. Quinn spoke, Ziggy Edwards and Ray Gerard of Junction Coalition provided a timeline of flooding issues in The Run and Pittsburgh Water’s troubled mitigation project. Ms. Edwards and Mr. Gerard have reported extensively on these issues. They explained that a flash flood in 2016 left a man and his young son trapped on the roof of their vehicle on Saline Street. Emergency responders had difficulty reaching them because of the rushing flood waters. They also described the lack of transparency from Pittsburgh Water when communicating changes to the project over time.

“The project … suffered from inadequate goals and self-defeating constraints,” Ms. Edwards said on June 14. She said the flood control features were tied to the Mon-Oakland Connector shuttle road project, also called MOC. Pittsburgh Water only admitted as much after Mayor Ed Gainey canceled it in 2022.

“They said they had a model of their project without the MOC but never would show it to us,” she said, adding that only a third of the funding was slated for the core project in Schenley Park and The Run.

The ongoing lack of transparency from Pittsburgh Water has angered longtime residents of The Run who have spent thousands of dollars repairing flood damage. One resident, Laura Vincent, remembered a 2022 community meeting held at the former Operating Engineers Union Hall. At that meeting, she said, a representative of Pittsburgh Water “had the nerve to tell us to be patient.”

Ms. Vincent, who owns two properties in The Run, has been waiting for decades for Pittsburgh Water to address this problem.

Residents of The Run have disproportionately shouldered the financial burden of the flooding. According to Ms. Quinn, residents face rising water utility fees while PennDOT, owner of the Parkway East bridge over Four Mile Run, does not pay any fees to offset the bridge’s substantial contributions to stormwater runoff. This further exacerbates flooding in The Run.

Additionally, residents and other ratepayers have supplied the $8.7 million already spent on the paused flood mitigation project. These funds were used to draw up a full design of the project, including green infrastructure. But Pittsburgh Water has yet to implement it.

District 5 City Councilor Barb Warwick, also a resident of The Run, called a press conference on May 23 during which Run residents and business owners expressed frustration toward Pittsburgh Water for failing to acknowledge the urgency of the project.

As the June 9 meeting came to a close, residents discussed next steps to advocate for the stormwater project. Ms. Quinn encouraged residents to keep pressuring Pittsburgh Water and elected officials. She included Democratic mayoral candidate Corey O’Connor, who indicated at a recent neighborhood meet-and-greet that he considers the stormwater remediation project in The Run a “passion project” of his.

In the meantime, Run residents and business owners are bracing for another flash flood season and hoping their worst fears won’t become reality before Pittsburgh Water finally decides to take action.

Marianne Holohan is a resident of The Run. She also serves on the board of the Greenfield School PTO and is an Allegheny County Democratic Committee rep for the 15th Ward – District 9.

Why I’m Voting for Ed Gainey

Posted on April 28, 2025 by Ziggy Edwards op ed 0

Mayor Ed Gainey surrounded by supporters at an April 15 fundraising event

It comes down to the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC): a boondoggle dreamed up by some of Pittsburgh’s universities and foundations that would have ruined a popular motor-free trail through Schenley Park and established a foothold for wiping my neighborhood (Four Mile Run) off the map.

Why dwell on a project that was discredited and shelved years ago? If you have to ask, it’s because you forgot how the MOC came to be old news. Two men figure prominently in the story—and both are currently running for mayor in Pittsburgh’s Democratic primary.

During Ed Gainey’s first run, he participated in a Zoom debate with the other mayoral candidates. Some of my Hazelwood neighbors and I got a chance to ask about their position on the MOC. Gainey didn’t seem familiar with the project, but showed interest in how we overcame efforts by MOC boosters to pit our neighborhoods against each other. After the debate, I emailed Gainey’s campaign inviting him “down The Run” to see the situation for himself. His wife Michelle replied and we made arrangements for visits to The Run and Hazelwood.

The first time I met Ed Gainey, about 35 of us from both neighborhoods walked with him from Four Mile Run Field into Junction Hollow and back. He asked questions, listened to our answers, and seemed genuinely concerned about our community’s problems. Before any of us mentioned hazardous conditions around the railroad trestle, Gainey noticed and inquired about piles of railroad spikes on the trail where they land after flying off the tracks.

We talked about destructive flooding in The Run and how it’s worsened over decades as uphill neighborhoods—including Oakland university campuses—develop rapidly and tax the sewer system. When Run residents learned of plans for the MOC from a 2015 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article, those plans did not include flood control. Our city government and Pittsburgh Water were shamed into their Four Mile Run stormwater project only after media coverage of a harrowing 2016 flash flood—in which emergency responders had to rescue a father and son trapped on top of their car.

Ed Gainey made no big promises on his first visit to The Run, but soon adopted our cause as part of his campaign. Canceling the MOC was among the first actions he took in office.

Gainey’s challenger, County Controller Corey O’Connor, was our District 5 city council representative throughout our six-and-a-half year fight against the MOC. He watched my neighbors and me show up in force at public meetings, organize marches and press conferences, and file Right to Know requests. In conversations with Run residents he acted as though his hands were tied, the road a foregone conclusion. He was evasive at best when it came to answering our questions and providing information about the MOC. He flat-out lied to us on several occasions.

Corey O’Connor was having completely different conversations with some Hazelwood residents, asking or even pressuring them to publicly support the MOC. In 2021 he played a shell game with the project’s funding, crowing about having moved $4.15 million to different projects in other communities. Mysteriously, $4 million for the MOC reappeared in the 2022 budget before Ed Gainey canceled it. This stunt only showed that O’Connor could have chosen to defund the MOC at any time.

But I’m not writing this because of the status quo. Everyone knows about public officials who bend over backwards to represent the donor class. So many people told me and my neighbors, “You’ll never stop the road; there’s too much money behind it.” I’m writing this because Ed Gainey came to our neighborhood, listened to our issues, and made good on his promise to address them. That never happens!

Bucking the status quo has a cost. Ed Gainey canceling the MOC surely isn’t the sole reason for Pittsburgh’s money-starved news outlets cranking out hit piece after hit piece from the moment he took office. But it surely enraged the universities and Almono Partners when he rescinded their long-coveted private driveway. Although politicians are not known for being above reproach, I’ve never seen a local one criticized with such heavy bias.

By contrast, Corey MOConnor’s campaign has been showered with funds and fawning attention by the very same players who stood to gain from the scrapped shuttle road. I don’t believe it’s a coincidence that he chose Hazelwood Green as the place to announce his run for mayor.

The MOC may be dead and buried, but it’s still an issue in this election. It stands for sharp differences between these two candidates—in their approach to managing Pittsburgh’s resources and in their ethics. And the consequences are still playing out. After the MOC’s demise, Pittsburgh Water called off the green infrastructure part of their stormwater project in The Run. This year they announced the entire project has essentially been canceled, the funds moved elsewhere. The Run needs strong advocates—perhaps now more than ever.

Our neighborhood is a snapshot of each candidate’s priorities demonstrated through their actions. Pittsburgh can choose a mayor who returns to business as usual at our expense, or a mayor who actually tries his best to represent us. Your neighborhood’s issues might be different, but they deserve the same attention Ed Gainey has given us.

For me, the choice is as clear as it ever gets. I haven’t forgotten the MOC, and I certainly haven’t forgotten that Ed Gainey showed up for our community.

Community Action Calls Attention to Traffic Dangers on Greenfield Avenue

Posted on August 30, 2023 by Junction Coalition events Special Reports 1

Slow Down Greenfield action on Aug. 25, 2023

At the tail end of rush hour on Aug. 25, more than 60 Greenfield parents and school-age children—some accompanied by family dogs—stood along Greenfield Avenue holding handmade signs that encouraged motorists to drive safely. They were taking part in Slow Down Greenfield, a street action organized by Greenfield resident and mother of three Anna Dekleva.

Ms. Dekleva told us she started Slow Down Greenfield in the wake of an Aug. 16 accident on the dangerous street that injured a 12-year-old and in support of a petition co-sponsored by the Greenfield School PTO and the Greenfield Community Organization (GCA).

Obvious, long-standing danger zones

The Keep Kids Safe with Traffic Calming on Greenfield Ave! petition asks Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI) to restore the school safety zone around Greenfield School and Yeshiva School (formerly St. Rosalia’s). It also calls on DOMI to add traffic-calming and pedestrian safety features on Greenfield Avenue at its intersections with Ronald and McCaslin streets, as well as the stretch between Kaercher and Irvine/Saline streets.

Concerns escalated after 12-year-old Cameron Grimes was struck and injured near the McCaslin intersection named in the petition. Children and seniors frequently cross there to access Magee Playground and Magee Rec Center. And residents south of the Kaercher intersection have witnessed numerous wrecks, totaled parked cars, sideswipes, and countless near misses over the years. More than 560 people have signed the petition so far.

We have needed traffic calming and ways for students to safely walk to and from school, and to and from the rec center, for years. Now a child has been hit. What will it take? I recently stood with my child at a STOP SIGN for three cycles before cars actually let us cross Greenfield at McCaslin. Cars never slow down at Greenfield and Kaercher, even though there is a cross walk. Motorists are not safe in this space and we need engineering to make them be safe.
—Petition comment

Greenfielders speak out

Catherine Adams, who serves as co-chair of the GCA’s Planning, Transportation, and Development Committee and co-wrote the petition, attended the action and lauded Ms. Dekleva’s quick organizing.

“This type of event is an easy way to build and strengthen the community,” she told us in an Aug. 27 email. She noted that along with driver awareness, “we also need infrastructure that prevents vehicles from traveling at high speeds in areas with a lot of pedestrians, many of them kids. A speed limit sign doesn’t prevent a vehicle from traveling too fast, but infrastructure changes can.”

“A lot of the drivers who passed us slowed down, gave us thumbs up and waved,” observed Daniel Tkacik, who participated with his 18-month-old son Felix and family dog Louie. “Greenfield is a neighborhood full of families with children… We need street design that discourages fast, dangerous driving.”

District 5 Councilperson Barb Warwick commented after attending the action, “I’m really proud of my Greenfield neighbors who came out to advocate for safer streets for our kids. As residents, we need to start prioritizing safety over convenience and traffic flow. Our local communities know the danger zones, so that’s where we should start.”

Traffic safety improvements were a major plank of Councilor Warwick’s successful campaign to replace Corey O’Connor in last year’s special election.

Obvious, long-standing neglect

Over several years, Greenfield residents have lobbied city government for better traffic safety in the neighborhood, but their pleas have been ignored. Since DOMI’s 2017 inception, residents have repeatedly asked when DOMI will meet with them to collaborate on traffic safety measures and when those measures would be implemented. DOMI’s responses have ranged from non-committal to non-existent.

DOMI project manager Zachary Workman acknowledged at a July 14, 2022, public meeting about the planned replacement of the Swinburne bridge that “DOMI is aware of dangerous traffic conditions along Greenfield Avenue that led to repeated requests for traffic-calming measures.”

“It’s definitely something that’s on DOMI’s radar for improvements in the future,” he said, “but they are going to be—it’s something that we’ll—it’s in the long-range plan as resources become available.”

pictures of three car wrecks that occurred on or near Greenfield Avenue in 2022 — (L-R) Emergency crews respond to a five-car accident on May 22, 2022, at the intersection of Greenfield and Hazelwood avenues; a car lies flipped on its side after a June 23, 2022, wreck on the 300 block of Greenfield Avenue that witnesses say required first responders to use Jaws of Life to rescue the driver; a car teeters at the top of a steep hill after jumping a curb on the same block of Greenfield Avenue on Dec. 31, 2022.

The Swinburne Bridge project was originally slated for completion in 2026. But after an inspection revealed that Anderson Bridge in Schenley Park needed repairs right away, DOMI had to delay the Swinburne project so that both bridges would not be closed at the same time.

Aside from the usual traffic, traffic has tremendously increased due to the Anderson Bridge closing and its plan to not open until 2025, traffic is more congested, drivers more anxious to get home, and increase for drivers to not obey traffic regulations.
—Petition comment

The wrecks keep coming

On the afternoon of Aug. 30, as this report was being finalized, another accident occurred on Greenfield Ave. A driver traveling east on the 800 block swerved and hit a legally parked truck, then flipped over. Fortunately, the couple and their young child who were in the car sustained no injuries.

Aug. 30 wreck on Greenfield Avenue — *An eastbound car traveling along the 800 block of Greenfield Avenue flipped after hitting a parked truck on Aug. 30. Photo on left courtesy of Ed Goyda; center and right photos courtesy of Kris Olsen.*

“Action is needed now”

DOMI’s intention to leave Greenfield Avenue as-is until reconstruction of Swinburne Bridge is finished prolongs conditions that put residents of all ages at risk. Cameron Grimes’ injuries have exacerbated Greenfielders’ frustration at DOMI’s neglect of basic safety improvements—especially as they see millions of tax dollars being spent on the very same solutions in more affluent surrounding communities.

“I understand there are needs throughout the entire city,” said Ms. Adams, “but it’s hard to be patient when pedestrians are getting hit by cars in your neighborhood.”

Asked what she would say to Mayor Gainey, Ms. Dekleva responded in an Aug. 27 email, “I would say this is an easy fix request being asked here; get a traffic engineering team activated and install traffic calming measures today, before another person is hit or killed. We don’t need a magic wand or any further extended theoretical deliberation…Action is needed now or more residents will be maimed or die from a problem the city can address today.”

Councilor Warwick told us, “Traffic calming doesn’t have to be complicated, and as a city, we need to be implementing simple, common-sense fixes while we work on larger-scale projects.”

Slow Down Greenfield rides again (soon)

Ms. Dekleva said she valued being part of this action with her neighbors and plans to schedule another one—possibly the weekend after Labor Day.

She told us during an Aug. 21 phone call, “I think that the tremendous history of working-class solidarity is alive and well in Greenfield—something we all love about Greenfield. This is not something people will let go, and we will be heard for sure.”

Car Wrecks on Greenfield and Hazelwood Avenues Highlight Need for Traffic Calming

Posted on July 10, 2022 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

car wreck on Greenfield Ave. June 23, 2022

Crumbling city steps. Disintegrating sidewalks. Bridges neglected for decades. As the project formerly known as the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) moves forward without Almono Partners’ shuttles, residents of MOC-affected communities are asking why the project still takes precedence over fixing dangerous conditions in the same area.

Along Hazelwood and Greenfield avenues, the skewed priorities have become impossible to ignore after two serious car accidents in the past two months.

Flipped car on Greenfield Avenue

At approximately 1:20 p.m. on June 23, Greenfield Avenue resident Will Smith heard a loud noise. He told us during a July 5 phone conversation that when he looked out his front window, he saw a car that had apparently flipped over and was resting on its side in the middle of the street.

Mr. Smith rushed outside with his phone to document the accident’s aftermath. The car’s roof was crushed. A man and two women had stopped and were checking on the trapped driver. Police arrived on the scene and closed the block to traffic. Within 15 minutes, firefighters arrived to rescue the man from his car using Jaws of Life. The driver was unconscious when placed on a stretcher and driven away by ambulance.

A witness driving behind the car said she saw another car cross the center line as it traveled east up Greenfield Avenue, causing the westbound driver to swerve and clip the side of a parked car before flipping over.

At the scene of the June 23, 2022 accident on Greenfield Avenue. Video courtesy of Will Smith.

Mr. Smith commented on the accident, “This was inevitable.” He described speeding on the narrow lower portion of Greenfield Avenue as “ridiculous” and noted, “Every resident’s car parked on the street was just ticketed a few weeks ago.”

Mr. Smith and his neighbors received $114 citations in the early hours of May 9 for having their wheels on the curb. Parking this way is common on Greenfield Avenue and other narrow streets where residents try to protect their vehicles from speeding drivers. One recent hit-and-run totaled the parked car of a resident who is also a city employee. Residents’ only available parking is on the downhill side of the street. They have to cross through swiftly-moving traffic to reach their houses.

“The city needs to do something to make drivers slow down and pay attention,” Mr. Smith said.

Multi-vehicle crash on Hazelwood Avenue

Residents along Hazelwood Avenue face similar dangers. On May 22, Kevin Dole witnessed the immediate aftermath of an accident at the corner of Greenfield and Hazelwood avenues near his home. When we spoke by phone on June 30, he said four or five vehicles were involved—including his neighbor’s parked car, which was totaled. An ambulance transported one person away from the scene.

Photo courtesy of Greenfield Livable Streets

Mr. Dole said speeding is a constant hazard on Hazelwood Avenue, a narrow two-lane road with parking on both sides. He guessed the average speeder travels 45-50 mph in the 25 mph zone and “would not be able to stop in time if someone stepped out.”

“It’s common to see detached side mirrors on the ground and people parked a little up on the sidewalk,” Mr. Dole said. In addition, he described faded pedestrian crosswalks and oversized trucks using Hazelwood Avenue as a shortcut to Hazelwood Green or other construction projects.

“There is no infrastructure to encourage people to slow down and no enforcement of the speed limit,” he added.

Although it was the first accident Mr. Dole saw, being a relative newcomer to the neighborhood, he has personally witnessed “many close calls” and heard from neighbors about other crashes.

One neighbor, Abby Zupancic, suffered a broken neck and other severe injuries in October 2016 when a vehicle hit him in front of his house. Mr. Zupancic told us what happened when we spoke by phone on July 8.

“Me and my wife and kids came home from shopping. My wife and son went in the house, and my daughter and I were behind them. I told my daughter, ‘Hang on a second, sweetie. I forgot to put the [side-view] mirror in.’ I went back out to the car, put in the mirror.” Mr. Zupancic was walking in front of his car when the vehicle plowed into him. He flipped in the air and bounced off the vehicle, then the ground.

Mr. Zupancic underwent emergency surgery and a grueling recovery process. “It took about a year to get fully functional,” he recalled. Although he still deals with chronic pain, he was eventually able to return to his job as a highway construction worker.

Mr. Zupancic, who has lived on Hazelwood Avenue for 18 years, said he sees dangerous speeding on a daily basis. He has witnessed two accidents in which a car flipped over—“which tells you how fast they had to be going.”

As for oversized trucks, Mr. Zupancic pointed out that a sign at the intersection of Greenfield and Hazelwood avenues clearly shows with an arrow that the truck route is in the opposite direction from the residential part of Hazelwood Avenue. But truck drivers ignore the posted route, not only worsening dangerous conditions but using “jake brakes” at all hours.

“It’s loud, it’s obnoxious, it rattles your windows,” Mr. Zupancic said. “This is a residential street, not a highway.”

Conditions are no better at the other end of the street near Second Avenue, where Reverend Michael Murray has lived for 26 years. During a July 4 phone call, Rev. Murray said over the past few years he’s noticed an increase in speeding and oversized trucks “beyond construction vehicles—trucks with great big iron rolls on the back, trucks carrying cars.”

“Some of the trucks are so huge you feel vibrations when they’re passing the house,” he added. He has lost three mirrors from side-swipes of his parked vehicle.

Rev. Murray is concerned that the problems will get even worse once construction on the nearby Hazelwood Green development is in full swing.

But residents on both streets said that years of calls to 311 and direct appeals to city officials have changed nothing.

Qualified, but not prioritized for traffic calming

Some members of Junction Coalition participate in the Greenfield Community Association’s (GCA’s) Development and Transportation Committee. The committee was copied—along with District 5 city Councilman Corey O’Connor’s chief of staff Matt Singer—on email correspondence between Greenfield resident and GCA board member Catherine Adams and representatives of Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI).

A May 5 email from Cortney Patterson of the DOMI Traffic Bureau referenced an application for the Neighborhood Traffic Calming program. “Your street does meet the Neighborhood Traffic Calming requirements, however, this project did not rank high enough to be funded for construction this year.”

Ms. Adams responded on May 13, thanking DOMI for the information and clarifying that two separate requests were submitted—one for Hazelwood Avenue from Murray Avenue to Bigelow Street and a second, independent request for a study of Greenfield Avenue from Lydia Street to the Saline/Second/Irvine intersection.

She asked for more details on the studies conducted on both streets and what the results mean. Additionally, Ms. Adams wanted to know where Hazelwood and Greenfield avenues fall on the list of priorities so residents can anticipate when projects might be started and what to expect.

Ms. Adams sent a follow-up email on May 30, noting the accident on Hazelwood Avenue. She followed up again on June 26, but has not received a response from DOMI.

Major construction supporting Hazelwood Green

Several projects are planned or under way in the area—in some cases a few dozen feet from where accidents took place on Hazelwood and Greenfield avenues. But these investments seem designed to continue the former MOC project and improve access to the Hazelwood Green development.

Widening Greenfield Avenue at the Irvine Street/Second Avenue intersection. One block west of the June 23 accident described by Mr. Smith, construction is in progress to create a dedicated left-turn lane onto Irvine Street for traffic heading toward Hazelwood Green (as stated in the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation’s September 26, 2018, meeting presentation called “Hazelwood Green Phase I Mitigation”). To make room for the additional lane, crews are narrowing the sidewalk at this busy intersection.

Reconfiguring the residential portion of Sylvan Avenue. At DOMI’s April 26 meeting about the Sylvan Avenue Multimodal Project, residents expressed concerns that planned improvements along the quiet street fail to address problems with nearby infrastructure and dangerous traffic patterns at both ends of the finished trail. The Sylvan Avenue trail, part of the proposed MOC shuttle route, connects Greenfield and Hazelwood avenues.

There is no infrastructure to encourage people to slow down and no enforcement of the speed limit.
Kevin Dole

Replacing Swinburne Bridge. The 107-year-old bridge has long been in poor condition. In a 2018 MOC public meeting, DOMI proposed using the bridge as part of the MOC route. During an October 2020 meeting, former DOMI director Karina Ricks assured affected residents that “the city has absolutely no intention to take properties [as part of the bridge construction].” But in the next breath, she added, “There is a possibility there might be some slivers that will be needed to create new footings for the bridge.” As of July 11, DOMI had not posted a presentation for residents to review before the July 14 meeting about the Swinburne Bridge project despite repeated requests.

Safety of residents should come first

“Residents of Hazelwood and Greenfield have been crystal clear about the kinds of solutions that would make their streets safer and more accessible,” said Dan Yablonsky, director of communications and development at Pittsburghers for Public Transit (PPT).

PPT worked with residents and community groups throughout MOC-affected neighborhoods to create Our Money, Our Solutions (OMOS), an alternative plan listing needed improvements that cost less than the MOC’s projected $23 million budget. These include traffic-calming measures on Greenfield and Hazelwood avenues.

“Infrastructure like speed tables to slow down car traffic, better sidewalks, more lighting, more benches, and better bus stops would all help improve access for all,” Mr. Yablonsky wrote in a July 11 email. “But when the rubber hits the road, we see time and time again that the city ends up spending money on infrastructure projects to benefit the developers at Hazelwood Green instead of the people who have called these neighborhoods home.”

“It doesn’t have to be this way,” he added. “Residents have done the work to make it clear what investments benefit the community. It’s up to the city now to follow their lead.”

The Mystery of the Old MOC Funds

Posted on June 11, 2022 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

When Mayor Ed Gainey announced an end to the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) shuttle road at the February 17 Greater Hazelwood community meeting, residents of affected communities applauded. They immediately requested basic improvements like safe street crossings, sidewalks and facilities for after-school programs. Officials offered no specific plans for redistributing MOC funds, but early reports focused on building a biking and walking trail that follows the same MOC route.

Five months after the MOC’s formal demise, as the bike/pedestrian trail project moves forward piece by piece, details on leftover MOC funds remain murky.

When we contacted Emily Bourne, communications specialist for Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI), she said in a June 10 email that $6.7 million remains in the budget for the MOC, which she referred to as the Four Mile Run project.

“All of the funds are still in Four Mile Run named capital accounts,” Ms. Bourne wrote. “Any movement would require council action unless spent on something connected to the Four Mile Run project.”

However, Pittsburgh’s 2021 capital budget reported the project had $7.7 million in “unexpended/unencumbered prior year funds.” This figure aligns with the one provided to us by DOMI’s chief engineer Eric Setzler in late 2021. He said in a phone call, “I am seeing about $8 million [of City funds].”

Peering inside the magic bag

Some of the $1 million difference between the 2021 and 2022 figures can be explained by money that was diverted from the MOC budget.

In December 2020, City Council passed a budget amendment introduced by Councilman Corey O’Connor that moved $4.15 million out of the MOC. Those funds were divided among affordable housing programs, support for small businesses throughout Pittsburgh, and infrastructure improvements in Hazelwood. This should have left around $3.85 million in MOC funds.

But Ms. Bourne, when asked to confirm this, emailed that the diverted money was “not actual funds.”

“Had the budget been passed as introduced they would have been, but they were moved before the budget was adopted,” Ms. Bourne wrote. “There could have been other budget moves but nothing with actual obligated funds.”

“The only transfer was from December 2021 when Council moved $575,000 from Mon-Oakland ‘Four Mile Run’ to Street Resurfacing,” she added.

Indeed, Councilman O’Connor did introduce a budget amendment to remove $575,000 from the MOC funds. Of those, $550,000 went to new lights for Bud Hammer Field in Greenfield and $25,000 went to repair steps around Burgwin Field in Hazelwood.

It is unclear how the Bud Hammer Field lights and Burgwin Field steps are related to street resurfacing, and where the $4.15 million in the 2020 budget amendment originated if not from MOC funds. Also unexplained is the $4 million shown in the 2021 capital budget as going back into the MOC for 2022.

Asked to comment during a June 10 phone conversation, Councilman O’Connor said, “People at DOMI are not very intelligent. Whoever you were talking to does not know what they are talking about. We always make amendments before a budget is passed. Only the final draft of the budget matters.”

The 2022 capital budget contains no mention of the MOC. Councilman O’Connor explained this by saying the project “would not have to be listed in the capital budget if the funds have already been allocated,” and no new funding was being requested.

About 7% of the $8 million in the fund last December is unaccounted for by our reckoning. This could be a calculation error due to rounding, or it might actually be missing. But the funds still exist and are being spent on lights and steps, at the very least.

Table showing known expenses or allocations and remaining balance calculated, compared against DOMI's reported MOC budget as of June 2022 — Table showing known expenses or allocations and remaining balance calculated, compared against DOMI’s reported MOC budget as of June 2022

When will our money fund our solutions?

One fact has become plain over the past five months: The project and its funding will continue—minus Almono Partners’ proposed shuttles and the MOC name.

This slow-walked continuation of the project formerly known as the MOC raises concerns among members of MOC-affected communities. Residents and community organizations created Our Money, Our Solutions (OMOS), an alternative plan listing needed improvements that cost less than the MOC’s original $23 million budget.

Some OMOS priorities have come to pass, such as weekend service on the 93 bus line and Second Avenue/Irvine Street sidewalk repairs in progress. But critical items—such as traffic-calming measures on Hazelwood Avenue and lower Greenfield Avenue and those discussed at the February 17 meeting with Mayor Gainey—remain unaddressed. Why is bike trail infrastructure being prioritized over needs like these? City parks already have a dedicated source of revenue from taxpayers, while neglect has destroyed existing infrastructure in these communities over decades.

“We said at the February 17 meeting that we are looking to put in a request for money for repairs and improvements for Burgwin [Recreation Building],” Councilman O’Connor said, explaining those funds would not come from the MOC budget.

He added this is the first year City Council will have park tax funds to work with, and they have not yet finalized the process for distributing them.

Meanwhile, explorations into the mysteries of MOC funding continue. In a May 27 email responding to inquiries, City Controller Michael Lamb said his office will soon release their performance audit of several city departments. The audit included a review of the MOC that helped inform Mayor Gainey’s decision to end the project.

Public Discussions Begin on Changes to Sylvan Avenue

Posted on May 17, 2022 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

On April 26, Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI) hosted a meeting via Microsoft Teams to kick off public engagement on its Sylvan Avenue Multimodal project, presenting early plans and fielding questions from community members.

Many of those questions revealed concerns about the project’s limited scope, its priority level and timing, and its potential effects on residents along Sylvan Avenue.

A project within a project

The Sylvan Avenue Multimodal project is one part of a pedestrian/cyclist trail that replaces—but follows the route of—the controversial Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) shuttle road between Greenfield and Hazelwood avenues. The stretch of Sylvan Avenue between Home Rule Street and Greenfield Avenue (currently closed to traffic) is also part of the trail but considered a separate project.

According to DOMI project manager Michael Panzitta, the City of Pittsburgh received a $1.76 million state grant to restore the closed part of Sylvan Avenue for bikes and pedestrians only. Along with separate funding, work on the Home Rule-to-Greenfield stretch of Sylvan Avenue will come with its own set of public meetings.

Discussion at the April 26 meeting was limited to plans for Sylvan Avenue between Home Rule Street and Hazelwood Avenue.

That work includes reconstructing the sidewalks, repaving the street, and adding features to slow down traffic. Two of the biggest traffic-calming features are raised pedestrian crosswalks at two sets of city steps, and landscaping near the entrance to the trail.

In addition, Sylvan Avenue is set to be designated as a Neighborway street, meaning it is a low-traffic street designed for the needs of people on foot, bikes, or other nonmotorized vehicles.

A combination of city and federal funding

The City of Pittsburgh is funding the design phase and street repaving. Construction funding comes from a federal grant with Pennsylvania Department of Transportation oversight, explained Leon Jeziorski of Michael Baker International, the multimodal design firm for the project.

Mr. Panzitta was unclear on the source of federal funding. In a May 9 email, he referred funding questions to Emily Bourne, DOMI communications specialist. Ms. Bourne replied to emailed inquiries that she was coordinating her response with that of Mayor Gainey’s press secretary, Maria Montaño, who had been contacted separately.

Community concerns include parking, safety

During the Q&A portion of the meeting, residents raised concerns about pedestrian safety on Hazelwood Avenue and the limited parking available on Sylvan Avenue.

Pastor Tim Smith, CEO of Center of Life—located at the intersection of Hazelwood and Sylvan avenues—asked if the project will widen the road. He said people park on both sides at that end of the street, which leaves a narrow space for drivers passing in opposite directions. Mr. Jeziorski responded that the project would not address parking issues, and the east side of the street (across from the Center of Life) is currently a “no parking” zone.

A Sylvan Avenue resident who did not give her name said enforcing the “no parking” zone would prevent residents from parking near their homes.

Roy Simms, who said he’d lived on Sylvan Avenue for more than 50 years, asked if the city steps would be repaired as part of the project. Mr. Panzitta answered that the steps are also outside the project’s scope.

Why here, why now?

Several attendees wanted to know more about why this project was identified as a priority now. Despite being touted as a safe multimodal connection, it does not address issues with the steps, the decrepit retaining wall and railing near the future trail entrance (the project will use landscaping to block off the railing rather than fix it, according to Mr. Jeziorski), or dangerous conditions at either end of Sylvan Avenue.

“If you’re looking to increase bike accessibility in a safe way, there’s a lot of already-existing safety issues with Greenfield Avenue,” said Eric Russell, a Greenfield resident and daily bike commuter. “Especially if you’re dumping people onto Greenfield Avenue from Hazelwood.”

Catherine Adams lives on Hazelwood Avenue and said some of her neighbors have been hit by cars. They have been meeting with DOMI and District 5 Councilman Corey O’Connor about speeding and safety issues on Hazelwood Avenue for the past two years.

Mr. Panzitta said the trail is included in the Greater Hazelwood Neighborhood Plan. Page 96 lists “creat[ing] a bicycle route up the hill from and parallel to Second Avenue” as a way to “address gaps in multi-modal network throughout the neighborhood.”

Mr. Jeziorski defended the project, asserting that improved accessibility to this corridor will draw more residents and businesses to the neighborhood. The increased activity should help Hazelwood get grant funding to replace the steps. “So this is a building block that can help with other improvements in the future,” he said.

End of MOC Shuttle Program Begins New Community Conversation with Mayor Gainey

Posted on February 19, 2022 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

Mayor Ed Gainey and District 5 City Councilman Corey O'Connor at Feb. 17 MOC meeting

On February 17, Hazelwood residents and others gathered at Propel Hazelwood to discuss rapidly evolving developments in the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) project. The day before, Mayor Gainey’s office announced an end to the controversial shuttle road that was the essence of the MOC.

The meeting, hosted by the Greater Hazelwood Community Collaborative (GHCC), brought a wide range of human interactions and emotions: sometimes heated, sometimes funny, occasionally joyful. Some attendees remarked that it was their first in-person meeting in months or years. The auditorium burst into thunderous applause several times—including after Propel Hazelwood students performed “Lift Every Voice and Sing,” and especially when Mayor Gainey said, “The Mon-Oakland shuttle project will not go forward.”

Moving forward together

Mayor Gainey’s announcement marks a huge turning point in MOC-affected communities’ battle to reclaim their tax dollars and voice in their future. It is an opportunity to repair public trust that was shattered by 6.5 years of pushing the MOC over multi-community opposition.

The battle is far from over. Already the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is writing op-eds attempting to resuscitate the weak case for MOC shuttles in the future. And the needs of existing 15207 residents still lack attention and funding the now-defunct MOC continues to enjoy. As the new Gainey administration works with our communities on building a new way forward, focus should be redirected to:

Critical needs in Hazelwood. Though Councilman Corey O’Connor moved some funds from the MOC, it still has about $7 million. Early reports indicate most of the MOC’s original $23 million budget will be restored for a new bike trail and improvements to Schenley Park and the Hazelwood Greenway (now also designated as a city park). Parks and infrastructure are both important, and should not be pitted against each other. Even the loveliest bike trail should not be prioritized over basic necessities for Hazelwood like safe street crossings, sidewalks, and facilities for after-school programs. City parks already have a dedicated source of revenue from taxpayers, while neglect has destroyed Hazelwood’s infrastructure over decades.
A stronger stormwater plan in The Run and Schenley Park—unhampered by the MOC. The Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority’s (PWSA’s) $42.65 million stormwater project, touted as a way to fix severe flooding in The Run, came after and was designed around the MOC shuttle road. For years, residents were told these were two separate projects and that PWSA’s efforts could easily move forward regardless of the MOC’s fate. That message has changed recently, but Run residents, who have been awaiting flood relief for decades, value effectiveness over speed. For years they have challenged PWSA to provide a stormwater model that does not include the MOC. Instead, PWSA compared the MOC-centric design against doing nothing. The Run has an opportunity to finally see how much better PWSA can address flooding now that accommodating a shuttle road has been dropped from their project requirements.
Transportation solutions that improve rather than undermine public options. The Our Money, Our Solutions (OMOS) plan, created by MOC-affected communities with help from Pittsburghers for Public Transit, contains many improvements that would serve residents and the Hazelwood Green development. Some of those improvements, such as weekend service for the 93 bus line and Irvine Street sidewalk repairs, have already been secured. Others, like extending the 75 bus line into Hazelwood, are under consideration. If we don’t adopt OMOS wholesale, we can at least revisit and borrow heavily from it.

Our new plan needs a new name to reflect new priorities

We all deserve a fresh start to distance ourselves from the dishonesty and corruption that plagued the MOC from the start. The MOC quickly became a “magic bag” of components and costs that shifted according to justifications needed for it at any given time. Only the shuttle road has remained consistent. Now that the road has been removed, this project is no longer the MOC. Any work in Schenley and Hazelwood parks must have a clear focus and leave non-transparency behind.

You can view a livestream of the meeting provided by Center of Life.

Photo courtesy of Juliet Martinez for The Homepage

Irvine Sidewalk Repairs Receive Funding

Posted on December 15, 2021 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

Construction Projected for Summer 2022

Long-needed sidewalk construction on Irvine Street between Hazelwood and Greenfield avenues got more attention recently when updates to the project’s Engage PGH webpage raised questions about funding.

Although the fact sheet linked from the webpage stated “this project is only funded for design. DOMI [Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Transportation] is investigating potential sources for construction funds…,” construction is funded and slated to begin in June.

DOMI’s chief engineer Eric Setzler said the project received a grant of $120,000 from the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, plus $1 million in funding from the $335 million Pittsburgh received as part of the American Rescue Plan (ARP).

Mr. Setzler reported that the Irvine Street project mainly consists of sidewalk and curb replacements with “updated ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant] ramps at the intersections.”

“We would like to get as much curb reveal as possible,” he said, referring to the height of a curb that helps provide separation from the road. As layers of asphalt are added to a road over time, its level rises closer to the adjacent sidewalk. Other Irvine Street improvements include adjusting drainage from the sidewalks and adding a small retaining wall to “hold the slope back”—especially near the Greenfield Avenue end of Irvine Street. The area currently has rock-filled wire cages called gabion baskets.

Mr. Setzler added that the project is “on a good track,” with design scheduled to wrap up by late January.

Run resident Barb Warwick noticed the outdated fact sheet and commented on the page, along with several other community members, calling for construction funds to be taken from the budget of the unpopular Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC).

“$12 million is a lot of money and it’s just sitting there in DOMI’s coffers,” Ms. Warwick said, referring to the estimated MOC budget. “Now that everyone is finally acknowledging how misguided DOMI’s plan to build a shuttle road through Schenley Park really was, we can start using that money for mobility improvements the people of Pittsburgh actually need.”

Regarding the MOC budget, Mr. Setzler said, “I am seeing about $8 million [of City funds], not counting anything from PWSA [Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority].” He mentioned the $4 million difference had been redirected in the 2021 budget through an amendment introduced by District 5 Councilman Corey O’Connor. PWSA has a budget of more than $42 million to complete a stormwater project on the same land as the MOC.

The MOC, slated to be put on hold by incoming Pittsburgh mayor Ed Gainey, proposed connecting Oakland university campuses and the Hazelwood Green development through the park’s Junction Hollow section and two adjacent neighborhoods—The Run and Panther Hollow. Affected communities including The Run, Panther Hollow, Greenfield, South Oakland, and Hazelwood created their own plan for how MOC funds should be spent instead: Our Money, Our Solutions (OMOS).

The ARP funding arises from controversy as well. When it was announced in July 2021, Mayor Bill Peduto drew criticism from constituents who said he needlessly rushed to set a major spending agenda that prioritized infrastructure above mitigating COVID-19-related harms, such as evictions.

Anna Tang, a community organizer with BikePGH, received an email alert about the page update on Dec. 3; she forwarded it to her contacts in the Greenfield/Hazelwood area. “It’s my job to let the public know about this stuff,” Ms. Tang said, speaking as a citizen familiar with City websites rather than as a representative of BikePGH.

“This is an important corridor for all modes of transportation,” Ms. Tang remarked, “and it seems like the most vulnerable users are almost always last to get the infrastructure attention they need. [The sidewalk repairs] couldn’t come soon enough.”

“To be 100% honest, there’s not a whole lot of things to provide feedback on,” Mr. Setzler said of the project’s Engage PGH webpage. “But we still want to put it out there and let people see it.”

Although other city departments have been sharing their projects on Engage PGH for longer, “DOMI is catching up,” Mr. Setzler added. “Going forward [Engage PGH] will be our main source for sharing project information. In general, projects will still have outreach to community groups and public meetings”—virtual or in person.

As of Dec. 14, the project page had an updated fact sheet and a new “virtual public plans display.” The display features maps and a schedule that projects construction will take seven months. In addition, a new feedback form was placed on the page above the existing 140-character comment field. You can also create an Egage PGH account to receive email alerts about upcoming projects in areas you choose from a list.