Hazelwood

Why I’m Voting for Ed Gainey

Posted on April 28, 2025 by 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.

‘Without the 56, I’m at home 24/7’

Posted on January 5, 2025 by Special Reports 0
The 56 bus stop across Second Avenue from the Hazelwood Healthy Active Living Center at Mansion Street. Lincoln Place resident Tom Weber rides the 56 bus from the stop near his home to most of the places he has to go, including the Healthy Active Living Center. Photo by Juliet Martinez

Cutting the 56 bus would strand some Lincoln Place residents

Editor’s note: This article is the third in a series on how changes proposed in the first draft of the Bus Line Redesign project for Pittsburgh Regional Transit (known as PRT) would affect riders in neighborhoods The Homepage serves.

Most of the Lincoln Place residents interviewed for this article said they no longer ride the bus, either because they work from home or because they found other forms of transportation. But others said they depend on the bus so much, the proposed redesign would change every aspect of their lives for the worse.

A bus line can be a lifeline

Tom Weber, 68, catches the 56 bus on Mifflin Road north of Interboro Avenue.

“Thankfully, the city has a pretty decent bus system that serves 90–95% of my transportation needs,” he said on Dec. 18.

But in the current version of the Pittsburgh Regional Transit redesign plan, the 56 would be eliminated and replacement routes would not serve this part of Lincoln Place. This spring, PRT will publicize a new draft of proposed changes they are calling “draft 2.0.”

Mr. Weber does not own a car and lives on a fixed income. He already walks a steep road to and from the bus stop. The proposed plan would leave him with only one transit option: Walk farther to catch a bus that would not take him to the places he needs to go.

Mr. Weber is always on the move, often riding the bus seven days a week. He volunteers at a church in Homestead. He is deeply involved at the Hazelwood Healthy Active Living Center and spends most weekdays there.

Tom Weber in the Hazelwood Healthy Active Living Center where he spends most weekdays. Photo by Ziggy Edwards

“The only time I don’t come in here [the Hazelwood Healthy Active Living Center] is when I have a doctor’s appointment,” he said. Mr. Weber sees specialists in places as far away as Elizabeth and Jefferson Hills. The 56 allows him to transfer to the routes he needs to get to all his appointments.

“These things are an integral part of my life,” he told me. “Without the 56, I’m at home 24/7.”

Mr. Weber, who said he has a history of depression, credits his busy schedule with keeping him healthy and happy during his retirement. “My involvement here at the center has basically saved my life. I’m able to do so much because my mental health has been so good from being active. It’s a circle.”

The devil is in the data

Laura Wiens, executive director of Pittsburghers for Public Transit, says one reason for the apparent disconnect between PRT’s plan and riders’ needs is the way PRT collected data for its first draft. In a Dec. 16 phone call, Ms. Wiens described the approach as “total amnesia about the system that exists, that people use it — and we have data based on that system.”

Instead of using trips taken on existing bus lines as a starting point for their plan, PRT used cell phone travel data to find the top destinations and origins in Allegheny County. This approach overlooks how people use public transit and cars for different purposes.

“Transit is not a shuttle service,” Ms. Wiens said. “It’s not just drawing a line between places, it’s about connecting people to as many destinations and origins as possible.”

Pittsburghers for Public Transit has been analyzing PRT’s current proposal and has identified changes needed to make a Bus Line Redesign that works for everyone, she said.

First, the changes should increase ridership while recognizing that the people who need public transit most are those who already use it.

“Non-disruption of existing riders needs to be a priority,” Ms. Wiens stressed. That includes avoiding adding transfers to current trips as much as possible. Transfers make trips longer and less reliable, no matter how well-appointed the transit hub is. And for cash users, transfers are more expensive.

In addition, PRT should make the transition simpler for riders by doing less and slowing down.

“It’s impossible for riders to respond [to the plan] because they are doing so much at one time,” Ms. Wiens said. “Since the routes, bus line names, frequencies, and number of transfers are all changing, it’s hard to answer the question, ‘What’s going to happen to my ride?’”

Mr. Weber echoed Ms. Wiens’ comments. “The main reason it’s so confusing is that they’re trying to change everything at once.”

Mr. Weber said he has worked hard to understand the proposed changes, including attending the Hazelwood community meeting.

“This morning I spent an hour and a half tracing routes to find dead spots and consider alternatives. Electric bikes aren’t cheap,” he added.

Similar problems for students

Like others in Greenfield and Hazelwood, Lincoln Place high schoolers use PRT buses to get to school. In Lincoln Place, students have farther to travel to get to schools like Allderdice located across the river. School commutes can go the other way, too.

A school guard who asked not to be named wrote in a Dec. 3 email that the school bus shortage has meant more and more students are riding PRT to school. “I brought this up at a PRT thing in Squirrel Hill and the gentleman said something to the effect of, we can’t plan on or around public school students. [Pittsburgh Public Schools] pays for a lot of those kids to ride the bus, why is their money no good?”

Emily Provonsha, PRT’s manager of service development, said after the Nov. 12 Hazelwood community meeting that PRT had met with school transportation directors from across Allegheny County. PRT asked the schools to share data on where their students travel to and from to reach school so PRT can compare those trips with the transit network.

Help push for a better ‘draft 2.0’

You can review the Bus Line Redesign proposal, get the latest on meetings, and comment to PRT at engage.rideprt.org/buslineredesign/buslineredesign-home. PRT said online comments will remain open until at least Jan. 31.

Pittsburghers for Public Transit is encouraging people to join them in advocating for a Bus Line Redesign that works for all. Visit pittsburghforpublictransit.org/petition-we-deserve-a-prt-bus-line-redesign-that-works-for-us-all/ to read and sign their statement detailing what PRT should do to improve the plan.

“They can get it right in draft 2,” Ms. Wiens said. “But they’ve got to shift some fundamental assumptions.”

This article originally appeared in The Homepage.

Hazelwoodians Tell PRT, ‘We Need the 93!’

Posted on December 4, 2024 by Special Reports 0
The inbound 93 bus stopped at Second and Flowers avenues. Photo by Juliet Martinez

After Pittsburgh Regional Transit released the first draft of its Bus Line Redesign project on Sept. 30, Hazelwood resident Tiffany Taulton had one top concern: How will her son and his classmates get to school at Allderdice? The plan eliminates the 93 bus line and replaces it with routes that don’t have stops in Squirrel Hill, Shadyside or Lawrenceville.

“Without the 93 bus, there is no connection to Squirrel Hill that gets [students] to school on time and safely,” Ms. Taulton said on Nov. 13.

On Nov. 12, the agency formerly called Port Authority, now known as PRT, gave a presentation on their new plan to the Hazelwood community meeting — where they heard many similar concerns from Hazelwood residents.

Proposed Hazelwood changes

About 35 people attended November’s monthly meeting in person and, another 20 used Zoom. Emily Provonsha, PRT’s manager of service development, said PRT is in its first phase of getting feedback about the proposed plan. As the weather gets colder, she said, they are planning fewer “pop-up” events in different neighborhoods. But people can still comment online until at least Jan. 31, 2025.

PRT will share another draft of proposed changes they are calling “draft 2.0” with the public sometime this spring. The new draft will incorporate the feedback they are hearing at events and meetings like this one. Stops for the new routes have not been proposed yet.

“One of the changes proposed in the first draft that reflects changes in transit demand after the pandemic is the proposal to discontinue many of the commuter flyer routes,” Ms. Provonsha wrote in a Nov. 14 email. “The ridership on many of the commuter flyer routes remains very low and has not recovered after the pandemic. That being said, we will take another look at this based on public feedback we receive and refer to more recent ridership data as well. In the first draft, given our constraint of having the same operating budget and number of bus operators, we redistributed service hours from the commuter flyer routes and put them into standard bus routes that operate all day, 7-days a week, and this increased trips throughout the midday and on weekends for many of our local bus routes.”

Ben Nicklow, a senior planner at PRT, listed and explained the new routes that would go through Hazelwood: D44, D52, and O53. A fourth route, N94, skirts the edge of Hazelwood. He also mentioned X50, which follows the route of the existing 61C route; and O50, which follows the route of the existing 61D. Those two routes do not go through Hazelwood, but they have stops near Hazelwood and could be reached by transfer.

“You will be able to connect to [X50] through the Waterfront,” Mr. Nicklow explained. “When you need to go somewhere in that service area, even if it looks like it’s not quite in the same travel corridor you do currently, it may come so often that even if you have to transfer it’s a quicker trip.”

Where Hazelwoodians are going

The team from PRT seems to have thought that Hazelwoodians travel to the Waterfront a lot more and to Squirrel Hill (along with other uphill neighborhoods) a lot less than they actually do.

When they took questions from meeting attendees, the questions centered mostly around the need for a direct connection between Hazelwood or Glen Hazel and Squirrel Hill. Attendees wanted one-seat rides to places other than Oakland and the Waterfront. Parents were concerned about their children getting to Allderdice.

Ms. Provonsha told me, “PRT recently held a stakeholder meeting in which we invited school Transportation Directors from all schools throughout the County to discuss their proposed changes and ask them to share data with us on where their students travel from to go to each school, so that we can compare those trips with the transit network.”

“I think they were surprised,” Ms. Taulton commented about the meeting. “I don’t think they realized the 93 was so critical, that people were using it to get to Squirrel Hill so much.”

She uses the 93 to get to work, do light grocery shopping, and get to her mom’s eye doctor, among other places. Hazelwood residents are going to Squirrel Hill not only for the necessities they lack in their own neighborhood, but for connections to the larger community.

Besides grocery stores and banks, Ms. Taulton and several other meeting attendees mentioned Zone 4 safety meetings in Greenfield and the JCC in Squirrel Hill. The JCC has the only pool nearby and offers activities for seniors. They also hold public meetings there.

Mary Bartol, who lives in Hazelwood, commented about the 93 at the Nov. 12 meeting.

“It satisfies every need we have because you can get off in Squirrel Hill to Schenley Park, then into Oakland — then you can go into Shadyside, get off anywhere there.” She said she sometimes visits Bloomfield and Lawrenceville and mentioned the new grocery store being built on Butler Street.

“We’d be lost without it,” Ms. Bartol said.

Lincoln Place PRT riders

Because PRT’s proposed changes are so complex and far-reaching, this article is one in a series. The next article planned is about Lincoln Place. Please email us at junctioncoalition@gmail.com if you want to be interviewed about how the bus line redesign would affect you.

You can review the Bus Line Redesign proposal, comment to PRT, and get the latest on meetings at PRT’s Bus Line Redesign website.

This article originally appeared in The Homepage.

It’s a Road: What’s Missing from DOMI’s Sylvan Avenue Trail Plan

Posted on September 28, 2024 by op ed 0

Plan disregards environmental issues, lacks transparency and needs more public input

At the Aug. 22 public meeting about this project, representatives from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and the City of Pittsburgh Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, also known as DOMI, fielded questions about management of stormwater and springs in the project area, landslide prevention, the dangerous intersection at Sylvan and Greenfield avenues, steep inclines on Waldeck Street and along the proposed trail, light pollution from proposed streetlights, landscaping maintenance and invasive plants, and the effects on nearby residents.

These matters are not easily addressed. Yet when attendees asked about them, DOMI project manager Michael Panzitta responded, “That’s a good point” or, “We’re looking into that.” How has DOMI not heard the same resident concerns since 2018, when the Sylvan Avenue Trail was first proposed as phase 2 of the Mon-Oakland Connector shuttle road between Oakland university campuses and the Hazelwood Green development?

This chart comes from a 2020 memorandum leaked to Junction Coalition in which former DOMI director Karina Ricks addressed Pittsburgh City Council and for the first time named specific components and costs of the MOC project.

Community input

Discussion of this trail began with the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) instead of the communities in its path. Public meetings about development and infrastructure projects should focus on dialogue, not checking the “community engagement” box in a rush toward predetermined outcomes. Since 2022, Junction Coalition has been calling on the city to adopt our guidelines for public engagement, including announcing meetings at least 14 days in advance and posting the meeting slides with the announcement.

The city continues to fall short, as well as not following state guidelines for community involvement in greenways outlined in the Pennsylvania Trail Design and Development Principles.

Transparency

The design presented bore a striking resemblance to the MOC. Controversy plagued the plan partly because of dishonest tactics used to force it on affected communities. Opacity was and is its hallmark: inadequate community outreach for public meetings, evasive answers and an unwillingness to clearly define the scope of and intentions behind each phase of the project.

For example, while holding public meetings about the shuttle road in 2018, DOMI hid its grant applications for work on the Sylvan Avenue portion of the road.

Before informing affected communities about the MOC through a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article, former mayor Bill Peduto’s administration filed a fraudulent grant application for the project for $3 million and then tried to cover it up, violated the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act, and repeatedly violated PA’s Right to Know law throughout the years-long process of trying to bully the plan through.

The recent Sylvan Avenue Trail meeting presentation did not even include a budget slide. How much money has the Sylvan Avenue Trail received as part of the MOC? How much is budgeted to address the major environmental and safety issues, like an abandoned mine under part of the project area?

Slides showed an unrealistic rendering of the trail with mature plantings to obscure removal of existing trees and gentle slopes instead of cliffs.

Some residents who arrived early said they were told city officials were holding a separate, closed-door meeting with PennDOT before the public meeting.

And according to Mr. Panzitta and Pittsburgh Neighborhood Services infrastructure engagement specialist Jan Raether, this was to be the only public meeting about the Sylvan Avenue Trail.

Unfortunately, this territory is all too familiar. It is obvious to us and others in Greenfield and Hazelwood that, although Mayor Ed Gainey canceled the MOC, DOMI has continued to plan out a buildout of the project.

What’s not missing from the Sylvan Avenue Trail project is red flags that point to a road paved with bad intentions.

Some residents of Greenfield and Hazelwood have organized meetings to discuss the project and reach consensus on an alternative proposal. Reach out to Junction Coalition at junctioncoalition@gmail.com if you are interested in getting involved.

Originally appeared in The Homepage

Transit Report Urges Local Riders to Dream Big and Campaign Hard

Posted on September 7, 2024 by Special Reports 0
Protester holding up sign that reads "Transit funding now!"

Advocates set 2020 transit levels as first milestone but aim to restore 20 years of service cuts

Big changes are coming to public transit in Allegheny County with Pittsburgh Regional Transit’s Bus Line Redesign project. As the public transit agency (formerly Port Authority, now known as PRT) prepares to release a draft of its plans in the coming weeks, Pittsburghers for Public Transit is encouraging riders to advocate for the service they need—and the funding to make it happen.

A vision for better transit

In August, Pittsburghers for Public Transit published a report titled Allegheny County Visionary Service that views the Bus Line Redesign planning period as an “opportunity to reverse the trend of budget and service cuts.”

The Bus Line Redesign will propose four versions of a revamped bus network. They will differ based on levels of funding: cost-neutral, 15% decrease, 10% increase and 20% increase.

According to the transit advocacy group’s report, our region has seen a more than 37% cut in public transportation service over the past 20 years. “That has led to a transit system that doesn’t go where we need it to go, long wait times between buses, and service that doesn’t always run at the times we need it,” the report states.

Against this dismal backdrop, it makes sense that PRT would prepare for more cuts, even though they would be catastrophic for an already gutted system. Redesigning the network with no change in funding would present problems of its own, because some communities would have to lose service to allow others to gain service.

Pittsburghers for Public Transit encouraged PRT to also consider versions of the Bus Line Redesign where the bus network can grow with funding increases. This would still leave much work to be done. Even a 20% increase in service would merely restore the amount of service provided before 2020. Although 2020 levels of transit service fell short of meeting community needs, the report calls for getting back to that level as an important first step.

‘Transit champions’ can help

The Allegheny County Visionary Service report identifies local, state and federal officials pushing to expand funding for public transit including the PRT.

Pittsburgh Mayor Ed Gainey’s transition team in 2022 recommended that the city work with PRT to “make its use easier and more attractive to encourage ridership” (p. 103). Their transition report showed an understanding of the need to improve transit service frequency and expand its hours.

Allegheny County Executive Sara Innamorato built her 2023 campaign partly on a platform of improving public transit.

In his 2024 budget address, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro called for increasing the state’s public transit funding by $282 million without levying new state taxes. PRT would receive $40 million of these state funds, which would increase their operating budget by more than 7%. In July, an $80 million stopgap was passed from the state’s surplus to the Public Transportation Trust Fund.

Reps. Summer Lee and Chris Deluzio are co-sponsoring the “Stronger Communities through Better Transit Act,” a federal bill that would provide funds to transit agencies of PRT’s size and larger. Allegheny County would receive an additional $175,586,810 in transit operating funding, allowing for up to 37% more service.

These funds could make a huge difference to riders and the whole region.

“It’s not just PRT that needs to hear from people, but also legislators,” Pittsburghers for Public Transit executive director Laura Chu Wiens said during a July 31 phone call.

Another bus line for Hazelwood?

In 2019, residents and organizations in Greenfield, Hazelwood and other communities worked with Pittsburghers for Public Transit to draft Our Money, Our Solutions, an alternative plan listing needed improvements that cost less than the Mon-Oakland Connector’s original $23 million budget.

The Mon-Oakland Connector envisioned a privately-run shuttle from Oakland through Schenley Park, Four Mile Run and Hazelwood to Hazelwood Green. The project, designed to serve university and research interests, was scrapped by Mayor Ed Gainey in early 2022 after years of community outcry.

The city and PRT adopted some items from Our Money, Our Solutions, like additional weekend service on the 93 bus line. Another top transit item, extending the 75 line across the Hot Metal Bridge into Hazelwood, has been under discussion. More transit funds and renewed local support could make the extended 75 line a reality.

It’s an example of what Pittsburghers for Public Transit would like to see happening throughout Pittsburgh’s neighborhoods.

“We hope people will be galvanized by the opportunities from getting more funding and what that would look like, how it could benefit their communities,” Ms. Wiens said.

District 5 Residents Voice Priorities for 2024 Budget

Posted on November 5, 2023 by Special Reports 0
Greenfield residents and City Councilor Barb Warwick speak with DOMI representatives

On Oct. 24, about 60 Pittsburghers gathered at the Pittsburgh Firefighters Local in Hazelwood for a budget engagement meeting with city officials. It was the final meeting in a series of five throughout the city to get feedback on the preliminary budget Mayor Gainey’s office is proposing for next year.

Budget basics and a high-tech twist

Patrick Cornell, chief financial officer of Pittsburgh’s Office of Management & Budget (OMB), presented the city’s process for creating budgets and finalizing them with community feedback throughout the year.

Mr. Cornell also explained the difference between operating and capital budgets and went over broad highlights of the real 2024 budget. These included increased funds for keeping bridges and roads safe and maintaining community assets like rec centers.

He invited attendees to try creating an imaginary $1 million budget using a budget simulator. A separate feedback tool on the city’s website, Balancing Act, lets users submit their ideal capital and operating budgets.

When asked if the city has a process to use feedback from the budget simulators, Mr. Cornell said he introduced them as a pilot program this year so there is no formal process yet, explaining they would need to create a citywide campaign and leave the simulators open for longer.

Residents share their priorities

In the second half of the meeting, attendees circulated around the room, talking to representatives from city departments.

The Greenfielders we interviewed all named traffic calming on Greenfield Avenue as an urgent priority. The budget includes a 44% increase in funding for traffic calming projects, but Greenfield Avenue was not selected.

“We have no school zone,” Eric Russell said. “The cars on Greenfield Avenue go extremely fast. That’s where the Rec Center is, the playground.”

“You go to Squirrel Hill or Shadyside; I’ve seen so much traffic calming there, but nothing in Greenfield,” he added.

Anna Dekleva, organizer of a recent protest demanding traffic calming on Greenfield Avenue, wrote in an Oct. 25 text that department representatives did not provide a lot of specific guidance.

DOMI’s representatives seemed unaware of a petition for traffic calming the Greenfield School PTO and Greenfield Community Association submitted to them over a month ago, she said.

“[District 5 Councilmember] Barb Warwick is a tremendous ally and committed to this concern and through her partnership I see the most capacity to change on this issue now,” Ms. Dekleva added.

Other attendees’ priorities revolved around people, housing and green spaces.

Saundra Cole-McKamey of Hazelwood said her top priorities are “more funding for youth and senior programs, more money for low-income housing, more money for the food justice fund and grassroots organizations.”

Teaira Collins of the Hill District emphasized fixing the crosswalk signs on Second Avenue and affordable housing built to suit children with disabilities. “I had to move out of Hazelwood for one reason: no tub. My son has Down syndrome and sensory issues; he can’t take showers.”

Jazmyn Rudolph of Mt. Washington said, “There are a lot of vacant lots, so it
would be great if we could use those for youth to learn about farming.”

“I want them to build a playground down below the tracks,” commented Hazelwood resident Bob White. “There used to be one on Blair Street that was there when I was a kid.”

You can find the preliminary budget and simulator tools at https://engage.pittsburghpa.gov/2024-city-pittsburgh-budgets.

Juliet Martinez co-wrote this article, which originally appeared in The Homepage.

City Council Legislation Aims to Protect Parks, Increase Transparency Around Grants

Posted on August 12, 2023 by Special Reports 0
Photo and map of Junction Hollow

On June 21, Pittsburgh City Council passed Resolution 1619-2023, which formally recognizes 28 acres between Panther Hollow and The Run—known as Junction Hollow—as part of Schenley Park. The same day, they passed an ordinance (1620-2023) that got less attention at the time but could help any Pittsburgh resident who wants to have their say in the future of a city park.

District 5 councilor Barb Warwick introduced both pieces of legislation, stressing the importance of parks. In her resolution, she wrote that Junction Hollow provides recreational space and is vital for green stormwater management. She told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on June 7 that Junction Hollow “has been part of the park in layman’s terms for a long time, but it’s not officially designated as a park.”

Now, it enjoys the same protections as the rest of Schenley Park.

Councilor Warwick said during a July 7 phone call that her office is working to introduce related measures over the next few months. Their common goal is to prevent development-oriented projects like the now-defunct Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) from being forced on communities that do not want them.

Lessons Learned from the Battle of Four Mile Run

“Throughout the MOC fight, the city was trying to turn a park into a shuttle road,” Councilor Warwick said. “The city’s argument was that it used to be a road; it didn’t matter that it’s a park now. [The resolution that passed] is just to make it clear that this is a park now.”

Residents in MOC-affected communities didn’t know that Pittsburgh’s Home Rule charter gives them the right to petition the city for a public hearing on what Ordinance 1620-2023 calls “the change of use of a City Park or Greenway.” And they could have bolstered their case against allowing the MOC in Schenley Park by citing a state law called the Donated or Dedicated Property Act. It says land donated or dedicated as a park cannot be taken out of the public trust to serve other purposes. The ordinance requires the city to tell petitioners that the Donated or Dedicated Property Act exists, and that they have a right to use it to defend public land.

Councilor Warwick said her office is working on legislation to introduce in the fall setting rules for development in city parks. Without changing zoning laws, she wants to focus development only on the public’s enjoyment of the parks. For example, the MOC was a roadway or thoroughfare intended to connect two neighborhoods, not promote use of the park itself.

At the time of our interview, Councilor Warwick was planning to introduce legislation on July 18 that would change the city’s process of applying for certain grants. When a city department decides to apply for a grant worth more than $250,000 or to fund a project that is not already in the capital budget, they would have to notify City Council before applying.

“It doesn’t give us a vote, but earlier on in the process, we have an opportunity to ask questions,” Councilor Warwick explained. “If we don’t support the project and they apply for the grant anyway, when the grant does come to a vote at the end there is a record of these issues.”

The point of involving City Council earlier, she said, is “ensuring that when the city is pursuing a grant for a project, it is one the community wants or has identified as a need. That’s all we should ever be doing, but the reality is it hasn’t been. Big, visionary things are fine, but we need to be focusing on the communities’ day-to-day needs.”

Shaping the Future of Sylvan Avenue Trail

Councilor Warwick saw firsthand how communities can be left out of deciding which projects to fund with grants. During a series of public meetings about the MOC in 2018-2019, the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, known as DOMI, applied for a grant to build the Sylvan Avenue trail (part of the MOC route) without informing the public. After receiving the grant, they pushed the project through by raising the specter of leaving money on the proverbial table.

“If they were doing this now and notified me, I would have asked, ‘Why are we applying for this grant when there are so many other things that need to be done for Hazelwood?’” Councilor Warwick said.

But since the trail project is moving forward, she added that she intends to make the best of it. “We’re trying to put money toward creating a plan for the Sylvan Avenue trail instead of it just being a DOMI bike trail. We want to include a plan for the larger space because it is now a park.”

The trail is part of the Hazelwood Greenway, which was designated a city park in December 2021. That means it has the same current and future protections as Schenley Park.

“It’s going to take years, but whatever the design is for that trail, I want it to include what that park could look like 5 to 10 years from now with investment,” Councilor Warwick said. “It’s for the community, not just commuters passing through.”

Our Money, Our Solutions: Big Wins, More to Do

Posted on July 17, 2023 by Special Reports 0
Eagleburger Band plays as the MOC casket is carried to Four Mile Run Field

On June 11, residents of Panther Hollow, Four Mile Run, and Hazelwood gathered with supporters in Panther Hollow to celebrate the demise of the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) shuttle road and uplift a new vision of community-centered development in its place.

They marched in a New Orleans-style brass band “funeral” parade along Junction Hollow Trail in Schenley Park, a popular car-free route for cyclists and part of the route the MOC would have taken between Oakland university campuses and the Hazelwood Green development site. The MOC would have permanently degraded the park and commandeered already-limited public spaces in Panther Hollow and The Run. And many Hazelwood residents questioned proponents’ claims that the road was designed to improve their mobility.

But in the face of a campaign to paint concerned community members as anti-progress, simply saying no to the MOC wasn’t enough. Residents and community organizations from all MOC-affected neighborhoods—including Oakland and Squirrel Hill—met several times in 2019 to draft an alternative plan that would improve mobility in their neighborhoods and cost less than the projected $25 million Pittsburgh planned for the MOC. Pittsburghers for Public Transit helped coordinate meetings and organize the plan. Improvements were broken into three categories: pedestrian, transit, and trail/bike.

The Our Money, Our Solutions, or OMOS, plan was the result. The needs it identified were compelling enough that several of them have been addressed since the plan was launched as a petition to City Council.

Completed

  • The Irvine Street and Second Avenue sidewalk audit and replacement with ADA-compliant width and curb cuts from Greenfield Avenue through the Hazelwood business district
  • Weekend service on the 93 (a minimum frequency of once every 40 minutes is still in process)
  • Street resurfacing and traffic calming around Burgwin Rec Center and Burgwin Field

Under discussion/in progress

  • Extend the 75 bus line across the Hot Metal Bridge into Hazelwood
  • Calm traffic on Hazelwood Avenue
  • Create and maintain the Sylvan Avenue corridor as a vehicle-free route for pedestrians and cyclists, managed with an emphasis on forest habitat restoration
  • ADA-compliant sidewalks and street lights on Desdemona Avenue and Imogene Road (Councilor Barb Warwick said she is trying to get this into the budget)
  • Traffic signal priority for buses on Hot Metal and Birmingham bridges
  • Reconstructing the nexus of Saline-Irvine-Second-Greenfield streets, i.e., rethinking the current plan with more direct community input so that improvement does not ease Hazelwood Green traffic at the expense of residents in directly affected areas, particularly The Run

That is a pretty good scorecard for a plan that has never been formally recognized by the city!

Remaining goals

Address widespread traffic safety concerns. These include traffic calming on lower Greenfield Avenue; lighting on Irvine Street; school zone infrastructure around Burgwin Rec Center, Burgwin Field and Propel Hazelwood; building an ADA-compliant sidewalk along Boundary Street in Panther Hollow; and dedicated pedestrian crossing times and signals in the Hazelwood business district.

Improve public transit connections, which are still lacking throughout the area. OMOS asks for electric buses on the 75 bus line and clean bus stops with benches and shelters.

Increase connections for cyclists and pedestrians. Keeping Junction Hollow Trail free of motor vehicles, making it safe for year-round commuting, and extending bike lanes from the trail into Panther Hollow all accomplish this goal without displacing residents or disrupting Schenley Park. OMOS also calls for creating a connection between Junction Hollow Trail and the rest of the park under or over the railroad tracks to Panther Hollow Lake. Similarly, a more modest investment to connect the Duck Hollow Trail over the train tracks to Hazelwood could extend the trail network to Squirrel Hill, Frick Park, and points east. Improving the connection between Hazelwood Green and the Eliza Furnace Trail would make the bike commute between Hazelwood and Downtown much safer and allow bus riders safer access to more routes on both sides of Second Avenue.

Let’s get to work—with each other and our local representatives—on meeting the rest of these needs. Especially now that the MOC is officially “dead!”

This article originally appeared in The Homepage.

Join Our FUNeral Parade for the Mon-Oakland Connector

Posted on June 7, 2023 by events 0

Our communities said no to the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) and won the Battle of Four Mile Run! Let’s celebrate by burying the MOC and uplifting a new vision of community-centered process in its place—one that empowers Pittsburghers over products and corporate profits.

Join residents of Four Mile Run, Hazelwood, and Panther Hollow—along with Junction Coalition, Pittsburghers for Public Transit, P.O.O.R.L.A.W., GH-CARED, and Eagleburger Band—for a New Orleans-style brass band funeral parade followed by a good ol’ community potluck picnic.

Date: Sunday, June 11

Time: Step-off in Panther Hollow @ 1 p.m.
“Services” in The Run @ 1:45 p.m.

Get more details and RSVP on Pittsburghers for Public Transit’s page. Questions or access needs? Reach out to info@pittsburghforpublictransit.org.

Now We Can Has CommUnity Input?

Posted on April 21, 2023 by Special Reports 0
cheezburger cat looming over Swinburne Bridge

After Charles Anderson Memorial Bridge abruptly closed in February, Pittsburghers welcomed Mayor Ed Gainey’s announcement that the city will complete a full rehabilitation—even though it means the bridge will remain closed for a few years instead of the four months originally projected for temporary repairs.

Emily Bourne, a press officer in Mayor Gainey’s office, wrote in an April 13 email, “Charles Anderson design is tentatively set to finish in Fall 2023 with construction anticipated to begin in Spring 2024. Ideally the bridge would reopen to traffic by late 2025.”

Residents of The Run who live around nearby Swinburne Bridge, also scheduled for replacement, have questions about what the new plan means for them. Until the city closed Anderson Bridge, Swinburne Bridge had been on track to be replaced first. The Run was threatened with erasure by the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) shuttle road, which Mayor Gainey halted in February 2022. The planned MOC route included a rebuilt Swinburne Bridge with a dedicated shuttle lane.

As the Swinburne Bridge project moves forward without the MOC, Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI) has continued its odious track record of prioritizing high-powered profiteers above communities. But the Anderson Bridge closure gives DOMI an opportunity to change course. They should reset the Swinburne Bridge project to include public decision-making—even if that means a short delay.

A tale of three bridges and one dangerous street

The first public meeting about rehabilitating Anderson Bridge hasn’t been scheduled yet, but DOMI has already posted a presentation about it on the project’s Engage Pittsburgh webpage. After the Fern Hollow Bridge collapsed in early 2022, Pittsburgh officials told the public to expect limited involvement in the rebuild because of its urgent nature. Even so, artists and residents had time to discuss ways to honor the span’s history and connection to Frick Park.

By contrast, DOMI ignored repeated requests for DOMI’s presentation on plans for Swinburne Bridge until about four hours before the first of only two public meetings on the project. Then project manager Zachary Workman posted a statement denying the requests. DOMI’s community outreach consisted of a letter sent to a few residents who live near the bridge, which they received 10 days before the original meeting date.

At the July 2022 meeting, representatives from DOMI, PennDOT, and private construction firm Alfred Benesch & Company all acknowledged that work on Swinburne Bridge will profoundly affect The Run. A significant portion of the neighborhood—and the only street providing vehicular access to it—lies directly beneath the bridge.

DOMI painted a rosy picture of plans to minimize disruptions to the community, but avoided promising that residents would not have their homes taken through eminent domain. They also avoided any commitment to calm dangerous traffic along Greenfield Avenue.

DOMI ruled out even adding a traffic signal at the intersection of Swinburne Bridge and Greenfield Avenue until after construction on Swinburne Bridge wraps up in 2026 (at the earliest). Residents have been advocating traffic-calming measures along the nearby 300 block of Greenfield Avenue for more than eight years. They face speeding traffic every time they walk between their houses and cars. Several accidents, including some that totaled parked vehicles, occurred there in 2022 alone.

Moving traffic without mowing down residents

Affected residents, commuters, and DOMI all agree that closing Anderson and Swinburne bridges at the same time would cause far-reaching traffic nightmares.

According to Ms. Bourne, “Based on the traffic observed with Charles Anderson being closed, it is apparent that construction cannot begin on the Swinburne replacement project until Charles Anderson has reopened to traffic.”

While Anderson Bridge remains closed, the posted detour includes Greenfield Avenue.

Bumper-to-bumper traffic now provides a brief respite from leadfooted drivers during rush hour, but the rest of the time, they continue to speed.

Whose needs is DOMI serving?

There is no getting around the fact of competing priorities for Greenfield and Hazelwood. Residents need safer streets, while investors in the Hazelwood Green development have long desired a “permanent, rapid link” that moves traffic as quickly as possible between their site and Oakland university campuses. This explains DOMI’s continued prioritizing of MOC-related projects above community needs even after the MOC’s demise.

Taxpayer-funded institutions should be working against such an extreme power imbalance instead of deepening it. We are calling for DOMI to:

  1. Prioritize the physical safety of existing residents by adopting the Our Money, Our Solutions plan. Residents from MOC-affected neighborhoods created the plan in 2019 to point out infrastructure improvements Pittsburgh should be funding instead of the MOC. Several items in the plan have since been addressed—but not traffic calming on Greenfield Avenue.

  2. Follow the public engagement guidelines/demands posted at junctioncoalition.org/2022/07/26/pittsburgh-community-engagement-needs-more-of-both/. These are commonsense provisions like notifying the public of meetings and sharing presentations at least 14 days in advance so that people can come prepared with relevant questions. City officials are aware of these guidelines but have not responded.

  3. Reboot the Swinburne Bridge Project, starting with additional public meetings. The next public meeting is not scheduled to be held until the “final design” phase of the project. Plans established before the first meeting call for a rushed, cookie-cutter design that skipped public input. With work on Anderson Bridge expected to last at least through 2025, there is plenty of time to reassess this approach—and no excuse not to.

Categories

Most Shared Posts