ShareThis Page
Pittsburgh Tuesday takes |

Pittsburgh Tuesday takes

| Monday, March 21, 2016 9:00 p.m

Make it happen: Private donors could be sought to restore the 101-foot water tower in North Park. A total restoration of the 1937 icon, whose observation deck has been closed to the public for decades, is estimated to cost about $500,000. But interim fixes could make it accessible as other work commences. And that, we suggest, could be funded, in part, with a nominal admission fee. This tower with its phenomenal view is worth the effort.

Oh, where, oh where: The search has commenced for that rarest of rare Pittsburgh bird — a Republican candidate for mayor. That bird, if it can be found, would face Democrat incumbent Bill Peduto, who’s expected to seek re-election next year. The GOP traditionally has blamed the city’s overwhelmingly Democrat voter-registration edge for either having no candidate or putting up one sacrificial. But if Pittsburgh truly wants to be a renaissance city, Republicans must step up to the plate.

It’s really here: Spring arrived Sunday on a snowy note. And the Monday morning icy crust on many vehicles certainly was not welcome. But long-range forecasts suggest March, which came in like a lamb, will baaaaa-out the same way. (Sorry, we couldn’t resist.) It’s certainly good news for those who make a living selling spring products. And its great news for those with visions of wonderful gardens, flower and vegetable. Here’s to spring.

Categories: Editorials
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.