The Westwood Neighborhood Council unanimously voted Wednesday to ask the city to draw a crosswalk from the east side of Levering Avenue to the Chevron gas station on Le Conte Avenue.
The council passed the motion to address safety concerns some students and Westwood residents recently expressed. UCLA third-year political science student Aurelia Friedman, who serves as the council’s student director, proposed the idea.
“I live in Club California apartments, so I often go to the Le Conte and Levering avenues intersection, but I almost always see cars zipping by when I try to cross,” Friedman said.
Friedman said some students came to her with safety concerns about the intersection, so she said she thought the council should immediately address the safety conditions of the intersection.
Los Angeles Department of Transportation officials plan to address the crosswalk motion, said Bruce Gillman, department spokesperson.
Gillman recommended Westwood Neighborhood Council officials request the proposal on myladot.lacity.org. Then LADOT officials would send an engineer to the Le Conte and Levering intersection to make a traffic survey, which the office representatives would evaluate and respond to, Gillman said.
Some UCLA students and other pedestrians crossing the Levering and Le Conte intersection said they think a clearly marked crosswalk would benefit pedestrians.
“I think this idea is pretty necessary because it takes way longer for me to get across these intersections without the crosswalks since I always have to look around and be extra cautious that cars are not around,” said fourth-year political science student Mack McGonagall.
Fifth-year English student Jasmine Perez, who lives on Roebling Avenue, said she also supports the crosswalk motion. She said she is often concerned for students who try to cross the intersection while carrying heavy groceries or laundry bags.
UCLA neurology doctor Patkawat Ramart said the proposed crosswalk would be convenient for him as he walks to work.
“I have to cross this intersection to get to my work building on Westwood, which should not take much time,” Ramart said. “But since there is no clear cross walk here I have to detour around the intersection, which takes more time than I would need to take to get to my destination.”
Gillman said he thinks it is premature for the Los Angeles Department of Transportation to decide whether the crosswalk motion is necessary before making and evaluating the traffic survey.
How about a map? This article is poorly written. The east side of Levering is on the same side as the Le Conte Chevron so a crosswalk would be unnecessary. There is already a crosswalk from the west side of Levering to the east side at Le Conte. Are you talking about a crosswalk across Le Conte where it meets Levering? Do you mean the northeast corner of Levering and Le Conte to the southeast corner of Levering and Le Conte?
I believe they are looking to create a crosswalk from the northwest corner of Chevron to the Southwest corner of the UCLA Extension building. The intersection currently has a stop sign for vehicles. If someone was walking southbound on eastern side of Levering they can’t technically cross the street toward Chevron without “jaywalking”. This would allow pedestrians to continue southbound and connect with Gayley Ave. Currently, if you were following that exact route, you would need to turn left from Levering onto Le Conte and then cross Le Conte (toward Chevron) in order to continue going south on/toward Gayley. The intersection in question is basically the stop sign in front of UCLA Extension.
The only issue LADOT would have with this is that they would need to figure out what to do with traffic heading southbound on Levering Ave. Since they don’t have a stop sign at that intersection, they are free to turn left onto Le Conte (barring oncoming traffic). Adding an additional crosswalk may require them to install an additional stop sign.
I agree. This is a poorly written article (no big surprise there). If the point of all this was that they just want a crosswalk painted on the ground from the extension building to the chevron, then the article is misleading and wasting everyone’s time. If there is already a stop sign, then there is already a crosswalk. The neighborhood likely isn’t asking to create a new crosswalk. It’s not “jaywalking” to cross the street at an intersection.
The crosswalk would make it clearer to drivers that pedestrians are crossing at those corners. Southbound traffic on Levering has no stop sign, therefore they must yield. Same for northbound traffic on Levering. Westbound drivers on Le Conte (passed Gayley) have the stop sign, however drivers are not always aware of pedestrians crossing from Chevron toward the Extension building. Those Le Conte westbound drivers, while looking south for oncoming traffic, either fail to make a complete stop or fail to see people wanting the cross the street. The same for those southbound Levering drivers who swerve left onto Le Conte. The term “jaywalking” was used loosely because drivers (and pedestrians) don’t always recall the CA Driver Handbook (page 19) and drivers seeing people in the street might think of them as jaywalkers when in fact it is an intersection crossing. it’s about sharing the road and drivers are already distracted as it is– hence why West Hollywood had to install all those garish crossing signs and plastic poles.
https://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/dl600.pdf
I’m not disagreeing with you. You bring up good points, but this all goes towards the statement that the article was poorly written. If the problem is people aren’t stopping at the stop sign, then get the cops involved. If they are asking for a new stop sign for southbound levering at le conte, then say so. If this is all about painting two white lines on the street from chevron to the extension, then say that.
Also, the headline doesn’t match the story. The Westwood Neighborhood Council didn’t vote to establish a crosswalk; they voted to request that the City of Los Angeles establish one. And Gilman’s response makes it sound as if the vote was essentially meaningless, since anyone can make the same request on myladot.lacity.org.