Gazette Ceases Publication: Donates Archives to LHS


In 2010, the Larchmont Gazette ceased publication. In 2011 the publishers donated all contents to the Larchmont Historical Society, which will continue to make the Gazette archives available online.



All inquiries should be addressed to the Larchmont Historical Society.


17 comments - (Comments closed)

Pedestrians Hit Crossing Larchmont Avenue

Two Mamaroneck Town women were hit by a car as they were crossing Larchmont Avenue at Willow Avenue at around 9:15 pm on Tuesday, April 26, according to a release from the Larchmont Village police.

The pedestrians, ages 43 and 63, were taken to Sound Shore Medical Center, where they were treated and later released. The driver, a 53-year-old man, was from Harrison.

Larchmont Avenue at Willow Avenue. Photo from Google Maps. Click for larger view.

A preliminary investigation by the police suggested weather conditions contributed to the accident. The police did not issue any summonses or file any charges.


View Larger Map

PrintFriendlyTwitterGoogle GmailYahoo MailShare

Related Articles:

17 comments to Pedestrians Hit Crossing Larchmont Avenue

  • Exercise Caution

    In my opinion, too many Jay Walkers are out on the streets today. I can’t believe people think it’s OK to just walk into traffic as if the cars are going to have enough time to stop. It is simply dangerous for everyone to do that.

    Not saying this happened here but it’s a good time to discuss that Jay walking is illegal people1!!!

  • Jill

    They were crossing at a crosswalk. And since when does the driver have the right of way?

  • bobo

    The pedestrian has the right of way, but pedestrians should take extra cautuion on dark rainy nights assuming they will be harder for the drivers to see. I hope both are OK.

  • Ted

    and…it was during a heavy downpour! Yes, pedestrians have the right of way, but unfavorable conditions require common sense.

    • Exercise Caution

      EXACTLY – I am not saying that these pedestrians did anything wrong though, I am merely commenting that too often today, pedestrians say: “We have the right of way” then they just go right out into the traffic w/ that sense of entitlement.

      Caution must be exercised at all times by both driver and pedestrian – and for the record, pedestrians do not have the right of way unconditionally. They cannot just run out into traffic and be non-culpable for their actions because they are pedestrians. There are rules of the road – for both driver and pedestrians – and while every driver under power should always yield to pedestrians, it is not always possible – especially with the way that many pedestrians jay walk and how they conduct themselves today. Drivers are not the only ones at fault in accidents involving pedestrians.

      As a sailing community, perhaps Larchmonters may understand this example: When a boat is under power along side of a sailboat (under sail…), the boat under power must yield to the one under sail (as it is considered to be at a disadvantage/i.e. less powerful or in control). However, a sailboat must still follow rules of the road (red right return when coming around a buoy just as a boat under power must do)…And pedestrians must yield to red lights and only cross at the GREEN………not ……..in between :-)

      Bottom line? How are these injured people doing today? Any updates? My thoughts and prayers go out to them and their families….regardless of who is right or wrong!

  • Catherine Hiller

    The other day I was crossing at a crosswalk with a traffic light. The light was green for me, but a turning car kept turning even though I was moving first and had the right of way. I gave the driver “the look” (astonishment but not anger!) and in reply she gave me the finger as she kept right on turning in front of me, almost touching the tips of my shoes. I was astonished. Could it be that drivers don’t really know that in these cases (turning cars) pedestrians ALWAYS have the right of way?

  • Barbara Barber

    Crossing the streets here at night, is dangerous, most people wear dark or black clothing and cannot be seen,except last minute by cars.Larchmont Ave is a very dark street with hardly any lights and if, they are hidden by all the leaves on the trees.

  • next town over

    The driver doesn’t have the right of way, but there is an attitude in this town that you can just step out into the street whether cars are coming or not. Whatever happened to “look both ways?” I see it all the time. It’s so typical of the arrogance in Larchmont. It’s also extremely poor modeling for your children.

  • Steve Blau

    Speaking of poor modeling by parents. It is against the law to ride bicycles on the sidewalk. It puts pedestrians and the cyclists in danger for injury. How many parents do you see in the business sections of larchmont leading even their teenagers down the sidewalk on their bicycles

  • Andrew M Harrison

    Remember your Drivers’ Ed classes from high school? Every driver in NYS has the obligation to see what is visible in front of him/her. Every driver is obligated to have his or her vehicle in proper working order, including their headlights, and to have those headlights on and illuminated. Every driver in NYS is required to exercise appropriate caution for the prevailing circumstances, including darkness, heavy rainfall and possibly less than ideal street lights which may be partially obscured by foliage, depending on the time of year. This intersection also has signs reinforcing that drivers are required to stop for pedestrians crossing in the crosswalk (as was the situation with these two ladies), but that sign and the bold crosswalk lines are too often disregarded by drivers who are tempted to go too fast on the broad boulevard that is Larchmont Avenue.

    Andrew M. Harrison

  • Sheila Chervin

    Just a simple question: were you there? Where are your facts coming from? It was dark and rainy on Larchmont and Willow that night–true–but, 1) these two mature women wore light tan coats. 2) They looked both ways on Larchmont Ave, and as if that weren’t enough, a car turning right from Willow onto Larchmont, waved them on because it was apparently good to go. 3) They waved back, acknowledging the courtesy, and then looked up and down Larchmont Ave again. No cars were visible. They proceeded in the crosswalk, marked with heavy White Diagonal lines in the center of which was a sign saying “SLOW’ to drivers. The driver came upon them with no warning whatever–no apparent lights, no horn, nothing but a terrifying impact which left both of them with multiple injuries. Six days, four doctors, two hospitals, more than a half dozen tests later, they are still in great pain and medicated.
    It is great to pass judgment based on no facts, but quite misleading as well. Darkness and rain is no excuse for negligent driving.
    Since the matter wasn’t fully investigated, it is not known whether the driver was drinking, had turned his headlights on (his car was a 1992 Buick–no automatic lights)–or if, indeed, his cell phone or other PDA was in use.
    If you have any of this information, I’m sure the police would be happy to receive it. Until you get factually correct information, however, you might do better to refrain from drawing conclusions so quickly.

    Sheila Chervin

    • Scratching my head

      No one is passing judgement at all – not as far as I can see…people are saying here that EVERYBODY needs to be vigilant and that often – not always – both parties are at fault.

      In this situation, as you so vehemently state, perhaps no one but the driver is at fault. But for God’s sake, calm down!!!

  • Anthony Waring

    Unfortunately, I do not find this surprising. I, myself, have had four close calls at the same intersection, three times on foot and once in a car, all during daylight hours. And, oddly enough, two of the near misses involved the same driver.

  • Jon B

    It’s incredibly odd that folks like “Ted” and “Extreme Caution” would rush to blame the victims of this accident without any knowledge of what actually happened.

    If you’re friends with the driver –maybe you don’t want people to think he’s a bad person because he was speeding without his lights on at night?– just say so. But the fact is that these two women did absolutely nothing wrong. To imply otherwise is shameful.

  • pedestrian right of way

    Our police officers should just write a few more tickets for failure to yield the right of way to a pedestrian in a crosswalk…it is a 6 point ticket! I know because I received one once on Mamaroneck Avenue in White Plains for a pedestrian that had stepped off the curb 6 lanes away from me (I truly did not see this person) because they were 70 feet away from me, but the police were set up across the street, watching as her feet touched the gutter, and they wrote me the ticket.

    I went to court and was let off…but it was a very interesting lesson in the law. How often do you see people failing to yield the right of way to pedestrians clearly in the crosswalk? Now I slow 35 ft ahead of time and when the nice old guy with the walker waves me on through, I absolutely refuse to go while he is in the crosswalk.

    I honestly believe that a few strategically written tickets will go a long way to elevating the status of the crosswalk in our community. And for all of you who think these women were wrong…what is it you teach your children? You teach them to cross in the crosswalk. And how do you think they are able to differentiate? They are not able to. (Do you think they can look at a car and say…oh this one is going to obey the law and this one is not?) It is the driver’s duty/obligation to yield the right of way. period.