MM: East Decatur Construction Timeline, Lee Retiring, and the Paradox of Bike Helmets
Decatur Metro | July 21, 2016 | 1:01 pm
- Construction on east Decatur development should start in October [AJC]
- Decatur Deputy Police Chief is retiring [Decaturish]
- Decatur searching for new aborist after Woodson resignation [AJC]
- Coca-Cola sign at Manuel’s Tavern being restored this week [ABC]
- MillerCoors Just Bought Athens’s Terrapin Beer Co. [Eater]
- The Bike Helmet Paradox [The Atlantic]
Image courtesy of Terrapin Facebook page
RIP Terrapin, just create the Palpatine Pilsner and get it over with.
“Yes, there are studies that show that if you fall off a bicycle at a certain speed and hit your head, a helmet can reduce your risk of serious head injury. But such falls off bikes are rare — exceedingly so in mature urban cycling systems.”
Heresy!
Sounds like Woodson was perfect for that job.
Helmets are a choice.
They, also, cause a drop off in the number of people that are biking if there is enforced wearing.
As for the arborist, ‘good riddance’; after seeing the four large oaks cut down by Core Development on Fairview, both, for no apparently good reason, & most likely, in violation of code~ &, certainly, obscene!
It is a disgrace!
The city arborist enforces the ordinance which, by accounts I’ve heard, Ms. Woodson did well. If you have issues with the ordinance, take them up with your city commissioners. Don’t blast a civil servant for doing their job.
Scott, those of us who’ve tried to take the issue of a weak tree ordinance up with the current City administration have been largely ignored. Or been told the tree ordinance is a “balanced” approach, that getting it passed initially was very controversial and that many homeowners objected to it (and probably still do). The City’s development ordinances (and perhaps the mindset of many in City government) is that development trumps everything, even trees and green spaces.
I don’t disagree that wading those political waters is a very difficult row to hoe (to mix metaphors as painfully as possible). I’m just saying that Ms. Woodson, whose job is enforcing what’s on the books rather than setting policy, doesn’t deserve the scorn.
Agree, Scott. She seemed to be doing the best she could with a complex and flawed ordinance.
I doubt the issue was the ordinance being complexed. It’s really not that deep. Moreso that it’s highly flawed. You can’t always make chix salad out of chix ish. She’s probably glad to get away from it. I know I would be.
So should we blast her or the city for not coming to look at a potentially dangerous tree despite numerous calls from numerous neighbors?