mon-oakland connector

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.

‘Pittsburgh Water broke its promise’

Posted on June 9, 2025 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

Pastor Mike Holohan speaks at the May 23 press conference.

District 5 city councilor demands revival of Four Mile Run stormwater project

City Councilor Barb Warwick and her neighbors in The Run are fighting to convince Pittsburgh Water (formerly PWSA) to reverse its unannounced decision to cut the stormwater project from their capital budget. She spearheaded a May 23 press conference in Four Mile Run Field just before making public comments at Pittsburgh Water’s monthly board meeting.

“Pittsburgh Water broke its promise just like everyone in The Run said they were going to do,” she told reporters, referring to predictions by locals since the utility announced its $40+ million project in 2017.

People from The Run have told The Homepage in recent years that they believed work on flood control would only go through if they dropped their opposition to the proposed Mon-Oakland Connector shuttle road. This road was planned to go through their neighborhood and Schenley Park. Residents and allies throughout Pittsburgh eventually defeated the plan when Mayor Ed Gainey canceled it in 2022. Within six months of the project’s demise, Pittsburgh Water removed all green infrastructure elements from their stormwater project.

Green stormwater infrastructure is a set of passive, nature-based solutions to flooding, according to the environmental group PennFuture. It can include manufactured wetlands, swales and rain gardens that collect and hold rainwater before it enters the sewer system, and porous paving that allows water to soak into the ground.

On May 23, Ms. Warwick recalled the November 2022 public meeting where Pittsburgh Water announced these changes. At that time, the water authority reaffirmed its commitment to completing the project, which had been billed as a solution to The Run’s dangerous flooding issues.

“I stood up in front of my neighbors with PWSA CEO Will Pickering, and I said, ‘Don’t worry, guys; they’re going to fix it,’” she told the crowd.

But sometime in 2024, Pittsburgh Water removed all funding for construction of the project from its capital budget.

This choice was only referenced indirectly during Pittsburgh Water’s November 2024 board meeting. Pittsburgh Water board chair Alex Sciulli said the board had earlier met in executive session and discussed “some updates on some projects.” Soon afterward, board member BJ Leber thanked the finance department for a budget-related education session held that week. She referred to “tough decisions in terms of available resources.”

About 25 residents joined Ms. Warwick at the press conference and shared the urgency they felt about the project.

Dana Provenzano owns Zano’s Pub House on Acorn Street in The Run. She talked about flooding that brought water and sewage into the pub, forcing her to close her doors.

“I have to make it safe and sanitary to serve food. No one compensates me for the money I lose when flooding happens,” she said.

Ms. Provenzano called on Pittsburgh Water board members to put themselves in Run residents’ shoes.

“If it was your business, if it was your family, if it was your friends — would you stand up and say, ‘I will reallocate this money to somebody else’?”

“We’re not just talking about a little water in the basement — we’re talking about life-threatening flash floods that blow off manhole covers and fill the streets and homes with sewer water in a matter of minutes,” said Run resident Cynthia Cerrato. “Every time we get a heavy rain my heart freezes, wondering if this is going to be the big one.”

Residents speak up

Immediately after the press conference, Ms. Warwick and three neighbors carpooled to Pittsburgh Water’s offices where the monthly board meeting was being held.

Pastor Mike Holohan is a Run resident and board member of the Greenfield Community Association. He attended the meeting virtually. He said Pittsburgh Water seemed incredulous that Run residents believed the stormwater and Mon-Oakland Connector, or MOC, were linked. When Pittsburgh Water decided to defund the stormwater project, it did not inform the community association ahead of time.

“Pittsburgh Water may give this or that reason for canceling this project. They may say it has nothing to do with the MOC, but when I stop and look at the narrative arc, it seems pretty clear,” he said. “The wealthy people who make things happen don’t see us as a vital neighborhood, but as an obstacle to overcome. They don’t see what I see — that this is an important place where neighbors are friends and children play, and it’s worth protecting.”

Annie Quinn lives in Greenfield and founded the Mon Water Project to advocate for local watersheds.

“This is an environmental injustice happening right here in our neighborhood. It is a human health emergency. We must demand solutions,” she told reporters. “After 10 years and $8.7 million, no physical solution has been installed.”

In her comments to the board, Ms. Quinn challenged them to not only follow through with the scaled-down project Pittsburgh Water promised after the shuttle road project cancellation, but to bring back the original green infrastructure project that included daylighting Four Mile Run stream.

“I request that you go back to your very own studies — that you produced and paid for,” which recommended connecting the stream to the Monongahela River, she said.

She also asked Pittsburgh Water to work with PennDOT during its planned I-376 project above The Run and not allow PennDOT to add runoff from the overpass to the already overburdened water system below.

Pittsburgh Water responds

Mr. Sciulli responded, “We don’t normally comment on the content of our public speakers, but I think it’s important for the record for me to make a few remarks.”

“The Four Mile Run project should have been a crown jewel for green infrastructure, but it met tons of obstacles and challenges to execute the project,” he said.

Mr. Sciulli enumerated some of those obstacles, including the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection adding constraints by reclassifying Panther Hollow Lake as a high-hazard dam.

“The refusal of the railroad company to allow our construction equipment to cross the rail line, even with the use of their own flagmen at outrageous rates, also caused much of the problem,” he added.

Mr. Sciulli responded to concerns about the Mon-Oakland Connector.

“It wasn’t our project,” he said, but as “good public servants” Pittsburgh Water attempted to save taxpayers money by accommodating it and combining construction costs.

Finally, he said PennDOT would not acknowledge its contribution to flooding in The Run and refused to share costs for the stormwater project.

“While this major investment of this project is on pause until we secure the funding, we haven’t stopped trying to solve the problem,” Mr. Sciulli stressed.

That night, former Pittsburgh mayor Bill Peduto responded to media coverage of the press conference in a series of posts to the X social media platform.

“Just a reminder that there was a green stormwater management plan for Four Mile Run. It would have daylighted the streams in Schenley Park, dredged Panther Hollow Lake and ended flooding. Essential Foundation funding ended when the Oakland-Mon Connector project was killed,” the first post read.

Mr. Peduto’s comments contradict Mr. Sciulli’s stated obstacles to the stormwater project and seem to support Run residents’ prediction: No shuttle road, no flood control.

Ms. Quinn held a public meeting in The Run on June 9. About 30 people gathered at Zano’s Pub House to hear an update on the history and status of the stormwater project, as well as discuss next steps to get the funding restored.

Pittsburgh Water Defunds Four Mile Run Stormwater Project

Posted on June 5, 2025 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

A Four Mile Run resident and his 8-year-old son trapped on top of their car await rescue during the 2016 flood. The stormwater project meant to prevent floods like this was defunded in late 2024. Photo by Justin Macey

On April 22, District 5 City Councilor Barb Warwick held a post-agenda hearing on Pittsburgh Water’s announced “pause” on the Four Mile Run project and other flood mitigation projects in the city. Representatives of Pittsburgh Water (formerly PWSA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers attended and answered questions.

Shifting funds and priorities

Ms. Warwick asked on April 22 why the water authority determined that the project is not as urgent as other flood projects that are still moving forward. At one time more than $40 million was budgeted for it, so the councilor asked what changed.

“It’s really funding,” responded Tony Igwe, Pittsburgh Water’s senior group manager for stormwater.

Mr. Igwe said that about $8.7 million has been spent on the project so far. About half a million went to work on the Bridle Trail in Schenley Park that was supposed to hold water back from The Run. But most of the funds were spent on design and planning. He said construction of the project would have cost about $30 million.

Marc Glowczewski, planning chief for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, said federal environmental infrastructure programs could contribute 75% toward the costs of projects like the one in The Run. Pittsburgh Water would need to submit a letter of intent and then the corps would apply for funding.

Ms. Warwick said the project’s indefinite pause bolsters a longstanding suspicion held by Run residents that they could only get their flooding addressed by accepting the now-shelved Mon-Oakland Connector shuttle road through their neighborhood.

District 8 City Councilor Erika Strassburger is a board member for Pittsburgh Water. She said she has been part of past discussions about the project. “I don’t think it helps to insinuate in any way … that there was somehow a decision that was made to punish the residents of The Run because of an organizing effort,” she said.

Ms. Warwick said some neighbors in The Run must routinely replace their boilers and clean up dead rats in their yards. “So, when I as their council representative explain their disillusion with city government and our city authorities over this project, that is what I’m talking about,” she added.

A ‘long and painful history’

Flooding has plagued The Run for decades, although some older residents have said it was not an issue before construction of the Parkway began in 1949 and uphill neighborhoods like Oakland rapidly developed. As the flooding worsened, Run residents were told repeatedly that Pittsburgh lacked funds to address it.

A 2009 flood, which Pittsburgh Water labels a 75-year event, caused catastrophic damage: Cars floated down the streets in 6 feet of water and sewage, while residents watched the mix breach the first floors of their homes.

Ms. Warwick recalled Pittsburgh Water around 2013 holding small meetings at the homes of Run residents to float ideas for flood mitigation, but a lack of funds meant those discussions went nowhere.

Residents learned of plans for the Mon-Oakland Connector from a 2015 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article. But those plans did not include flood control in The Run. City government and Pittsburgh Water were shamed into securing funds for the Four Mile Run stormwater project after media coverage of a harrowing 2016 flood showed emergency responders rescuing a father and son trapped on top of their car.

The stormwater project was billed as a solution to the flooding, but only a third of the funding was slated for the “core project” in Schenley Park and The Run.

The rest of the funding was intended for possible future projects in the watershed, green infrastructure improvements and partnerships with the universities and nonprofits, according to a 2020 email from Pittsburgh Water’s senior manager of public affairs, Rebecca Zito.

Documents obtained through Right-to-Know requests showed that the current chairman of Pittsburgh Water’s board of directors, Alex Sciulli, preferred a more drastic solution. Going back to at least 2019, he advocated for removing residents from flood-prone areas and “changing the flood plain.” In a 2020 email to then-Mayor Bill Peduto’s chief of staff, Dan Gilman, Mr. Sciulli stressed that the “discussion regarding property acquisition” may need to go forward despite being unpopular.

Within six months of Mayor Ed Gainey’s February 2022 cancellation of the connector project, Pittsburgh Water removed all green infrastructure elements from the Four Mile Run stormwater project. After a November 2022 public meeting announcing the project’s “new direction,” it stagnated. Sometime in 2024, Ms. Warwick said, Pittsburgh Water decided to remove all funding for project construction.

“Given the long and painful history of this flood mitigation project for residents in Four Mile Run, I am beyond disappointed in the decision by Pittsburgh Water to indefinitely postpone this work with no prior notification to me or the community,” she said on May 17.

Residents left treading water

Dana Provenzano has seen her share of flooding. She has owned and operated Zano’s Pub House on Acorn Street in The Run for 12 years.

“When people around the city get flooding, it’s water. When we get flooding, it’s sewage,” she said on May 18. “It’s a health concern. I can’t open my doors until I know it’s safe to serve people.”

Ms. Provenzano said the flooding has been getting worse.

Mr. Igwe mentioned during the post-agenda hearing that 2022 work on the outfall into the Monongahela River may have helped, but they don’t know for sure. The Run hasn’t gotten weather conditions that cause flooding since 2021.

We asked Annie Quinn, founder of the Mon Water Project, if The Run will flood again. She said on May 19 that the watershed outfall updates have stopped the Monongahela River from backing up.

But the pipes under The Run are still a pinch point. Water from parts of Oakland and Squirrel Hill, plus all of Greenfield, converges there. “That hasn’t changed,” she emphasized.

“So, yes, the right amount of rain in a short enough time could activate that pinch point and cause more flooding,” Ms. Quinn concluded.

Community actions in the pipeline

On May 23, as this article went to print, Ms. Warwick and several Run residents were scheduled to hold a press conference and give testimony at Pittsburgh Water’s monthly board meeting.

Ms. Warwick told us she planned to ask Pittsburgh Water to restore funding to the Four Mile Run stormwater project.

“Pittsburgh Water must do right by The Run and reallocate the funding to find a solution to the life-threatening flooding in their neighborhood,” she said.

This article originally appeared in The Homepage.

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.

In Defense of Progress

Posted on March 20, 2025 by Ray Gerard op ed 1

Councilor Barb Warwick (l) Dept. of Public Works Deputy Director Bill Crean, and Mayor Ed Gainey (r) respond to Greenfield residents' concerns at the Feb community 17th meeting.

Columnist Joseph Sabino Mistick’s Feb. 22 op-ed in the Tribune Review, “Progressivism killing the party, city,” spins a false narrative. After misattributing a Mark Twain quote to now deceased former County Executive Jim Roddey, Mistick misdiagnoses underlying issues at a contentious Feb. 17 Greenfield community meeting. His takeaway: Greenfield is part of a nationwide backlash against progressivism because moderate resident voices are being shut out.

Mistick quoted Greenfield resident Joe Pegher saying, “There’s a growing tension between the longtime moderate Democrats in the neighborhood and the new progressives. They were welcomed here but have not returned the kindness.” The “moderate Democrats,” who enjoyed years of dominance in neighborhood affairs as members of Greenfield Community Association‘s (GCA’s) board of directors, were neither welcoming nor kind when other Greenfielders asked for help with serious concerns.

Case in point: After the Mon-Oakland Connector project was announced in 2015 to erase Greenfield’s Four Mile Run community and make way for university expansion, the “moderate Democrats” aligned with that back-door deal made up of Oakland universities, private developers, and the Peduto administration. During our six-and-a-half-year opposition to the private roadway, “moderates” did much worse than sit on their hands.

As a member of the GCA’s Development/Transportation committee, I pressed the group to represent all Greenfielders, including Run residents. Then-co-chair Mr. Pegher memorably said, “The GCA does not represent the residents of Greenfield.” When asked who it represents, he refused to answer. After losing his role as co-chair, he stopped attending meetings. As more progressive members were elected to the board and became the majority, Mr. Pegher resigned as board president.

At the Feb. 17 meeting, a group of grievance-filled residents (and non-residents) showed up as an angry mob and proceeded to shriek at public servants, shout down answers to their accusations barely disguised as questions, disparage poorer neighbors, and push for removing newly installed traffic-calming infrastructure.

Some of their concerns and criticisms are valid. Clearly there is room for improvement regarding city services, and more adjustments should be made to the Ronald Street/Greenfield Avenue intersection. But the group’s behavior was churlish and abusive. Had they bothered to remain for the presentation on District 5 improvements, they would have gotten updates on significant progress. Instead, they chose to hijack the first hour and then abruptly leave.

These days, too many use their voice to scream demands while employing uber-aggressive bullying tactics as a means to return to their romanticized past—to what they believe is their community, their country. Newer Greenfield residents are now being treated with disdain, contempt, and as outsiders. Recent online community message-board posts describe neighbors being harassed for speaking Spanish at the Greenfield Giant Eagle.

*Next Door post describing incident at Greenfield Giant Eagle*

Progressivism brought about democracy, freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of the press, women’s and minorities’ right to vote, the right to form or join a union, and much more. The root word of “progressivism” is “progress,” once described by Immanuel Kant as a movement away from barbarism toward civilization. If progressive values and accomplishments are so bad and wrong, what do more “moderate” voices intend to replace them with?

As a Greenfielder who lives in the house I grew up in, whose family history here stretches back to the late 1800s, I don’t believe my voice counts more than others’—regardless of when they moved into the neighborhood or where they’re from. And I want all my neighbors to live a good life, regardless of their level of emotional maturity and prejudices. But it seems a minority faction would rather employ authoritarian tactics to claw back their perceived entitlement to sovereign authority.

Those who are truly committed to community find a way to peacefully reach consensus. As President John F. Kennedy said, “If we cannot now end our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity.”

Gainey, O’Connor Kick Off Primary Fight

Posted on February 9, 2025 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

Allegheny County Controller Corey O’Connor (left) and Pittsburgh Mayor Ed Gainey face off at the Feb. 2 debate on the stage of the Eddy Theater at Chatham University. The two agreed on many larger topics but differed on the details, including inclusionary zoning and traffic calming. Photo by Ray Gerard

Junction Coalition covers the mayoral race from a 15207 perspective

Gloomy weather couldn’t dampen the enthusiasm for a Feb. 2 forum with incumbent Mayor Ed Gainey and County Controller Corey O’Connor, sponsored by the 14th Ward Independent Democratic Club. Just under 300 people rubbed shoulders with the candidates during a meet-and-greet before everyone squeezed into the Eddy Theater auditorium at Chatham University. East End Print’s editor and publisher Ann Belser conducted one-on-one interviews with Mr. Gainey and Mr. O’Connor, then moderated a brief yet feisty debate between the two.

Housing and budgets

During the debate, the two candidates agreed on progressive ideals like gun control and non-cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

They even agreed in broad strokes on the hot-button local issue of affordable housing, with Mr. Gainey touting his inclusionary zoning plan and Mr. O’Connor saying he had supported that type of zoning in Bloomfield and Lawrenceville during his time on city council.

But they do not agree on the finer points. Mr. Gainey’s proposal would require developers citywide to set aside 10% of units to price within reach of lower-income households. Mr. O’Connor asserted that neighborhoods should have varying affordability standards. He also accused the Gainey administration of holding Pittsburgh back from building new developments quickly enough.

“The big shame of it is we are not growing, and we are not growing fast enough,” Mr. O’Connor said. “We need more than a thousand units a year.” He added that the city needs to make things easier for developers who want to build and “get [Permits, Licenses and Inspections] working faster so Pittsburgh is open for business.”

Mr. Gainey said it was fair to ask developers for concessions in return for things like allowing building on smaller lot sizes and waiving parking requirements, especially since previous housing programs haven’t stopped the city from losing residents.

Mr. O’Connor accused the incumbent mayor of “wasting” the $335 million in federal COVID-19 relief Pittsburgh received by hiring 100 new city employees instead of spending it on snowplows, rec centers and information technology.

Mr. Gainey replied that Pittsburgh’s problems with outdated equipment, understaffed departments and crumbling infrastructure predate his tenure by over a decade.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that previous Pittsburgh mayor Bill Peduto’s administration ignored repeated warnings from bridge safety inspectors. This culminated in the collapse of the Fern Hollow Bridge early in Mr. Gainey’s term.

Pittsburgh still managed to end 2024 with a $4 million budget surplus, Mr. Gainey said. He pointed out that Allegheny County has similar budget worries — and, unlike Pittsburgh, had to raise taxes for 2025.

Issues affecting 15207

Mr. Gainey has spent three years as Pittsburgh’s mayor. Mr. O’Connor served for 10 years as City Councilor for District 5 (which includes 15207).

Ms. Belser’s first question for debate concerned whether speed humps are effective enough to be worth the hassle. She noted, “Everybody wants them on their street, and nobody wants them anywhere else.”

Mr. O’Connor answered that while on City Council, he helped put in some of the first speed humps in the city. He praised the Gainey administration for adopting a Vision Zero policy that aims for zero traffic deaths.

“Speeding is a thing,” Mr. O’Connor said. “We have to protect our residents; we have to ensure that there are no strips in the city of Pittsburgh where you can exceed the speed limit [by up to] 20 to 30 times.”

Mr. Gainey described traffic calming as a way to “create equity in our communities.”

“When I came in,” he said, “we had a whole lot of speed bumps in Squirrel Hill. But you had no speed bumps in Glen Hazel, none in Hazelwood, none in Greenfield.”

In 2022, Pittsburgh City Controller Michael Lamb’s office released a performance audit of the city’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, or DOMI, that highlighted how traffic-calming measures were being applied unevenly in Pittsburgh.

The audit included maps that showed 100% of speed humps in District 5 concentrated at its northern end, in Squirrel Hill South. In the two years since that audit was released, an increase in the traffic-calming budget and advocacy by District 5 City Councilor Barb Warwick resulted in DOMI adding speed humps and other traffic-calming infrastructure along Hazelwood, Greenfield, and Johnston avenues.

In the first two months of Mr. Gainey’s term, he canceled the Mon-Oakland Connector project pushed by CMU, University of Pittsburgh, the Peduto administration and ALMONO Partners (owners of the Hazelwood Green development). The publicly subsidized $23 million private roadway would have permanently degraded Schenley Park and commandeered public spaces in the historic Four Mile Run and Panther Hollow neighborhoods. Mr. O’Connor’s tenure as District 5 Councilor encompassed all six and a half years of residents’ fight to save their community.

Junction Coalition will continue covering the mayoral race as the May 20 primary election approaches.

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

Posted on September 28, 2024 by Junction Coalition 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

The Department of Mendacity and Inequity

Posted on March 1, 2024 by Ray Gerard op ed 0

A newspaper clipping about the 1948 blockade. Photo courtesy of Ray Gerard

Greenfield Avenue’s 300 block needs traffic calming now

Residents along Greenfield Avenue’s 300 block were fed up with dangerous conditions on their street. Speeding vehicles and crumbling infrastructure caused wrecks and injuries, countless near-misses and a constant fear for children’s safety. Years of pleading with city officials to address the hazards went unanswered, so residents organized a protest. They brought their porch chairs and lined up across both lanes, shutting down all traffic on Greenfield Avenue. It was 1948.

Residents’ direct action that day caused officials to show up within two hours, repair the infrastructure and commit to policing speeding drivers. One of the organizers, Julia Grezmak, was my grandmother. Seventy-six years later, living on the block and experiencing these dangers every day, my neighbors and I feel the same frustration and outrage.

Past becomes present

Today’s city officials are inflicting the same disregard on current residents. In the last decade, numerous legally parked cars on the block have been totaled. Clipped mirrors, sideswipes and other damages by hit-and-run drivers are commonplace. Worse, residents’ and pedestrians’ physical safety is at risk 24/7. Weekly near-misses that could cause severe injury or death take a mental and emotional toll.

The critically unsafe conditions on the 300 block are well-documented, but the city continually ignores our urgent, legitimate concerns.

Since 2014, we have been requesting traffic safety measures. In 2017, we began calling for the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, known as DOMI, to meet with us onsite to witness the danger, discuss solutions and schedule resident-approved fixes.

A 2023 petition drive demanded DOMI address three areas of Greenfield Avenue needing traffic safety improvements. The city recently committed to addressing two of them, both in upper Greenfield. The 300 block, a notorious danger zone, was included in the petition. But — incredibly — DOMI left it out of Greenfield’s hard-won traffic-calming plan.

DOMI hedges as conditions worsen

My neighbors and I are furious at again being ignored while living on the most treacherous stretch in the neighborhood. This persistent, purposeful neglect over years amounts to abuse.

Since the closure of Anderson Bridge over Schenley Park, speeding has gotten worse as impatient commuters are detoured from both directions onto Greenfield Avenue. More than ever, crossing the street or exiting a parked car is a life-or-death game of chance.

DOMI’s single proposal: a four-way traffic light at Swinburne Bridge. They won’t install it until after completely rebuilding the bridge, an extensive project that can’t even begin until work on Anderson Bridge ends. A traffic light could make the intersection at the bridge safer, but will do nothing to curb speeding on the 300 block.

Once past that intersection, eastbound drivers floor it, reaching 40-50 mph on the 25-mph residential street. Westbound drivers would have a clear path to speed downhill until reaching the bridge. A traffic light would accomplish nothing for safety on the 300 block.

DOMI has responded to our concerns and proposed traffic-calming solutions for the block with a mixture of arrogance, indifference and dismissiveness. After we confronted them at several public meetings, they said, “DOMI is aware of dangerous traffic conditions along Greenfield Avenue that led to repeated requests for traffic-calming measures … It’s in the long-range plans as resources become available.”

Resources are available… for now

Pittsburgh’s approved 2024 capital budget includes a 138% increase for traffic-calming measures, which amounts to $877,744 in additional funds. Residents’ ideas for solutions are chump change in this context. We have offered to provide the labor for installation to prevent delay and save taxpayers’ money.

If there is no traffic calming along the 300 block in 2024, the city may not fund it for years — or at all. At a public budget meeting on Oct. 4, city representatives projected a severe drop in revenue after 2024. They said the 2025-2027 budgets will be tight.

Representing corporate interests

We believe DOMI’s targeted refusal to address basic public safety needs stems from the wishes of private developers.

The foundations that own Hazelwood Green, along with CMU and Pitt, joined forces in the development plan through a public-private partnership announced in 2015. The Remaking Cities Institute’s 2009 “Remaking Hazelwood” report baldly stated their infrastructure goal: to move traffic as quickly as possible between Oakland and Hazelwood. Their report also advanced the controversial Mon-Oakland Connector, rejected by a multi-community coalition and canceled by Mayor Ed Gainey on Feb. 17, 2022.

These developers want infrastructure designed for their project rather than the safety of residents and pedestrians. It’s our public servants’ job to correct the power imbalance.

The city has publicly acknowledged that the 300 block qualifies for traffic safety improvements but chooses to prolong the danger and consciously disregard our personal safety. One neighbor dubbed it “vehicular terrorism.”

Direct action needed

If the Gainey administration is authentically committed to equitable traffic safety, they should put our money where their mouth is. After 76 years, the equitable thing to do would be to address unsafe conditions on lower Greenfield Avenue, now, before the next severe injury or fatality.

Residents on the 300 block are taking a stand. Unless DOMI commits to addressing our traffic hazards in 2024, we will implement our own safety measures to slow down drivers. It should not take causing an epic traffic jam to force officials to take adequate steps, but it might be the only way. I’m certain my grandmother would approve.

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

Posted on August 12, 2023 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

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.”