Cyclist Victim of Hit and Run Tuesday Afternoon

The cyclist suffered minor injuries, but the driver who hit him drove off.

A cyclist was the victim of a hit and run that took place on Tuesday, according to Officer Ming Yang Hsu of the California Highway  Patrol’s Altadena station.

A group of five cyclists was riding near the intersection of East Woodbury Road and North Garfield Avenue when a driver cut them off while making a right turn, Hsu said.

 The lead rider was hit by the car, whose driver promptly drove off, he added.  The cyclist suffered only minor injuries, according to Hsu.

 A plate number for the driver was reported but it led to a dead end, Hsu said.

Lisa Hastings March 20, 2011 at 05:54 AM
I have been stuck going very very slow behind cyclists going very very slow and deliberately blocking the lane by riding 3-4 abreast when there was room for them to ride single file. I can't see how that was legal.
Dinah Kanser March 22, 2011 at 04:44 AM
@ Dan, I did not say or imply any such thing as you appear to indicate. In fact, may I direct you to the sentence in my post (above) ==> " " I of course do not condone any sort of violence towards bicyclists and this hit & run incident is a disgrace to our community. "" The balance of my rant was offered so as to shed light on some of the behaviors that bicyclists exhibit which contributes greatly to bicycle vs. car accidents problem. @ True Freedom 1) I know of no fee or tax that bicycle riders specifically pay to ride their bikes on public streets like cars do. Perhaps you can enlighten me which bicycle specific fee/tax you are speaking of. 2) I stand by my assertion that ALL (well,99.937%) of all bicycle riders on public roads: run stop signs, do not signal turns, make unsafe lane changes and do not obey speed limits on a daily basis. This is a fact. 3) re: your "little snippet from the DMV site" please post a link to this site where this is stated in those exact words. I posted the EXACT DMV law with statute number(s) in it's entirety (above). Maybe that's what you are basing your wording on. 4) Please do not assign phrases to me like "pious stance". I stated the FACT that ALL bicycle riders do not obey the most basic rules of the road. This is the truth. Nothing pious about it. 5) 95+% of cars stop for stop signs and red lights. Yes, some don't signal turns or speed, but you can't compare that to the chronic running of stop signs by bicyclists.
Dinah Kanser March 22, 2011 at 05:11 AM
Since bicycles now have their own lanes in many areas and we are to share the road with them as equals, it's about time they have license plates and bicycle drivers licenses. The collected fees would help the city/state as well. Maybe some sort of bicycle proficiency testing and mandatory insurance are needed as well, since the risk of injury to the rider is almost certain when there is an accident involving them on public roads. Especially with the speeds they can be driven at, their worth (several hundred to several thousand dollars) and expense to replace if lost, stolen or damaged in an accident. Some sort of insurance must be considered for the benefit of all, since bikes can also do certain damage to others property as well. Cars, Buses & Motorcyclists all have to have insurance and license plates to operate on public roads. Why not bicycles too?
True Freedom March 22, 2011 at 06:38 PM
In theory, I agree with you. However, there are many practical implementation issues with registration, insurance, etc. The City of Long Beach attempted a registration law, but it failed miserably and was removed. Perhaps there implementation was the problem.. but here are some issues: a) Fees: they should be computed in a similar way to autos, which currently is based on the depreciated worth of the vehicle. Now, while you certainly will see some bike snobs like myself riding$7k bikes, the vast majority of bikes that would be registered are extremely low cost.. in the $100 range. This would make the fee somewhere around a dollar or two if computed like autos. This fee would not even come close to covering the cost of administering the program (personnel, processing forms, maintaining records, etc).. so it would be a cash negative (money losing) program. In order to make the program self-funded, fees would need to be raised to a level that many would argue would be a financial burden to low-income folks who use bikes for transport (think of the restaurant workers riding home at night). b) How do you administer the licensing/ insurance for children? Are we going to require that I register my 3 year old's bike, have him take a test, and have him carry proof of insurance for a cruise around the public streets in our neighborhood? c) it would need to be statewide instead of city by city... which was one problem in Long Beach. The list goes on, but I'm out of chars
True Freedom March 22, 2011 at 06:48 PM
You are a funny lady, Dinah. On one hand, you seem to question the validity of my DMV quote by requesting a link to the source of my data.. then you turn right around with completely unsupported claims AS FACT that: a) ALL bicycle riders do not obey the most basic rules of the road b) 95+% of cars stop for stop signs and red lights c) ALL (well,99.937%) of all bicycle riders on public roads: run stop signs, do not signal turns Here's the link to the EXACT DMV phrasing I posted above. http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/traffic_lanes.htm Please post links backing up your statistics presented as FACTS. As for the bike fees... sorry, I was unclear in my original posting. No, bikers do not pay fees specific to bikes for using their bikes on public streets. However, the funding for public streets does not solely come from USE FEE's such as gas tax and auto registration fees. The monies come from other revenue sources which almost all cyclists pay into.. such as Federal monies, local monies from collected taxes (sales, property, etc).. plus, most bikers own cars, so those do pay auto reg and gas fees. Plus, arent' you glad we don't have USE fees (for every possible modality) for roads? Otherwise, you'd have to register your tennis shoes to take a walk in a neighborhood without sidewalks (much of Altadena)... mothers would pay stroller fees, old folks.. walker fees, skateboard, scooter, roller skate, roller blade, etc..
Geoff A. March 22, 2011 at 07:39 PM
"Many people assume that pedestrians and cyclists contribute less than their fair share toward roadway costs because they do not pay vehicle user fees (fuel taxes, vehicle registration fees, and road tolls), and so argue that pedestrians and cyclists deserve less right to use roadway facilities. However, this assumption is wrong. Although user fees fund most highway expenses, local roads are mainly funded through general taxes that residents pay regardless of how they travel. The majority (probably more than 90%) of walking and bicycling occurs on locally funded roads, since most highways are unsuited to walking and bicycling. Table 2 shows that in 2002, $27.9 billion were spent on U.S. local roads, of which only $3.1 billion was from user fees. General tax funding averaged about 5.6¢ per motor vehicle mile of travel on local roads. Roadway user charges fund only about 70% of roadway expenditures (only 60% excluding bond revenues), indicating that fuel taxes would need to increase more than 45% to fully cover these costs." -from Page 6 of the following study http://www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf
True Freedom March 22, 2011 at 08:30 PM
Excellent post. Thanks for backing up my statements made in my 11:48am post. Ride on!
Dinah Kanser March 24, 2011 at 11:11 PM
@ true freedom What I posted IS A FACT. (VIRTUALLY) 99.37% OF ALL BICYCLE RIDERS RUN STOP SIGNS ALL THE TIME ON A DAILY BASIS. Don't believe me ? Want to question it? Tell you what... Lets meet this Saturday near the intersection of Ventura and Windsor. Lets say 9:00am to 11:00 am. And I will make a friendly wager with you. We will sit there and observe the 3 way stop sign there. For every bicycle rider that stops for a stop sign I will pay you .25cents. And for every bicycle rider that runs a stop sign , you pay me.25 cents. Fair enough? I'll even bring the coffee and granola bars. You bring several rolls of quarters. As for your DMV automobile handbook link, Yes, it does back up what you posted. However what I posted (above) is the bicycle specific code and in my view supersedes and further clarifies exactly what the codes are for bicycles.
Dinah Kanser March 24, 2011 at 11:13 PM
As for reader Geoff A. post and the link he listed. VTPI is a Canadian outfit funded by pro-bicycle activists. While it offers some interesting statistics applicable to Victoria Canada, It is decidedly agenda driven. I stand by my assertion that local bicyclists pay no BICYCLE SPECIFIC tax or fee to use local roads. With regards to licensing bicycles and bicycle riders, both Oregon and Colorado have current programs in place to license bike riders. I would be for a simple maybe $10 license plate fee, with annual bicycle safety check inspection. Or something similar. Doesn't have to be complicated. It would help bike riders as well as the general public to see license plates on bicycles. Currently there is no way to identify or hold bike riders responsible for their actions on public roads. Cars, Buses and Motorcycles all have license plates. Why not bicycles?
Dan Abendschein (Editor) March 24, 2011 at 11:16 PM
If you two seriously consider sitting down and watching the intersection let me know- I'll publish your results. I think it is a great idea. What I think you will find is a lot of cyclists running a stop sign when there is nobody anywhere in sight in the intersection, but few running the stop sign when cars are present.
Dinah Kanser March 24, 2011 at 11:26 PM
Look I apologize to everyone for ranting on on this topic. I just feel strongly about bicyclists wanting to have all the advantages of using public roads, but not wanting to accept or bear any of the responsibilities or costs associated with doing so. If bicycles are to be treated as equals to automobiles on public roads, having their own lanes and such, they MUST agree to be licensed for identification purposes just like all other wheeled devices that use public roads, and must across the board, agree to start to OBEY the most basic rules of the road. That's it. Let's move on.
Dinah Kanser March 24, 2011 at 11:48 PM
@Dan, I was being a bit facetious extending my .25 cent wager, but you got my point. Perhaps one of the members of your crack staff could do a news story on this topic. I mentioned the Ventura & Windsor intersection because it's frequented by many bicyclists , and the stops signs there are blatantly disregarded by all bicyclists, especially on the weekends. But maybe I'm sandbagging (lol) . You could have your people check several local intersections over a few week period in an attempt to be as scientific as possible. Lincoln & Altadena. Ventura & Casitas . You guys choose. If anyone has any doubts of the outcome..... But hey, it would be interesting to have a news organization such as Patch confirm what is already widely known. And publishing the results of your "investigation" would maybe help prevent future bike/car accidents by making people aware of this problem. And it might just help prevent hit and runs like this unfortunate incident that started this thread. I'm sure the Sheriffs office would be interested in your findings too. Have at it.
Dan Abendschein (Editor) March 24, 2011 at 11:52 PM
@Dinah- I may do that. It would be a good story. I've also considered rigging a camera to my helmet when I ride to show intersections where motorists absolutely refuse to yield on a pedestrian crossway.
True Freedom March 24, 2011 at 11:58 PM
Get the GoPro Hero helmet cam. I've got one and it's a super cool HD camera. If you do collect some statistics, measure how many cars come to complete stops at the intersection as well. I'd be willing to bet that the percentages between fully compliant bikers and drivers are not all that different.
Dan Abendschein (Editor) March 25, 2011 at 01:44 AM
@True Freedom - I was thinking of strapping my iPhone to my helmet, but that does sound much cooler.
Geoff A. March 25, 2011 at 02:58 AM
I'll concede that a majority of cyclists roll through stop sign, especially if there are no cars at the intersection, and should have every right to expect to be cited. I'd also like to have Ms. Dying of Cancer sit at the same area of Casitas and Ventura with a radar gun and verify that close to all motor vehicle drivers exceed the speed limit on both of those streets. That's why the stop sign was put there in the first place. By the way, it is not a 3 way stop on the weekends since the JPL lot is closed. As to the report I posted being published by a group with an agenda, absolutely. I posted it to show actual, verifiable, numbers relating to the US roadways and their funding, instead of making up stuff to make a point. You have your agenda and make up stuff, they have their agenda and do actual research. As to licensing and insurance, feel free to propose more bureaucracy and regulation on individuals and public and private institutions. You might have problems with that since the majority of the vocal population seem to be headed in the other direction.
Lisa Hastings March 25, 2011 at 04:20 AM
Okay, someone said something above about cyclists being equal to vehicles on the road. Huh? That's like claiming that pedestrians are equal to vehicles. And then someone (Dan?) mentioned that many vehicles run right through pedestrian crosswalks. NEXT TOPIC! I want to talk about rude and dangerous drivers who have no respect for pedestrians. I have almost been hit by vehicles that pay no attention and vehicles have honked at me and cursed me while I was in a crosswalk and the walk signal on. My friend who has MS and who is in a wheelchair has been hit in a crosswalk TWICE and the walk sign was green. I witnessed one of the incidents and yet another time I witnessed a vehicle hit a pedestrian as the pedestrian had the green light. There are bicyclists that have an attitude. Like the ones that ride three abreast. But now I am starting to think that is for their own safety and they don't care who they anger since it is not safe riding single file due to all of the rude and dangerous people who drive cars. So what this is really all about are the drivers that do not pay attention and do not realize or care that they can kill someone with their vehicle. Some bicyclists are jerks. So what. That's nothing compared to the jerk people that drive cars.
Geoff A. March 25, 2011 at 05:12 AM
Agreed. Jerks are jerks no matter their method of transportation. It's just that some modes are statistically more lethal than others.
Dinah Kanser March 25, 2011 at 03:44 PM
It's been called to my attention that I should add a caveat to my "99.937%" assertion. That being ==> * " Unless the bicycle rider's life would be in immediate peril" I DO admit bike riders WILL STOP for a stop sign if they are in danger of being injured, or in an accident. As for the statement " By the way, it is not a 3 way stop on the weekends since the JPL lot is closed." That is INCORRECT. The stop signs do not fold up on weekends. They remain stop signs, in all directions at all times. Actually the stop sign facing the JPL parking lot exit is the least of the problem. We cannot pick and choose the stop signs we wish to obey. Please check with the Altadena Sheriff's office if you have any doubts. I also resent persons trying to do an "Alinsky" on me by trying to isolate & ridicule me. Stick to the issue at hand and leave personal attacks out of the discourse. Justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior is both wrong and poor form. @Geoff A. "As to the report I posted being published by a group with an agenda, absolutely. I posted it to show actual, verifiable, numbers relating to the US roadways and their funding" ...um.. NO you didn't. The study was from Victoria, Canada regarding statistics that might be true in Canada . Apples & oranges. As it's been said... There are 3 types of lies: Lies, Whoppers, and Statistics. Now .. again.... let's move on!
True Freedom March 25, 2011 at 04:00 PM
@Lisa: You bring up a good point. There are times when I will fully assert my right under the law to ride in the middle of the lane: when the lane is too narrow for both the car and me to fit. If I stayed to the far right in these situations, cars would squeeze past without slowing. By being in the middle of the road, cars are forced to make a safe and proper pass. Additionally, I'm much more visible if I'm smack in the middle of the road... much easier for a texting, radio changing, cell phone talking driver to see. Again, I try to avoid roads where that is even necessary... and I don't do it on roads with a big shoulder or bike lanes.
True Freedom March 25, 2011 at 04:03 PM
he he. Yeah, the GoPro is cool. You can record a couple of hours of video on a single 32Mb SDcard. It has a waterproof, shock resistant case so you don't have to worry about the elements or crashing. (disclaimer: i don't work for GoPro :)
Dan Abendschein (Editor) March 25, 2011 at 04:26 PM
@Lisa - I fully agree. Crosswalk safety is something that can be improved with more enforcement and better marking (the ones with bright neon signs and flashing lights are invariably safer than normal ones). Personally when I get behind the wheel of a car I can actually feel myself transforming into more of a jerk! I have to fight it to make sure I am a responsible driver- all the traffic and constant lights and needs to brake and yield and go slower than you really want can really be a hassle, and I think people who are responsible in most other fields of life can very easily become out of control behind the wheel of a car.
Dan Abendschein (Editor) March 25, 2011 at 04:26 PM
@TrueFreedom - What do you do with that camera helmet of yours? Do you film bike routes, or use it when you are mountain biking? What kind of footage do you come up with?
Altadena Cycling Gal April 05, 2011 at 03:47 PM
I've been hit by a car twice by staying to the right side of the road. Once doored by car being too close to a car being mindful of the traffic on my left. The driver of the parked car on my right flung his door open with little attention as he was talking on his cell phone. Luckily I wasn't run over by the cars in the two lanes of traffic driving by. Which they did drive past as I was lying in the middle of the road. The other time a car was trying to pass me way to close. He brushed me and my hip removed his side view mirror. I ended up with a cracked elbow, broken helmet (landed on the side of my head) and broken bike. Luckily the driver felt bad enough to stop and turn around. He paid for my bike repair and then fled any more responsibility by not paying my medical expenses. I was too nice and trusted him and should have followed suit legally. Now I ride in the middle of the road when in tight situations or at least 3 feet way from the car to avoid getting doored again. Sharrow marking in Altadena would be a great addition to show motorists that bikes belong in the road too ; )
Revvell April 22, 2011 at 12:41 AM
You want to meet me at 5 a.m. and see how many auto drivers run stop signs? I bought a bike ~ yeah, in the couple of hundred dollar range ~ and I wont go in the streets except in the early morning when I can at least hear the idiot who thinks no one else is out in the early morning ~ and avoid a collision as they speed down Woodbury ignoring all signs and signals.
Revvell April 22, 2011 at 12:45 AM
Three abreast makes sense to me. When I rode a motorcycle, I was told "take the lane" because if I didn't, idiot drivers would get into the lane and run me into oncoming traffic.
navigio May 27, 2011 at 07:21 AM
wow, i am surprised by the comments on this thread. if you blow it on a bike you're dead. if you blow it in a car you usually kill someone else. if anyone watches an intersection for cyclists that dont stop at stop signs they must include cars that dont stop at stop signs. If you're then willing to argue that we should ban cars as a result, count me in! I really dont understand the anger toward cyclists. Even if they take up a lane, which I often see, I believe it is rarely because it is their intention to hinder car drivers. It is generally clear when this is the intent, and it usually only happens in critical mass or similar efforts. I think it is obviously because they feel safer doing so. Should that be wrong? If a cyclist feels safer even riding side by side, why should it bother me if I have to drive a bit slower (and save some gas in the process) if it means being safer? Are kids running across the street trying to 'inhibit' car drivers from getting somewhere on time? The scary thing is car drivers sometimes intentionally mess with cyclists because they see them as not having a right to be on the road. This is stupid and very dangerous, imho. People need to get over this belief that the highest priority thing about driving a car should be getting from one point to another as fast as they possibly can. So much so, that they actually increase their likelihood of killing someone in the process. Does that really make any sense whatsoever? Seriously?
Barbara Ellis June 03, 2011 at 08:26 PM
Drivers should try cycling themselves before they criticize cyclists - I'd like them to see what it's like. It can be hard physical effort, and I'm no spring chicken. It's easy not to want to stop at a stop sign when there's no other traffic around, because it takes energy to regain the momentum lost. Car drivers only have to put their foot on the brake and then on the accelerator pedal. Try getting out of your cars and giving it a go - especially in a hilly area. Car drivers should also be thankful that I've left my car at home and am on my bike, because that's one less car on the road to get in their way - my car takes up a lot more of the road than my bike.
True Freedom June 06, 2011 at 05:51 PM
@Barbara: good to hear you're out there on your bike. You're right about the physical effort... I often find myself saying, "I never knew this street had an incline!" The losing momentum at a stop sign is definitely a big energy sink for bikers. If I'm in my car and a cyclist is approaching a fourway stop near the same time as me... I'll wave them through. There is a bill being proposed where a cyclist would be able to run a stop sign if there are no other cars present. This has been implemented in several cities with success. I think it's a great idea.
Dan Abendschein (Editor) June 06, 2011 at 08:01 PM
@True Freedom - Have a bill number or any other information on that legislation?


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something