Greenfield

Hazelwoodians Tell PRT, ‘We Need the 93!’

The inbound 93 bus stopped at Second and Flowers avenues. Photo by Juliet Martinez

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

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

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

Proposed Hazelwood changes

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

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

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

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

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

Where Hazelwoodians are going

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lincoln Place PRT riders

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

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

This article originally appeared in The Homepage.

15207 May Be Hit Hard by PRT Bus Line Redesign per Current Proposal

A feedback sheet at the Oct. 21 PRT pop-up event at the Giant Eagle on Murray Avenue shows thumbs-down and mind-blown stickers along with rider comments like, “Less options for the children to get to school in this city!!!”

On Sept. 30, Pittsburgh Regional Transit (formerly Port Authority, now known as PRT) released the first draft of its Bus Line Redesign project.

Their proposal completely reroutes many transit lines. It also includes new schedules and new names for all the routes in the system. Because the changes are so complex and far-reaching, this article is the first in a planned series.

As it stands, PRT’s plan contains grim surprises for residents of Greenfield, Greater Hazelwood, and Lincoln Place. Future installments will focus on each of these areas.

Service cuts in parts of Greenfield

PRT’s interactive map shows a hole on Greenfield Avenue, where the 58 bus line now connects Second Avenue with Greenfield and other communities at the top of the steep hill. The redesign appears to merge the 58 with the 65, which now runs between Squirrel Hill and downtown.

As a result, people who live in upper Greenfield and work downtown would be redirected through Oakland. People who live in lower Greenfield and can’t walk up the hill would be cut off from the rest of the neighborhood. Greenfielders, who have long enjoyed the benefits of the neighborhood’s central location, could see their bus commute time double.

“I don’t understand it, why you just keep cutting, cutting, cutting, cutting,” said transit rider William Shorter at an Oct. 21 PRT pop-up event at the Giant Eagle on Murray Avenue. “People need these buses.”

“It would suck,” said Patrick Hassett, who has lived in Greenfield since 1989. “It would suck for me, my elderly buddies, and businesses that depend on transit for their employees and customers.”

Mr. Hassett said he has spoken with proprietors along Greenfield Avenue who are concerned that the route changes will make it difficult or impossible for people to get to their business.

Although Mr. Hassett considers himself a Greenfielder first since his retirement, he earned degrees in planning and transportation and worked for the City of Pittsburgh for 26 years in transportation and development.

When we met on Oct. 9 to review the map, Mr. Hassett identified Greenfield and Murray avenues as the two main commercial corridors that serve Greenfield.

“The most important transit spine is Greenfield Avenue,” he said. “Murray Avenue doesn’t penetrate the neighborhood like Greenfield Avenue does, although its commercial district is important.”

Pittsburghers for Public Transit’s director of communications and development, Dan Yablonsky, said the organization is holding meetings about the Bus Line Redesign every week to better understand what is being proposed and to shape their response.

Prioritizing bus rapid transit

The proposed plan’s effect on Greenfield is the opposite of PRT’s stated goal to “prioritize equitable investment by aligning service with land use and socio-economic changes.”

The source of the disconnect in PRT’s plan may be two-fold: the bus rapid transit model around which the plan is designed, and its “cost-neutral” funding scenario.

Mr. Hassett said bus rapid transit is not a new idea, and other cities like Kansas City and Indianapolis have been using it for more than a decade. Bus rapid transit focuses on connecting employment centers — in Pittsburgh’s case, downtown and Oakland.

“That system requires you to adjust the transit network so that service to the corridor is maximized. What suffers is local service,” he said.

“Right now, the buses filter through Pittsburgh’s many neighborhoods and smaller centers of employment,” he said. “The effect on Greenfield is obvious, but similar problems could occur with Lawrenceville, Squirrel Hill, and South Side [with this plan]. You still get local service, but it is less effective and more tuned to commuter needs. Many of the routes are redesigned to get you to Oakland.”

Mr. Hassett said discussions of bus rapid transit, or BRT, have been percolating in Pittsburgh for over a decade, too, but were previously shelved for competing transit priorities, plus a lack of funding and political support. He questioned whether the model of redirecting commuters to key job centers is an appropriate response to the effects of COVID-19 on transit demand.

“How have they modified the BRT model since the pandemic?” he asked. “You’d think people working from home would require more diffuse neighborhood service, not less.”

PRT’s cost-neutral plan means that the bus rapid transit investments would come at the expense of existing community services. In their Allegheny County Visionary Service report, Pittsburghers for Public Transit encouraged PRT to also consider versions of the Bus Line Redesign where service can grow with funding increases.

The Bus Line Redesign website includes a section imagining they will have 20% more funds. But those funds would not restore eliminated routes in neighborhoods. Instead, they are earmarked for increasing service on the proposed routes and establishing new “microtransit zones” in several neighborhoods including Oakland.

Mr. Yablonsky said, “We didn’t know what to expect, just that the framework they set up was cost-neutral. And like Laura [Wiens, executive director of Pittsburghers for Public Transit] always says, any redesign that doesn’t look at a growth scenario is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.”

Help turn this bus around

PRT says they are in the process of gathering feedback from transit users. At the time of this writing, they had scheduled several “pop-up” meetings for mid-October. You can review the Bus Line Redesign proposal and get the latest on meetings at engage.rideprt.org/buslineredesign/buslineredesign-home.

Mr. Hassett encouraged Greenfield transit users to ask themselves how the new routes would affect their ability to get to the Greenfield Giant Eagle, Magee Rec Center, St. Rosalia’s church, and other Greenfield destinations they need to visit. How much longer would the trip take, and how much more walking would be involved to get to the bus stop?

Pittsburghers for Public Transit says their organization is approaching the Bus Line Redesign with caution because of concerns like these. According to their website, their focus is “that PRT should ‘Do No Harm’ with the new design, at the least.”

Mr. Yablonsky invited residents of hard-hit neighborhoods to “organize with their neighbors and join up with [Pittsburghers for Public Transit].” He said the group will hold a Zoom organizing meeting on Nov. 13 from 7 to 8:30 p.m. where they will discuss the proposal and decide what changes to push for. Email info@pittsburghforpublictransit.org for details.

PRT will address the Greater Hazelwood community meeting on Nov. 12.

This article originally appeared in The Homepage.

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

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

Traffic-Calming Measures in Greenfield Leave Some Residents in Danger

car wreck on Greenfield Ave. June 23, 2022

In the first week of July, Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, known as DOMI, began its traffic-calming project along Greenfield Avenue. Crews installed speed humps and raised pedestrian crosswalks near Magee Rec Center and Greenfield School, and added rumble strips and extensive line painting. They also created a short bike lane that begins just past the 300 block of Greenfield Avenue.

It was a welcome sight for many Greenfielders, whose calls for traffic safety swelled after a car hit and injured a 12-year-old last summer near Magee Rec Center. But residents on the 300 block of Greenfield Avenue report little or no improvement when it comes to speeding drivers, even though they fought to have their area included in the project.

Two Greenfield Avenues

“I’m definitely seeing a complete change in traffic from Rialto’s around to the stop sign [at McCaslin Street],” upper Greenfield resident Annie Quinn said on July 14.

Addy Lord, a close neighbor of Ms. Quinn, agreed. “I think overall it seems as though people are slowing down around Magee,” she said. “Really thrilled about having the raised crosswalk.”

Catherine Adams co-chairs the Greenfield Community Association’s (GCA’s) Planning, Transportation and Development Committee.

“Anecdotally, traffic seems slower where the speed tables have been installed and I feel safer as a cyclist on Greenfield on the section where there is now a bike lane. But there doesn’t seem much of a change in rate of traffic speed or behavior change on the sections where the only treatment was paint,” she wrote in a July 14 email.

“Traffic calming on Greenfield Ave has been a long time coming,” Run resident Marianne Holohan texted on July 11. “We are honestly lucky that no one has died. I want to emphasize [that] more work remains to be done, especially in the 300 block.” Early last summer Ms. Holohan, secretary of the Greenfield PreK-8 Parent Teacher Organization, helped draft a traffic safety petition co-sponsored by the GCA. It garnered 600+ signatures.

An uphill battle continues

Since 2015, lower Greenfield residents have been requesting effective solutions for hazardous conditions on the busy 300 block, where vehicles often travel 40–50 mph. They report seeing frequent car crashes, including the destruction of parked cars.

The stretch is at the center of numerous major commuter routes, but many drivers do not respect it as a residential street. The Anderson Bridge closure detoured traffic to Greenfield Avenue and made the speeding even worse.

After last summer’s petition, public outcry over the child hit by a car, and pushback in response to Pittsburgh’s initial capital budget that left out traffic calming for Greenfield Avenue despite a 44% increase for its traffic safety program, DOMI finally agreed to include Greenfield Avenue — but not the 300 block.

Project area for Greenfield traffic-calming project. Source: https://engage.pittsburghpa.gov/index.php?cID=1605
The scope of the planned traffic-calming project for Greenfield Avenue completely excluded the 300 block, which is outside the project area shown in their plan. Source: Engage Pittsburgh project page

Only additional lobbying from frustrated residents and District 5 City Councilor Barb Warwick convinced DOMI to hold a neighborhood “walk-through” of Greenfield Avenue on March 5 to hear residents’ concerns and witness the dangers for themselves. DOMI agreed to add painted lines on the 300 block but, so far, no physical infrastructure.

Now that the work is complete, 300 block resident Paul Faust told us, “I think what they did with people driving downhill has them driving a little slower, but down [at Swinburne Bridge], as soon as [drivers] get past those rumble strips and curve they hit the gas. They floor it and are going 45 mph. At the least, they should put in a speed hump.”

The speed hump and raised crosswalk clustered together near the former St. Rosalia school are too far away to slow traffic where he lives, Mr. Faust said.

In a July 14 email, Greenfielder Ben Yogman praised the work in Upper Greenfield but wrote, “The absence of any marked crossing at all for residents of Tunstall Street and the 300 block is completely unacceptable. The danger here was highlighted at the start of the neighborhood walking tour with DOMI but they didn’t communicate that they were not including a crossing in their plan.”

On July 11, BikePGH advocacy manager Seth Bush took another walking tour with Junction Coalition to view and analyze DOMI’s traffic improvements.

“Unfortunately, cars [are] driving right over the paint on Lower Greenfield and zipping through just as fast as ever,” Mr. Bush observed. “There really isn’t any change. The bike lane helps slow folks down further up the hill, but drivers are ignoring the treatments otherwise.”

Mr. Bush said he believes some type of physical infrastructure is needed to make the 300 block safer.

Residents have discussed ways of slowing down traffic until city officials follow through on equitable traffic-calming measures, including installing their own.

New Playgrounds for The Run, Greenfield School

Four Mile Run Playground almost complete

by Marianne Holohan

It’s been a good year for playgrounds in Greenfield. The rebuilt playground in The Run is finally open and a playground at Greenfield School is moving forward.

This fall, new playground equipment was finally installed in The Run. The City worked with neighborhood residents—including children—to design the new playground, which features more climbing options than the previous design.

Replacing the playground became a priority after a neighborhood girl was seriously injured due to rusty play equipment. This playground is a favorite among local kids, who like the fact that the parkway bridge shields them during rain, extending playtime.

At Greenfield School, the unsightly paved lot that has doubled as a play yard will become home to the first Community Schoolyard in Pittsburgh. A project of the Trust for Public Land, Community Schoolyards turns neglected public school play spaces in cities across the country into environmentally friendly, green play spaces that also double as outdoor classrooms. TPL worked with the Western PA Conservancy to launch the project at Greenfield School. 

The partnership unveiled their design for the new schoolyard in September. It will feature traditional playground equipment along with a track, basketball hoops, new trees, and green spaces. TPL worked directly with students to design the schoolyard, which will be open to the community outside of school hours. Construction is slated to begin in summer 2024.

These new playgrounds have been hard-won, with residents advocating for them persistently over many years. They are a positive example of what’s possible when the City and nonprofit organizations invest in our communities’ future.

District 5 Residents Voice Priorities for 2024 Budget

Greenfield residents and City Councilor Barb Warwick speak with DOMI representatives

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

Budget basics and a high-tech twist

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

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

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

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

Residents share their priorities

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Community Action Calls Attention to Traffic Dangers on Greenfield Avenue

Slow Down Greenfield action on Aug. 25, 2023

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

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

Obvious, long-standing danger zones

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

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

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

—Petition comment

Greenfielders speak out

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

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

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

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

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

Obvious, long-standing neglect

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

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

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

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

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

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

—Petition comment

The wrecks keep coming

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

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

“Action is needed now”

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

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

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

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

Slow Down Greenfield rides again (soon)

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

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

Greenfield Boy Hit by Car Near Magee Playground

A pedestrian crossing sign was recently run over by a speeding car at Greenfield Ave. and Kaercher St., illustrating the need for better safety infrastructure.

On Aug. 16, a car struck 12-year-old Cameron Grimes as he and his sister began to cross Greenfield Avenue on their way home from Magee Playground.

Cameron’s mother, Leah Pugh, told us during an Aug. 17 phone call that he has a fractured arm and abrasions all over his body—including damage to his ear that will require surgery. “Other than that, he’s OK,” she said. Witnessing the accident had shaken Cameron’s 11-year-old sister Camella, but she was doing better at the time of our interview.

Neighborhood residents have been pleading with city officials for decades to address dangerous traffic patterns along Greenfield Avenue. In July, the Greenfield School Parent-Teacher Organization and the Greenfield Community Association co-sponsored a petition calling on Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI) to make Greenfield Avenue safer.

Another accident years in the making

Greenfield School PTO secretary Marianne Holohan, who helped draft the petition, said an accident like this is exactly what she was afraid of.

The petition specifically names the part of Greenfield Avenue where Cameron was hit, noting that kids and seniors cross at its intersection with McCaslin Street to visit Magee Rec Center. It also points out the stretch between Kaercher and Irvine/Saline streets, where “despite the high number of crashes, nothing has been done.”

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

When Mayor Ed Gainey held a community meeting in Greenfield on Jan. 14, attendees identified conditions along Greenfield Avenue as their top concern. Mayor Gainey thanked the residents for sharing their needs and encouraged them to “be aggressive” in communicating with his office going forward.

According to DOMI, Greenfield Avenue qualifies for Pittsburgh’s Neighborhood Traffic Calming program. However, it still has not received funding for traffic-calming improvements despite ongoing requests from residents and this year’s formal budget request from the Greenfield Community Association. At a July 2022 meeting about the replacement of Swinburne Bridge, DOMI project manager Zachary Workman told residents that any changes to Greenfield Avenue would have to wait until construction of the new bridge is complete in 2026 or later. “It’s definitely something that’s on DOMI’s radar for improvements in the future but it’s in the long-range plan as resources become available.”

“Outside of projects in affluent East End neighborhoods, DOMI only seems to install traffic calming after someone has been hurt or killed,” Ms. Holohan commented in an Aug. 17 text. “We should not have to sacrifice our children for basic public safety.”

“That could be any kid”

Ms. Pugh stressed the importance of better traffic control on Greenfield Avenue, saying that what happened to her son isn’t unique. She works in Hazelwood and knew Jamel Austin, the Glen Hazel 6-year-old who was killed on Johnston Avenue last year after being hit by a car.

She was aware of Glen Hazel’s successful efforts to get traffic-calming measures on Johnston Avenue and around the neighborhood schools after Jamel’s tragic death. But she said that before Cameron’s accident she was not aware that Greenfield residents were also lobbying for traffic calming. Now, she said, she wants to bring as much attention to the problem as possible.

We asked Ms. Pugh what she would say if she could speak directly to Mayor Gainey and the public about Cameron’s accident. She responded, “[Magee Playground] belongs to every child. So in a sense, my son is everyone’s son. Many have and will cross this same street that cars will continue to speed through. Clearly, that is [the] root and reason for the petitions and pleas to the mayor and so forth. How much more effort is needed for basic residential safety?”

To sign the Keep Kids Safe with Traffic Calming on Greenfield Ave! petition and add your comments, visit https://forms.gle/CAFP9yHbshzM7Yfg9 or scan the QR code below.

QR code for Greenfield Avenue petition

Petition: Make Greenfield Avenue Safer for Pedestrians

A pedestrian crossing sign was recently run over by a speeding car at Greenfield Ave. and Kaercher St., illustrating the need for better safety infrastructure.

by Marianne Holohan

Speeding cars, blind turns, complex intersections and a lack of safety infrastructure have created a hazardous environment for pedestrians on Greenfield Avenue. To amplify residents’ calls for change, the Greenfield School Parent-Teacher Organization and the Greenfield Community Association have co-sponsored a petition asking the city for traffic calming on Greenfield Avenue.

The petition calls on the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, known as DOMI, to restore the school safety zone on Greenfield Avenue that was removed when St. Rosalia’s school closed, despite the presence of Greenfield School next door.

The petition requests traffic calming and pedestrian safety measures on Greenfield Avenue at the intersections with Ronald and McCaslin streets, where kids and seniors cross to visit the Magee Rec Center, as well as the stretch between Kaercher and Irvine/Saline streets, the site of numerous wrecks in recent years.

car wreck on Greenfield Ave. June 23, 2022
Photo courtesy of Will Smith

While the petition focuses on asking for, not prescribing, solutions, potential interventions could include better crosswalk signage, a second crossing guard at Ronald Street, flashing speed awareness signs, rumble strips and a defined shoulder line.

Neighbors Share Harrowing Stories

The petition’s optional comment section is full of firsthand accounts from respondents who live on or near Greenfield Avenue, like witnessing a car crash that ripped the tire off of a parked car in front of Magee Rec Center.

One pedestrian called the Ronald Street intersection terrifying. A resident who has been asking the city for safety measures since the Murphy administration invited DOMI officials to sit on her porch and observe the traffic hazards she sees every day.

Many respondents begged DOMI to be proactive, with one recalling the tragic death of 6-year-old Jamel Austin on Johnston Avenue in Glen Hazel in July of 2022.

Another wrote that dangerous pedestrian conditions are bad for business. “It is extremely difficult to cross the Greenfield and Ronald intersection with my kids, which discourages us from walking to the businesses along Greenfield Avenue.”

Other respondents expressed disappointment and anger with the city’s inaction.

“It’s embarrassing we have to ‘petition’ to keep our kids safe,” one wrote. Another stated, “I am tired of living in a city where cars are a priority—even over the safety, health, and well-being of our children, residents and neighbors. Please do something.”

To sign the petition and add your comments, visit https://forms.gle/CAFP9yHbshzM7Yfg9 or scan the QR code below.

Marianne Holohan is the secretary of Greenfield School PTO and an Allegheny County Democratic Committee rep for the 15th Ward – District 9.

Now We Can Has CommUnity Input?

cheezburger cat looming over Swinburne Bridge

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

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

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

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

A tale of three bridges and one dangerous street

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

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

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

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

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

Moving traffic without mowing down residents

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

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

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

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

Whose needs is DOMI serving?

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

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

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

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

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