stormwater

4MR Talk and Tour Revives Flood Relief, Green Infrastructure Conversation

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

On Oct. 3, about 65 people gathered at the City Reformed Presbyterian Church in The Run to discuss solutions to the neighborhood’s flooding. The discussion has occurred repeatedly over the years, at times in the same basement assembly room when it was owned by International Union of Operating Engineers Local 95.

But this time, the crowd was somewhat different. It included members of 17 nonprofit organizations and community groups; 10 city, county, and state-level governmental agencies; and seven elected officials and their staff.

“We have quite an audience here today — individuals who, I would say, are the decision-makers,” said Mon Water Project founder Annie Quinn, who organized the event. She said she was excited to bring them together with groups pushing for flood relief and green infrastructure.

Not a revolutionary request

Water management problems affect The Run and Pittsburgh as a whole, Ms. Quinn explained. Pittsburgh starts at a disadvantage compared to cities like Philadelphia, which have better soil and less hilly terrain. Like many cities, “We grew systems without growing the infrastructure to support them,” she said.

As a result, every wet-weather event tests the limits of Pittsburgh’s water infrastructure.

“Our sewers overflow in even a tenth of an inch of rain,” Ms. Quinn said. “There is the possibility that The Run will continue to flood, and stormwater issues will be happening right here. But I am not done with my work until the Monongahela River is overflow free as the result of Four Mile Run no longer being the fourth-largest overflow in the city.”

She said Pittsburgh Water (also known as PWSA) has already completed much of the work toward solving this problem.

Ms. Quinn named five solutions she called “project areas”:

1. Separation of sewers in The Run. This means installing a dedicated pipeline for stormwater beneath the neighborhood’s streets. Ms. Quinn described it as “the project that has to happen for anything else to happen.”

2. Restoration of Panther Hollow Lake. The once-popular attraction is less than 4 inches deep, plagued by algae blooms and a recent fish kill. Pittsburgh’s Department of Public Works is applying for permits to do some of the work needed, but a much larger-scale restoration was already designed.

3. Uncovering and restoring buried streams. This would prevent two spring-fed streams from adding about 68 million gallons into the sewer system each year, allowing them to follow their own courses. Ms. Quinn noted that this is similar to work done on Nine Mile Run in Frick Park. “I am not asking for something revolutionary,” she said. “I am asking for a copy-paste of a restoration project that has already occurred and been one of the most successful restoration projects in the country.”

4. Infrastructure in upstream neighborhoods to direct stormwater to storage that could be built under places like Magee Field. Ms. Quinn said ALCOSAN has already identified Magee Field as a good location.

5. Removal of parkway stormwater runoff from the sewer system. PennDOT is planning major construction projects along I-376 Parkway East over the next few years, so now is the time to study how water runoff from the parkway can be diverted.

Pittsburgh Water had planned a $41 million stormwater project in The Run and nearby Schenley Park that included project areas 1–3. After the Mon-Oakland Connector shuttle road planned for the same location was canceled in 2022, Pittsburgh Water scaled back the project to only area 1. Despite reaffirming its commitment to Run residents at that time, Pittsburgh Water eliminated all funding for construction in late 2024.

Renewed determination

After her talk, Ms. Quinn invited Run residents to share their experiences.

Laura Vincent has lived in the neighborhood for 20 years. She remembered the floods starting in about 2006 and occurring every two years until the latest one in 2021. She said she and her husband replaced the hot water heaters, furnaces, washers, and dryers in their home and rental property three or four times. Eventually, they installed backflow valves and rubber membranes that keep both basements dry. But many of their neighbors lack the resources to do so.

“I can’t tell you how many times my husband, at 8:30 in the evening, has run around to all my neighbors to help them re-light pilot lights on their water tanks so at least after they’re done cleaning up their basements they can take a shower,” Ms. Vincent said.

Marianne Holohan, a 13-year resident, talked about raising her two children in The Run. “Part of their story of growing up is, ‘Be careful going outside after it rains because there’s sewage everywhere.’” Ms. Holohan added, “You know, people ride their bikes through this neighborhood constantly. They could also be the victims of the next major flood. It is, in fact, irresponsible to not do any of these projects.”

District 5 City Councilor Barb Warwick thanked Rep. Dan Frankel and Sen. Jay Costa for attending. She emphasized that many of her neighbors in The Run told her after PWSA pulled its funding, “‘They were never going to do that project. They were blowing smoke the entire time.’”

“That is so depressing,” she said. “Annie, just listening to you talk right now — you have galvanized me. These projects were promised to this neighborhood, and they need to get done.”

Working with PennDOT

During the walk through The Run and Junction Hollow, Rep. Frankel spoke with us about state-level solutions.

One obstacle to completing project area 5 is that Pennsylvania’s Department of Transportation (PennDOT) doesn’t perform maintenance beyond the boundaries of a state highway, except as needed to keep the highway structurally sound.

In addition, PennDOT does not pay a stormwater fee. According to Rep. Frankel’s office, government agencies normally don’t have to pay taxes, which the commonwealth says include stormwater fees. But the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is currently considering whether a stormwater management fee is a tax or a fee for service. Pennsylvania does pay fee-for-service charges. The case, Borough of West Chester v. Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education, was argued in 2024; a decision is still pending.

Rep. Frankel co-sponsored legislation introduced by State Reps. Justin Fleming and Dave Madsen. It would require Pennsylvania to pay its fair share of stormwater management fees to local municipalities.

He wrote in an Oct. 10 email, “This is an all-hands-on-deck problem, and I’m glad to help the city of Pittsburgh and the Mon Water Project get every state dollar possible to solve it.”

This article originally appeared in The Homepage.

Water-Focused Event Gives Center Stage to Stormwater, Sewage

Posted on October 7, 2025 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

Kids crawl through a simulated sewer system at the Aug. 27 event, Pittsburgh’s Got The Runs!, at the Roundhouse. Photo by Ray Gerard

Two girls laughed as they scooted through mesh play tunnels representing Pittsburgh’s wastewater system, each racing to throw her squishy poop emojis into the designated blue bin symbolizing a treatment plant.

They were playing the Poop Pipes Game at Pittsburgh’s Got The Runs!, an event hosted by the local nonprofit Mon Water Project on Aug. 27. About 140 people gathered at the Roundhouse on Hazelwood Green for hands-on activities, “lightning talks,” and even a “walk to your poop pipe” hike, all designed to educate residents on Pittsburgh’s unique water issues and encourage them to think about practical solutions.

‘There’s poop in the rivers’

Pittsburgh’s Got The Runs! was part of the city of Pittsburgh’s Summer of Engagement series. Annie Quinn, founder of the Mon Water Project, said she submitted her idea for the community event because city leaders often overlook water-related issues.

“The topic of water is always tied to transportation or sustainability,” she said during a Sept. 3 phone call, adding that the public knows more about those other areas.

With the city seeking public input for its comprehensive plan called Pittsburgh 2050, residents have a chance to identify where attention and funds should go. Ms. Quinn said she wants to help residents understand and explain why water quality and stormwater/wastewater management should be among Pittsburgh’s top priorities. The timing is important for another reason: ALCOSAN is preparing for construction on its Regional Tunnel System, one of the largest infrastructure projects in the region’s history.

Ms. Quinn described most attendees of Pittsburgh’s Got The Runs! as “regular community members” who were not water professionals.

“They knew the rivers were polluted, but now they were hearing why. One woman said to me, ‘So we keep putting a Band-Aid on a system that is failing us? What are we going to do?’ People were empowered, angry and ready to communicate in a way I haven’t seen before,” she said.

Other organizations hosting activities and giving talks included ALCOSAN, the City of Pittsburgh and Pittsburgh City Council, Greenfield Community Association, Hazelwood Initiative Inc, Hazelwood Local, Negley Run Watershed Task Force, One Valley, Pittsburgh Water Collaboratory, Squirrel Hill Urban Coalition, Three Rivers Urban Watershed Council, Three Rivers Waterkeepers, UpstreamPgh and Watersheds of South Pittsburgh.

No news is bad news

Pittsburgh Water (also known as PWSA) presented the final lightning talk of the evening. Holly Bomba, an education and outreach associate with the water authority, explained the utility’s role in delivering clean drinking water and managing storm- and wastewater.

One slide of the presentation showed their stormwater projects on a city map, color-coded by status. Among the seven projects listed as “in planning” was the Four Mile Run stormwater project, which caught the attention of Run residents in the room. Billed as a solution to the neighborhood’s longtime flooding, the project was allotted $41 million in 2017. After the Mon-Oakland Connector shuttle road planned for the same location was canceled in 2022, Pittsburgh Water scaled back the stormwater project to include only “gray” infrastructure — pipes under the neighborhood itself. Despite reaffirming its commitment to their project at the time, Pittsburgh Water eliminated all funding for construction in late 2024.

Pastor Mike Holohan, who lives in The Run, asked Ms. Bomba to explain the project’s “in planning” designation, considering that it was essentially canceled. In her response, Ms. Bomba mentioned that ALCOSAN pulled its grant for the project because green infrastructure work planned in Schenley Park was determined to be not effective enough.

Rebecca Zito, Pittsburgh Water’s senior manager of public affairs, later clarified that ALCOSAN pulled the grant after — not before — Pittsburgh Water removed green infrastructure from the project. She wrote in a Sept. 4 email, “This decision significantly changed the scope, and we would have to resubmit for a new grant to be considered.”

“ALCOSAN evaluated the effectiveness and that’s why they awarded the grant,” commented Ms. Quinn, wondering if ALCOSAN would re-issue the grant if the project were reinstated.

This would only happen if the green infrastructure part of the Four Mile Run project moved forward, since that element is what made the project eligible for ALCOSAN’s GROW grant program. Though Pittsburgh Water has abandoned their $8.7 million design, Ms. Quinn said the Mon Water Project is planning “a focused campaign to install big, climate-resilient projects in Four Mile Run.”

People can get involved by participating in the city’s comprehensive planning process.

“Based on what you learned at this event, identify water as a priority,” she said. “For example, write in ‘Four Mile Run stormwater project.’ We want to sway the comprehensive plan to include details about water and specific solutions.”

‘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.

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.

Watershed Advocacy in Hazelwood and Four Mile Run

Posted on February 28, 2023 by Junction Coalition interviews 0

Map of Sylvan Ave. with pins showing streams and ponds

Q&A with Annie Quinn, director of the Mon Water Project

Water issues can mean flooded streets, backed-up sewers, and even landslides. A new organization based in Greenfield has the mission of helping people with all of those. Junction Coalition spoke with Annie Quinn, director of the Mon Water Project (MWP) about water issues in The Run and Hazelwood. Ms. Quinn’s answers have been edited for length and clarity.

JC: Why did you decide to start the Mon Water Project?
AQ: I had been working for four years in watershed science. As I was attending meetings [about the Four Mile Run stormwater project] and hearing PWSA explaining the project to residents, I felt a responsibility. I wanted to help move the conversation forward. The Mon Water Project is an opportunity to serve the community in a way that helps us all with problems around water—and in Pittsburgh, we have a lot of those.

What is watershed science?
The concept of water management within a watershed—how does water move within a system? It’s an area of study that may have been called “freshwater biology” before.

How can the MWP help Hazelwood?
The [water/sewer] lines in Hazelwood are as old as the neighborhood. Hazelwood has been a neighborhood of disinvestment resulting from systemic racism, and the result of the “squeaky wheel” system: More privileged residents in other neighborhoods would call and have their pipes replaced over the years.

I want the MWP to raise voices in Hazelwood, find out about their water issues, and get resources for them. We may not know all the water issues Hazelwood residents face. I see the MWP as a chance to unite us and get good solutions for us all.

What have you done in Hazelwood so far?
Nonprofits often come into a neighborhood thinking they will be the solution to problems. I want to join existing organizations and become the neighborhood’s “Department of Water.” I’ve joined the [Hazelwood Initiative’s] environmental committee. As time goes on, I’m hoping to meet with PWSA and Grounded Strategies and build upon their relationships with residents. I’m also hoping to meet people at events and educational programs. And I would love to get out in the river on a boat so residents can see the outfall into the river. There are a lot of pathways for me to partner with everyone, and I’m looking forward to meeting residents of all the neighborhoods and working with them.

Could water issues affect the planned Sylvan Avenue Trail?
The city is going to have to be careful designing any trail through that area. The number-one issue in trail development is erosion and water damage. There are six streams that are ephemeral—which means they may not be there every day or even every season, but they are a systemic source of water. Any design will have to keep in mind that if not careful about width, ponding, and providing underground transport for water, the trail could become unusable. A pipe could direct water to flow down a steep cliff—and that could eliminate roots on the hillside and contribute to landslides. So for any design, you’d have to know how water works under and around the trail—and where is it safe for the water to go?

What have you learned so far about water issues in The Run?
When PWSA said they’re going back to the drawing board [with the stormwater project], they’re going way back… [PWSA has] a stormwater strategic plan—this is new. Before, they were doing stormwater projects more piecemeal and operating with a different metric… [In the new plan], out of all the watersheds in Pittsburgh, Four Mile Run is ranked 5 out of 19. So the good news is that PWSA plans to keep us in the top five for the city. The bad news is that this pushes the timeline [for fixing flooding in The Run]. It’s possible that Four Mile Run is looking at a delay in the promises PWSA made. The process is looking like several layers of plans, then another design and then a project—which can be very frustrating because the solutions are far in the future. We’ll have to figure out together what we do next.

How do you describe PWSA’s Four Mile Run watershed plan?
I don’t know, and I don’t think the PWSA knows either. That is the problem, and an opportunity for us to push back and get answers on that. It’s important that our next big conversation with PWSA should be answering questions like, how much additional flow will the project capture? What level of storm is that? Have you evaluated what level of service has allowed this type of flooding in the past? What level of service does this project get up to? There is an opportunity through modeling to predict how the system acts before, during, and after the project. At the MWP, we can analyze data. As a nonprofit, we can use PWSA data and study it from different angles to get some good answers and partner with PWSA to get grants. I’m thinking about how we can take our advocacy to the next level.

How does removal of the work in Junction Hollow affect flood control?
The green infrastructure that was proposed in the park…was designed with underdrains so some water goes to groundwater, but a lot is stored and released slowly. [PWSA] said at the [latest] meeting that the new direction [removing the green infrastructure piece] was managing the same amount of water. Slow release would allow them to account for that—the size of the pipes is accounting for holding water back and releasing it slowly… How can we do more storage and slow releasing above ground? How can we avoid feeding a stream into a pipe? The original plan still included water going back into a pipe.

How can the MWP help increase the plan’s effectiveness?
The MWP can be more nimble, flexible, and fluid—like water!— in that we are not a government agency with bureaucracy, with politics. We are a grassroots community organization that can apply for grants the city can’t apply for. Nonprofits often can handle problems quicker, or at least bring a distinct perspective. A unified voice for people throughout the watershed. We’re allowed to dream big and do big, innovative projects.

How can people get involved?
I am a fiscally sponsored nonprofit of another nonprofit—New Sun Rising. My first job is to get a list of leaders to help decide where the MWP goes next. If you are interested, you don’t have to be a professional—just someone in the community who wants to be actively engaged in a leadership role.

Another way to get involved is to sign up for the newsletter to stay up to date as we grow. Right now, that looks quiet. I want to meet the people who are already here.

Visit Monwaterproject.org or email annie@monwaterproject.org for more information.

Notes

About the image: This map shows six springs and ponding along the portion of Sylvan Avenue closed by the city due to landslides. Sylvan Avenue was part of the now-canceled Mon-Oakland Connector shuttle road route between Oakland universities and the Hazelwood Green development. A bike and pedestrian trail has been proposed along the same route. Courtesy of the Mon Water Project

This interview originally appeared in The Homepage.

PWSA Cuts Green Infrastructure Elements of Four Mile Run Stormwater Project

Posted on December 27, 2022 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

Map showing work area of PWSA stormwater project

The Four Mile Run Stormwater Project will proceed without green infrastructure in Schenley Park that was intended to reduce runoff from Panther Hollow. PWSA officials at a recent meeting said the scope of the project will now be confined to The Run.

On November 14, about 30 people gathered at the Local 95 Union Hall in The Run, along with 63 virtual attendees on Zoom, to hear long-anticipated updates on the project.

The green infrastructure element of the plan involved engineering a dam at Panther Hollow Lake and daylighting a stream in Schenley Park. PWSA is dropping it from the project because of persistent permitting issues, technical disagreements concerning the dam, and difficult negotiations with CSX, which owns property affected by the work. Senior group manager of stormwater Tony Igwe laid out the challenges and explained that resolving them would cause further delays.

“So the decision was to kind of cut bait and look at the lower stormwater portion [in The Run], which is the core of the project,” Mr. Igwe said.

Map showing water and sewer lines and the limit of work along Boundary Street in The Run

The project, first announced in 2017, was billed as a solution to severe flooding in The Run but floundered because of difficulties with permitting and murky ties to the controversial Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) shuttle road. PWSA’s last public meeting concerning the Four Mile Run Stormwater Project took place in October 2021, before Mayor Ed Gainey announced a halt to the MOC’s route through Schenley Park.

Kate Meckler, PWSA’s deputy director of engineering and construction, explained another reason for the change. In the past year, PWSA started implementing the Water Reliability Plan, which it calls “a series of once-in-a-generation projects that will modernize our water distribution system.”

Ms. Meckler said relocating 4,200 linear feet of 50-inch water main in the park during a critical phase of the Water Reliability Plan could disrupt people’s water service and that coordination proved too complex.

When work does begin, it will be complicated. Mallory Griffin, who works with construction firm JMT, answered questions about what to expect while work is happening in The Run.

“The design will not allow us to close the road,” she said. “There will be one-way traffic maintained at all times, traffic flaggers, ambulances will be able to get in and out. There will be a very deep trench next to the road. So it’s going to be a lot of police, a lot of work. It won’t be years; we’re estimating several months to get that pipeline in.”

Possible help for flooded homeowners

Laura Vincent said she has been waiting for solutions throughout her nearly 20 years living in The Run. “But honestly, not very much has happened,” she said. In the meantime, Ms. Vincent did extensive work on both of her properties to protect them from flooding.

“It has cost me thousands of dollars,” she said. “What about my neighbors who haven’t done what I’ve done? Do you know what it means to have shit water eight feet high in your basement?”

Mr. Igwe replied that the long delays were part of the reason PWSA decided to move ahead without the work in Schenley Park. “The core of the project is to try to remedy some of those situations,” he said.

Run resident Barb Warwick, newly elected as Pittsburgh’s District 5 city council representative, asked PWSA to work with her to explore the possibility of setting up a fund to help people repair flood damage as months continue to pass without construction on the stormwater project.

“It could make a huge difference for a resident,” Ms. Warwick said. “And it isn’t that much when you’re looking at the grand scheme of things.”

So far, PWSA has spent $7 million on the project. The future budget is not finalized, but they expect to retain the $42 million they had last year.

A new voice emerges on water issues

The other big news of the night came in the form of a new local organization: the Mon Water Project. Founder Anne Quinn, an environmental scientist and Greenfield resident with a background in water management, said the group is focused on conserving, restoring and advocating for the Monongahela tributaries in Greenfield, Four Mile Run and Greater Hazelwood, which Ms. Quinn christened “the Monongahela peninsula.”

Ms. Quinn said these neighborhoods have equally important issues with water. She wants the Mon Water Project to join forces with existing community organizations throughout the area.

Erin Tobin, an outreach coordinator with the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy, said her organization is looking forward to transitioning its 4MR Watershed Task Force to be under the Mon Water Project, although it will remain involved with stormwater improvement in Schenley Park. View the meeting slides and recording at https://www.pgh2o.com/projects-maintenance/search-all-projects/four-mile-run-stormwater-project.

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

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

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

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

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

Moving forward together

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

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

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

Our new plan needs a new name to reflect new priorities

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

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

Photo courtesy of Juliet Martinez for The Homepage

PWSA Fields Questions on Stormwater Project Delays

Posted on November 12, 2021 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

On Oct. 19, the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority (PWSA) held a meeting via Zoom to update the public on its Four Mile Run Stormwater Project. The project, announced in 2017 as a way to address severe flooding in the Four Mile Run neighborhood (The Run), has come under fire from skeptics who say it is designed around the controversial Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) plan. The MOC, announced in 2015, calls for building a road for university shuttles on the same land as the stormwater project. During the Q&A period after their presentation, PWSA officials made several false statements related to the MOC.

Shuttle road more integral to design than previously shared

Asked if PWSA is providing space in its stormwater plan for the MOC, Mallory Griffin of construction firm JMT (which is involved in the PWSA project) answered no. Yet PWSA senior group manager Tony Igwe asserted that removing the MOC from the watershed plan would require PWSA to start over, which would cause significant delay and cost millions of dollars in changes.

“PWSA has always said the stormwater project will still move forward whether the trail is there or not,” Mr. Igwe explained. “But what we never said was how much additional cost and time would be required if the trail isn’t there… To suddenly shut down one piece of that project, take it off the table, and then ask us to do a project, the first thing that’s going to happen is now we have to redesign the project to take that Mon-Oakland [Connector] out of the equation.”

The public has been told repeatedly at public meetings that the watershed plan and MOC are “two separate projects.” PWSA’s own notes from its Sept. 2020 public meeting on the stormwater project state:

“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 [the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (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.”

In several earlier public meetings, former stormwater project manager and current PWSA Board Chair Alex Sciulli had assured residents that the stormwater project takes precedence and that removing the MOC would not cause a significant delay because they are two separate projects.

New mayor, MOC opposition portrayed as obstacles

Ms. Griffin said that the PWSA hopes to have the permit approved by this winter, but warned of consequences if the MOC is removed as residents have been requesting for years. Slide 21 of PWSA’s presentation reads, in part: “If the new City Administration changes or removes the Mon-Oakland trail design, permitting will need to start over causing significant delay.”

Outgoing mayor Bill Peduto introduced the MOC plan to advance university and foundation goals. Mayor Peduto became Pittsburgh’s first incumbent mayor to be unseated since 1933. Mayor-elect Ed Gainey, by contrast, has clearly stated that he opposes the MOC. According to his campaign website, “Ed will stop the buildout of Mon-Oakland connector and prevent the construction of other privatized or quasi-privatized mass transit systems designed to support luxury development at the expense of existing residential communities.”

Community members at the meeting reminded PWSA of this, but Mr. Igwe said, “Up until that is done officially, all we’re really dealing with is people giving us their ideas and opinions on where they stand, and until someone puts something in writing formally that says it’s from the office of the people who can make the decision, that’s where we have to assume the project is going until it’s absolutely clear that it will not.”

Run residents have suffered a total of 10 major 25- to 75-year flood events in the last 15 years. They say a 10-year flood event plan (per PWSA’s current design parameters) is dangerously inadequate and that addressing floods must be prioritized. Every flood in The Run is an illegal combined sewer overflow that contains raw sewage—not merely stormwater runoff—which independent stormwater management consultants have labeled a public health and safety crisis.

Budget numbers continue to fluctuate

PWSA will spend $42.65 million on the stormwater project, according to their latest presentation. In a June 2020 meeting, another public presentation revealed that only about $14 million is going directly to flood relief in The Run. Asked why, PWSA acting senior manager of public affairs Rebecca Zito responded in an email on Aug. 24, 2020, “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, or revisit some of the original green infrastructure projects planned for Panther Hollow Stream and Phipps Run.” (emphasis added)

Excerpt from Nov. 10 PWSA letter in response to resident statement at Oct. 22 PWSA board meeting

Subsequent presentations between then and now have added items that were not previously considered part of the “core” project in the Junction Hollow section of Schenley Park. It is unclear whether the money set aside for opportunities to collaborate with the universities has been diverted to these new items, including “Construction Management / Inspection” (which presumably was always needed to complete the project).

In a letter responding to a resident’s statement at PWSA’s Oct. 22 board meeting, Mr. Igwe included the information from the budget slide and said the budget “does not contain $26 million ‘being held back for future projects.’”

Good news break: Sidewalks restored

The Oct. 19 presentation included photos of sidewalks in The Run that were dug up in the process of moving gas lines in advance of the stormwater project. One community member commented that the strip of rocks filling the trench down the middle of the sidewalk looked like “a tripping hazard.” A Run resident said they had been told the sidewalks would not be replaced until after the stormwater project is completed.

Ms. Griffin said the sidewalks were “100% in Peoples’ scope to replace” and pledged to “follow up with them tomorrow first thing to see what their schedule is for replacing the sidewalks.”

About two weeks after the meeting, construction crews returned to The Run. As of Nov. 12, they were putting finishing touches on the new sidewalks.

PA DEP concerns downplayed

PWSA received a technical deficiency letter from PA DEP dated May 27, 2021, in response to their permit application filed for the project in August 2020. Ms. Griffin and Mr. Igwe both mischaracterized this letter during the Q&A session, stating that the deficiencies identified were unrelated to the MOC. Ms. Griffin said that in a subsequent PA DEP letter “they had no questions on the trail’s impact to the flooding.” This point is debatable, but PA DEP’s concerns in the May 27 letter regarding the MOC are not incidental. Of 35 items listed in the 8-page letter, 13 specifically mention the MOC. For example, environmental comment 26 refers to additional permit requirements associated with the MOC:

“Since PWSA is the applicant, will PWSA be responsible for the operation and maintenance of this section of DOMI’s project? Alternately, please consult with DEP, regarding additional permit requirements, if PWSA will not own or have primary responsibility for this section of DOMI’s Mon-Oakland Mobility Project.”

On Oct. 29, PA DEP sent PWSA a second technical deficiency letter. They identified remaining “significant technical deficiencies” and requested a meeting with PWSA to discuss and explain them. Comment 17 in this second letter asks PWSA to “confirm that the Mon-Oakland Mobility Project is the same as the DOMI trail” and clarify that the full scope of the project is shown in a drawing called the “Boundary Street Concept North of Junction Hollow.”

“If there are additional components and/or sections of the overall DOMI Trail/Mon-Oakland Mobility Project,” the comment continued, “please note that a Comprehensive Environmental Assessment may be requested.”

After the Oct. 19 meeting and before receiving word of the second letter, residents asked the PA DEP to delay their decision to approve or reject the dual permit until at least February 2022.

PWSA Pushes Ahead on Four Mile Run Stormwater Project Without Permit

Posted on July 17, 2021 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

Despite receiving a Technical Deficiency Letter from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) in response to their dual permit application for the problematic Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) shuttle road and Four Mile Run Stormwater Project, PWSA shows no sign of reconsidering its plans. The current stormwater project is inadequate to address the flooding issues, in part because it was designed around the MOC. On top of that, existing flood protection benchmarks do not account for worsening conditions caused by overdevelopment and climate change.

May 27: The PA DEP sent the Technical Deficiency Letter. Its engineering and environmental comments contained numerous references to the MOC and requests for clarification on its impacts. Here is a small sampling of problems from the 8-page letter.

Engineering comment 5d: Was the area as a result of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure proposed trail and road incorporated into the flood analysis inundation limits study for proposed conditions. Provide evidence that the impervious area will not contribute additional flow increasing water surface elevations detailed in Figure 01 & Figure 02 of Project 2018-GI-102-0.

Environmental comment 25: Per Module S1, in the EA, “The purpose of the Project is to manageand/or remove direct stream inflow to the existing CSS within the Junction Hollow valley of Schenley Park and to improve the CSS system from Junction Hollow to the Monongahela River, by repair, replacement, and/or separation of the CSS and stormwater lines. The goals and benefits of the Project are to reduce CSOs; reduce flood risks and basement backups; reduce sediment transport; and leverage resources for regional benefit, including align with the Parks Master Plan.” Describe the relationship between PWSA’s project and the City of Pittsburgh’s project, in terms of the project purpose.

Environmental comment 26: The Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority (PWSA) is identified as the applicant, on the application form; however, the Project Description identifies the Mon-Oakland Mobility Project as a City of Pittsburgh project, led by the City’s Dept. of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI). Since PWSA is the applicant, will PWSA be responsible for the operation and maintenance of this section of DOMI’s project? Alternately, please consult with DEP, regarding additional permit requirements, if PWSA will not own or have primary responsibility for this section of DOMI’s Mon-Oakland Mobility Project.

Environmental comment 29: Since this application only includes a section of DOMI’s Mon-Oakland Mobility Project, identify and describe, to the extent possible, any and all potential impacts to aquatic resources, including watercourses, floodways, floodplains and bodies of water, from the overall Mon-Oakland Mobility Project. Please note that based on your response to this item, that a Comprehensive Environmental Assessment may be requested.

The letter stated that PWSA had 60 days to respond to these comments, or the application would be considered withdrawn. The deadline was July 27.

May 28: At the monthly PWSA board meeting Ziggy Edwards of The Run urged the PWSA to create a model for the stormwater project that does not include the MOC. She also asked for a report PWSA commissioned from ms Consultants that provides great detail on the Four Mile Run watershed and was funded with ratepayer dollars.

June 3: PWSA chief of project management Alex Sciulli denied Ms. Edwards’ request for the report. Regarding the dual permit application, Mr. Sciulli said he “asked staff to prepare a response to the PA DEP letter and to provide additional clarification regarding the stormwater impact of the proposed MOC, including the specifics of the ms Consultants report and previous modeling.” He added, “At the appropriate time, we will be happy to share and discuss our response to your inquiries.”

Mr. Sciulli did not clarify how PWSA would be able to address in two months the fundamental shortcomings identified by PA DEP.

June 13: Intense storms caused flash flooding in The Run that totaled several cars, damaged a garage, and caused sewage backups in basements.

June 25: At the monthly PWSA board meeting, several Run residents spoke and/or submitted statements regarding the June 13 flood. Ms. Edwards again implored the PWSA to come up with a plan to address flooding that is not designed around and hindered by the MOC.

“We need answers on how much better PWSA could address the combined sewer overflows without [the road]. These answers have life-or-death importance to The Run,” she said.

Ray Gerard of lower Greenfield recounted the flood’s aftermath in his statement. “The City again neglected to show up and remove inches of leftover fecal matter on the streets, sidewalks and limited community green space. The neighborhood literally smelled like [$#!*] for days. It’s understood that there are other areas of the city that suffered damage and flooding, but that was runoff storm-water, not raw sewage… Residents and their children are forced to breathe this toxic air in for days. Our local officials continue to ignore, at great risk, the lives and health of Run residents.”

July 9: PWSA senior group manager Tony Igwe sent a letter to Run residents informing them that although “the plans for the stormwater project are being reviewed by the [PA DEP] and we cannot move forward with construction [on the stormwater project] until a permit is issued … People’s Natural Gas (PNG) will begin construction to replace existing gas lines along Saline Street, Alexis Street, Four Mile Run Road, and Boundary Street.” The letter included a tiny image of a map with illegible text (see image above).

Stay tuned for updates on PWSA’s response to the Technical Deficiency Letter and whether PNG’s planned construction lacks necessary permits.

8 Urgent Questions for PWSA Board of Directors Re. Stormwater Project

Posted on February 27, 2021 by Junction Coalition Special Reports 0

On February 26, 2021, Ziggy Edwards of The Run addressed PWSA’s board of directors at their monthly meeting. She brought concerns from her neighborhood that the design and implementation of PWSA’s Four Mile Run (4MR) Stormwater Project suffers from skewed priorities. The project, which will include major construction on the only road into The Run, focuses on accommodating the Mon-Oakland Connector (MOC) rather than fixing severe flooding.

The following questions, which PWSA also received via email, are based on information in the Right-to-Know (RTK) request documents we have received so far and independent expert analysis of the plan submitted with the permit application to the PA Department of Environmental Protection and the US Army Corps of Engineers.

1. Why did the Heinz Endowments pay Howard Neukrug (past Philadelphia Water Commissioner) to review the PWSA stormwater project? (source: PWSA/CEC 4MR Weekly Meeting Minutes, April 16, 2019)

2. How much of the $40 million for the PWSA stormwater project did not come from the Heinz Endowments and/or other foundations that own the Hazelwood Green development?

3. How can the three new PWSA board members, who all have ties to entities with vested interests in the Hazelwood Green (HG) development, oversee the stormwater project in a fair and impartial manner that doesn’t benefit HG at the expense of Schenley Park and residents in The Run? For that matter, how can the other board members be fair and impartial in this project when they were all directly nominated by Mayor Peduto (a longtime proponent of the MOC)?

4. As you may know, the proposed MOC adds at least 0.80 acres (34,850 square feet) of paving to Junction Hollow. With the types of storms Pittsburgh has had in the past 10 years, a year with 50 inches of rain would generate an additional 1 million+ gallons of runoff to The Run. Why does the plan in the permit application propose to pollute this stormwater runoff by directing it from the MOC to the existing combined sewer system and not to the new stormwater network that flows directly to the river?

5. Did any consultant not funded by HG owners evaluate the impact of this stormwater project design on The Run? What did the consultants say about the absence of stormwater inlets of pipes along the proposed MOC road? What did they say about the absence of stormwater runoff from the road to the daylighted stream?

6. Is it true that the PWSA stormwater project’s construction plan calls for 4MR Field across Alexis Street from Big Jim’s to be used as a staging area for construction equipment and materials?

7. Because the “Parkway side” of the 4MR watershed is excluded from PWSA’s stormwater project, residents of The Run are still likely to see stormwater arrive in our neighborhood from that side of 4MR—even after this highly disruptive project is completed. Any flood water that enters the combined sewer network above The Run will still be in the combined sewer pipes running under the neighborhood. Therefore, if the volume of stormwater entering the combined sewer pipes above The Run is greater than those combined sewer pipes can handle, we are still likely to see raw sewage come to the surface from the remaining combined sewer inlets and/or manholes. Why is none of the $41 million earmarked for this project, which was billed as a solution to flooding in The Run, being spent on remediating the “Parkway side” of 4MR?

8. Is the PWSA board of directors aware that PWSA was ordered by the Office of Open Records to complete a review and provide the rest of its documents responsive to our RTK request? The deadline was yesterday [February 25, 2021]. At 8:52 p.m. we received a link to a zip file with a password that doesn’t work. Will the board encourage PWSA Attorney Samuel Hornak to resolve this issue as quickly as possible, since PWSA effectively missed the deadline?