Car and bicycle collide at 64th Street and 11th Avenue

Dyker Heights car crash leaves cyclist in critical condition

Dyker strike: A Honda Civic collided with a cyclist on May 11 on 11th Avenue, leaving the bike rider in critical condition.
The Brooklyn Paper
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Don’t miss our updates:

It was a bloody Sunday in Dyker Heights.

A driver collided with a bike near the corner of 64th Street and 11th Avenue on May 11, leaving the cyclist on the brink of death.

Authorities said they arrived on the scene at 1:30 pm, and discovered the 37-year-old pedaler the ground with severe body trauma. An ambulance transported the man to Lutheran Hospital in critical condition.

Eyewitnesses described a gory scene, with the man bleeding profusely in the street.

“His face was all bloody, and it really struck me all the blood that was on the floor,” said Tiffany Smith, who lives nearby. Smith added that the man appeared to be conscious, but unable to move.

Police believe that the cyclist was pedaling down 11th Avenue in the direction of Borough Park, while the driver was headed west along 64th Street toward Bensonhurst. No summonses have yet been issued, but an investigation into the exact cause of the crash is underway, police said.

Smith, who did not witness the crash but only its aftermath, said that a large part of the car’s windshield was shattered, and the passenger side mirror was sheared off. The 14-year resident added that such incidents are uncommon on the block.

“It never really happened over here before,” said Smith.

Reach reporter Will Bredderman at or by calling (718) 260-4507. Follow him at
Updated 10:17 pm, July 9, 2018
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Don’t miss our updates:

Reasonable discourse

Zero Vision? says:

64th and 11th. Isn't that near where the forklift ran over that person? And wasn't there another bad accident there even more recently?

Does it have something to do with the traffic light patterns? Or the direction of the streets? Someone please call DOT.

Or is it a matter of enforcement? Can the NYPD step up their game, even put an unmarked car or two around there for a sting?
May 13, 2014, 4:57 am
John from Bay Ridge says:
For the most part moving violations are ignored by the NYPD in southern Brooklyn.
May 13, 2014, 9:07 am
Jane from Dyker Heights says:
I wish they would put undercover vehicles around (not just there), because I can't begin to tell you how many times I've seen cyclists run red lights-literally not even look, just zip through an intersection. I've had right of way, crossing a street as a pedestrian, and nearly been hit by a cyclist on more than a few occasions. And forget the number of times I've been driving. There's a creep in my neighborhood who runs red lights every chance he gets (again, as a cyclist) and will yell at drivers for not looking out for him. Enforcement needs to be stepped up DRASTICALLY.
May 13, 2014, 1:30 pm
ty from pps says:
Yep, Jane... it's the cyclists fault. Always the cyclists.

I'm not going to defend the behavior of *some* cyclists, but all of this self-righteous hyperbole your throwing down is absurd.

Look, Jane. I know you *think* you've "nearly been hit by a cyclist on more than a few occasions," but it's really not true. Cyclists are VERY VERY aware of themselves, their surroundings and pedestrians, etc.

It's basic self-preservation. You can't extend the same callousness to cyclists that you can drivers of steel & glass boxes. What happens to a car and its driver if a car hits a pedestrian? Ask again... What happens to a cyclist if he/she hits a pedestrian?

"literally not even look" -- I REALLY REALLY doubt that. That cyclist has been looking at the intersection for 1/2 a block, along with looking for people in cars about to open doors, pedestrians jumping into the street, pedestrians *waiting* in the roadway instead of on the sidewalk, etc. etc.

That cyclist that rode a couple feet from you wasn't even close to hitting you... it was not a "nearly hit" situation. The 2-ton car that raced by you only a foot or two from you *was* a "nearly hit" situation.

Jane -- How do you think the field of vision compares between a cyclist and a driver? (Hint: A cyclist can see AND hear his/her surrounding much better than you in your driver's seat, through your windows, with the radio on.)

Again, not condoning the behavior of *some* cyclists... there are definitely bad apples out there. But there are HUGE qualitative differences between a cyclist going through an intersection (regardless of lights/stop signs) and a car going through an intersection.

(Also -- Jane, let's just pause for a second... Which person is in the hospital in critical care? Which part of the article stated it was the cyclist's error? And where do you live, so I know not to bike, drive or walk near you in your car.)
May 13, 2014, 2:27 pm
Rufus Leaking from BH says:
" Cyclists are VERY VERY aware of themselves, their surroundings and pedestrians, etc. "

See above story.
May 13, 2014, 4:21 pm
ty from pps says:
Thanks for playing, Rufus.
May 13, 2014, 4:43 pm
jay from nyc says:
well I saw two cyclists hit the same child in Propsect Park on this past Sunday afternoon mothers day. The ambulance came, as did the police.
So ty, your generalizations about bikes are just as off as Tals generalizations about car drivers.
And to all posters, BP, and the rest of people who read this, people are not complaining about bicycles for no reason, just like people complaining about cars are also not making that up either. (I know he has not posted here yet, but I am sure now that I have mentioned his name Tal will pop up like food poisoning)
The reality is that there are a lot of PEOPLE doing stupid and illegal things on and in and about the city streets that get other people hurt, and the police are doing little to nothing about it.
This endless argument that occurs about once a week on BP is really more like daffy duck and bugs bunny arguing over whether its rabbit season or duck season. POINTLESS.
How about we agree that streets need to be safe, and that more can be done to achieve that and that all options are on the table because we are sick of not being safe and are not going to take it any more? Huh how about that, put up or shut up.
May 13, 2014, 6:28 pm
SwampYankee from runined Brooklyn says:
News 4 New York reported that witnesses said that the cyclist ran the light. Based on that and the picture that clearly show the incident occurred in a plain daylight in a marked cross walk I would kind of wait for he investigation to speak before I expounded on cyclist holiness. See, the thing is, if you run a light and get hit with something of infinitely more mass than you it probably will not work out for the entity that made mistake
May 13, 2014, 6:42 pm
ty from pps says:
I actually didn't generalize, Jay. There were VERY specific limits to my statements. People complain about cyclists for two reasons: (a) actual dangerous behavior, and (b) *perceived* dangerous behavior or general "other-ness" of cycling.

I don't condone (or engage in) the former. It's the latter that is the problem. Folks perceive certain behaviors as dangerous... specifically, dangerous to them. Oftentimes (often, not always) because they are using their limited filter to understand the situation... usually something along the lines of "If a driver in a car did that, it would be really dangerous."

This isn't about this particular incident (Swampy), this cyclist may very well have been to blame. Or the driver is to blame. Or something in between. That's not the point.

My point above was concerning Jane's oh-so-common perception.

A person on a bicycle is far more aware of his/her surroundings than someone in a car. This is just a statement of fact. (You can point out all the marginal cases of extra aware drivers and dimwitted cyclists.... that doesn't change anything.) A person perched relatively high, with no windows or steel obstructing his/her view can see better. A cyclist is also very aware of how much it hurts to even hit a rut in the road, never mind a solid object (pedestrian/car). Very aware. They are literally connected to all of the moving parts. Cyclists are also very aware of the width and speed and maneuverability of their vehicle -- can you say the same about most drivers?

I'm just tired of hearing about all of the "close calls" with cyclists when there are DEATHS and SERIOUS INJURIES every day caused by people being hit by cars and trucks. Again, how many deaths caused by cyclists in the last decade? (I believe there have been two? And both in atypical locations... not regular streets.)

Jay -- I actually agree with 90% of what you said. But I can't abide by knee-jerk reaction of the New York Post reading dummies in this town... cars are fine, sure enforce the laws, as long as it doesn't affect me, but we know the *real* problem out there are those damn bicycles!!
May 13, 2014, 7:26 pm
Peter from Bensonhurst says:
I actually witnessed the accident and the cyclist was at fault. The driver of the honda had right of way and by the time he realized the cyclist was running the light, it was too late. The driver pulled over in front of a fire hydrant a few feet away and did not leave the scene of the accident. Officers put the cyclist's bike into the trunk of their vechile. The front wheel was bent, the cyclist was bloody. They were trying to treat him in the back of the police cruiser before ambulance arrived. Generally Dyker heights and Bensonhurst have safe cyclists and drivers, but there are always going to be those occasions where cyclists and drivers are not doing what they're suppose to be. Pointing fingers at either or is pointless. People tend to blame drivers because a vehicle will do the most damage to a cyclist or pedestrian. Being a defensive driver, there are limitations to how defensive one can be. Too many pedestrians j-walk, too many cyclist disobey the rules.
May 13, 2014, 8:40 pm
Sammy Y. from Bath Beach says:
Hey Petey, I appreciate ya soliloquy and sorry for any shock and trauma ya might have suffered witnessing this accident, but you gotta be a real jabobo to say "Generally Dyker heights and Bensonhurst have safe cyclists and drivers". This is _what_ the 3rd bad accident in almost the same spot in the past few months?

NYPD gotta step it up over there. Ever week you got break ins around 65 and 12. Now lately you got these car crashes. Wild West over there.

I agree w/ the posters here who say the NYPD should have some undercover cars in that part of town to check up on reckless drivers. Sure, there's a lot of minorities over there, but that's no excuse for people dying.
May 14, 2014, 5:07 am
DC from Park SLop says:
Cyclists are getting out of hand but when they get hurt they whine typical
May 14, 2014, 7:43 am
DC from Park SLop says:
Something needs to be done about THEM breaking the laws
May 14, 2014, 7:43 am
DC from Park SLop says:
TY is just some liberal bike enthusiast he will never fault a cyclists its always a big mean car
May 14, 2014, 7:46 am
Peter from Bensonhurst says:
It is true that there are area's where there are the most accidents but then again, you have to factor in why? There's a lot more foot traffic especially along 4th and 86th street, plus the fact that no body likes to wait for the light when they can j-walk. Cyclists tend to ride on the wrong side of the roads, run stop signs, run red lights, not wear the safety equipment they should especially riding at night, cars tend to go too fast, drivers are distracted by so many things going on whether it be their phones or multiple things going on down one single street. There are too many double parked cars, too many people blocking the bike lanes, too many people running out into the middle of the street, too many drivers confused at the no left turn during certain hours of the day, drivers become anxious around police presence, the list goes on. Yes they should definitely have more undercover cops, but they can't be everywhere at once, and frankly I'm glad they're not everywhere all the time. The fact is drivers, cyclist and pedestrians tend not to follow the rules and that's why accidents occur. The police can only do so much if citizens themselves refused to create a safer environment for their children, elderly and disabled peers. It's the responsibility of everyone to do their part. At the same time if you really think about it, if cyclists are so aware of their surroundings, why do they still get hit by vehicles? If the cyclists on 64th street had stopped like he should of, he would never of been hit by the driver of the honda. Plain and simple, cyclists disobey the rules, more often than drivers do because cyclists can get away with it while drivers have license plates attached to their vehicles. Until cyclists finally realize that they are suppose to follow the same rules and regulations as a moving automobile, it will never change. Pedestrians j-walking is hard to control because our streets are mostly narrow and even along wide long avenues people tend to j-walk. In Canada, you won't normally see this happen. Not only do they get a 50$ fine, they realize that it's just unsafe to do so. Especially since their roads are much wider, and almost if not everyone are drivers themselves. They have respect and understanding. New yorkers on the other hand, it's a free for all. It's disappointing, but there are other places in the world where cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers can all commute peacefully as long as everyone takes their time and respect each others way of travel. It's as difficult being a driver as a cyclists or pedestrian. We all share the roads one way or the other.
May 14, 2014, 8:48 am
ty from pps says:
Oh, am I one of those "self-loathing drivers" DC?
May 14, 2014, 8:48 am
ty from pps says:
If the cyclist in this situation ran the red light, then so be it. He was the only one physically harmed (and this is generally the case for cyclists and pedestrians crossing against signals -- they risk harming themselves only).

Now.... From the mouth of NYPD Chief of Transportation Thomas Chan:

“Motorists are operating a 4,000 pound vehicle. And we cannot be distracted while we’re operating that vehicle,” he said. “When a collision occurs between a motorist and a pedestrian, the pedestrian loses 100 percent of the time. So again, it’s very important that our motorists, who are obligated to be licensed, that they operate in a way that’s not distracted.”

Let's repeat that... "When a collision occurs between a motorist and a pedestrian, the pedestrian loses 100 percent of the time."
May 14, 2014, 9:30 am
Jane from Dyker Heights says:
To ty from pps-your condescension has been duly noted.

Perhaps you'd like to explain to my sister, who, while crossing in Midtown Manhattan, at the crosswalk, while having the right of way (you know, when the little walking man is lit up), she was hit by a cyclist running a red light who not only knocked her down, speeding to get through the intersection (keep in mind-RUNNING A RED LIGHT), but tried to punch her and blame her for crossing? No, of course, it's NEVER the cyclist's fault.

Please, by all means, come up to Ft. Hamilton Pkwy, in the 70's, and just sit and watch. Watch them as they go up and down Bay Ridge Pkwy. when they're zipping in and out of traffic, running the lights and yelling at the drivers. I see it EVERY DAY. Or when they're riding on the sidewalk, talking on their phones, not even looking to see if cars are coming when they're crossing the streets. How is it that the pedestrians manage to not cross, but the cyclists have no idea? But of course-the cyclists are so very self-aware. I watched a cyclist SLAM into a mother walking with a baby carriage, and got up and took off.
May 14, 2014, 12:36 pm
ty from pps says:
To Jane from Dyker Heights -- your lack of reading comprehension duly noted.
May 14, 2014, 12:58 pm
Jane from Dyker Heights says:
ty from pps
No, I read EXACTLY what you wrote, and fully comprehended it.

It's not some "random" occurrence, and it's not a few "bad apples". Cyclists ROUTINELY flout the laws they are required to adhere to.

May 14, 2014, 1:09 pm
ty from pps says:
(By the way, my comments above to you and to Jay can be summed up with the term "confirmation bias." You look for it, you see it. You don't look for it, you don't see it.

Jane, I'd be interested to know the massive number of cars and taxis rushing through/ramming through crosswalks that you *don't see* and *don't remember* because this is part of the "fabric" of your reality... vs. the small number of, admittedly, terrible cyclist behavior that you inflate to consume your whole worldview.)

By the way, Jane. Do you know what gets cyclists off the sidewalks and exhibiting better behavior?! Can you guess? It's something that has been shown to work in countless cities around the world AND in New York City... no guesses? It's a proper bicycling infrastructure that increases the safety and satisfaction of cyclists. Not some paint next to car doors, but proper design.

Do you know what increases pedestrian safety and improves pedestrian behavior? Hmm... any guesses? It's a proper pedestrian infrastructure that increases the safety and satisfaction of pedestrians. Larger sidewalks, intersection "bulb-outs," pedestrian islands/refuges for wide crossings, delayed lighting, etc.

Do you know what this requires?? The de-emphasis of the private motor vehicle on our city streets. Not the banning, not the "persecution" -- the de-emphasis.

Pedestrians, cyclists, emergency vehicles, public transportation, freight/commercial vehicles, taxis -- These should ALL have a greater priority than a private motor vehicles.
May 14, 2014, 1:14 pm
Jane from Dyker Heights says:
I'm not inflating anything. I gave you valid examples (not to mention places to go to see this occurring).

How about learning the laws you're required to follow??? That helps to get cyclists off the sidewalks (as there is a law stating that NO ONE over the age of 12 is to ride on the sidewalk). How about stopping at stop signs and traffic lights when you're REQUIRED to (again-another law)? How about NOT riding against traffic (yet another law!)? Using hand signals (REQUIRED BY, YOU GUESSED IT-THE LAW!). Not even to mention the safety equipment ALL cyclists are required to use, not least of which is a helmet.

How is it that I know what laws are supposed to be followed by cyclists (and pedestrians, and personal/private vehicles, oh, and also TRUCKS as I used to work for a public utility)-I WAS REQUIRED TO LEARN IT.

Education can go so very far in keeping people safe. And it should be mandatory.

Ignorance of the law excuses no one. And you can have all the infrastructure you want-IF PEOPLE DO NOT FOLLOW THE LAWS, IT DOESN'T WORK.
May 14, 2014, 1:36 pm
ty from pps says:
You're wrong on so many levels... not the existence of laws (there's lot's of them), but your confirmation bias is excruciating. Your last statement is especially wrong and it's clear you don't understand how street design plays a major role.

Easy example: Pedestrians don't jaywalk at location X if there is (a) a barrier preventing the behavior or (b) the infrastructure is modified so that preferred location is made a legal crossing.

Safer pedestrian crossing. No laws required.

Another example: Cars tend to drive slower (i.e., not exceed the speed limit) if the roadway is narrowed... not making it difficult, but removing the excess roadway to remove the perception of "openness" and "free to drive fast." This has been accomplished successfully around the city through "road diets" and adjusting things like sidewalk "bulb outs" etc.

Slower traffic. No laws required.

I could go on, but your confirmation bias is too strong.... cuz, ya know, all of those cars and trucks required to learn and follow the law! How's that education working? Super successful, right? Ft. Hamilton Pkwy is a model of prudent driving, no weaving in and out, no horn honking (I know how yelling cyclists annoy you, but honking is OK?), no speeds well above the limit, no rushing/crowding crosswalks, no running red lights, etc. etc,?

Confirmation bias.

Your inability to determine the proportional threat/risk of cars, trucks, bicycles and pedestrians is amusing, I guess.

P.S. Jane, helmets are not required by law.
May 14, 2014, 1:53 pm
ty from pps says:
Jane -- I'd be interested to know if you've ever been to a city with a proper infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists? (A city in which the private motor vehicle is de-emphasized.) I can probably assume you haven't. Am I right?
May 14, 2014, 1:57 pm
Jane from Dyker Heights says:
So then, what you're saying is-change the infrastructure (which has been done in places in NYC) and voila? No laws needed at all? No one hopping over barriers-because, you know, that never happens. No one avoiding the "preferred" crossing area because they don't feel like walking a few extra feet? Nope-that never happens, either. Reduce the width of the streets to "slow down cars"? Really? Have you ever seen a small sports car RACE down a city street? They don't need a wide street. Hell, they could fit on some city sidewalks with no problem. And how far do you reduce the size? Because I've seen streets in Queens and Staten Island where you couldn't get a decent sized delivery truck down them (and these streets haven't been changed in decades). I've seen motorcyclists ride on the sidewalk. Wait-let's get rid of traffic signals and stop signs too! Who needs them?

Seriously-do you really think you'd not need laws?

Do you have any other measures to reduce problems with other criminal activities? How about murderers and rapists? Thieves?

And yes, incidentally, I've been to a few places in England where these (or similar) measures are in place. And saw the same thing-and regularly saw people hopping the pedestrian barricades. Lack of education is a problem, as well as lack of enforcement. It's not just infrastructure.

Do you also think that never teaching children when things are bad or dangerous is ok, too?

PS-Helmets ARE required by law for children and people using bicycles for business (food delivery, messengers, etc.).
May 14, 2014, 2:45 pm
ty from pps says:
Yes, Jane. Obviously that's what I'm saying.

Your comments have become unhinged. Thanks. There are some nuggets of wisdom in there, but there's a whole lot more spewing of black-and-white hyperbole.
May 14, 2014, 3:01 pm
DC from PARK SLOP says:
NITWIT i said you put all the blame of autos and none on cyclists. Why bother with someone who focuses only on one thing. You can never put any type of blame on a person with a bike because of your bias against cars and those who drive them. I pity someone with your mentality
May 15, 2014, 12:25 pm
ty from pps says:
DC, are you addressing me... I'm not sure because the way you are characterizing my comments isn't actually correct... but... ya know...
May 15, 2014, 1:26 pm

Comments closed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.

Keep it local!

Stay in touch with your community. Subscribe to our free newsletter: