© 2011 Brentwood Residents Coalition. All Rights Reserved.

P.O. Box 491103 o Los Angeles, CA 90049 o T: 310.476.1383 o F: 310.476.2604 o E:

Streetsblog Los Angeles, PLUM Also Moves “Modified Parking Requirement (MPR) District” Ordinance (September 14, 2011):
“Neighborhood Activist Wendy-Sue Rosen testified, ‘…what you have before you is really a balanced ordinance.’”

Ron Kaye L.A., Standing Up for Good Government: City Hall’s Bus Bench Fiasco 
(August 17, 2011): 
“Here's an open letter on the controversy from the Brentwood Residents Coalition which also submitted a letter expressing its concerns to the Council.”

Westwood-Century City Patch, Residents Voice Concerns About Building and Safety Abuse at Westside Meeting (August 4, 2011)
 “Multiple speakers applauded the ordinance at the meeting, though Tom Freeman of the Brentwood Residents Coalition said the ordinance should be carefully drafted. ‘The devil is in the details,’ Freeman said. ‘We need to have an ordinance that clearly states what kind of violations count in this.’” 

Los Angeles Times, Alternative Mulholland Drive bridge plan could have saved money, lessened traffic woes (July 10, 2011):
“Wendy-Sue Rosen, one of the activists against the alternative plan, said residents felt there wasn't enough data on its environmental impacts or on the road closures that would have been required. Another key issue, she said, was a change in Mulholland Drive itself: The new bridge would have created a ‘T’ intersection on the east side of the bridge in place of a gradual curve in the original plan. Rosen's group, the Brentwood Residents Coalition, complained in a letter that the realigned bridge would ‘degrade the historic alignment and scenic character of the Mulholland Scenic Parkway.’ The letter also hinted at legal action, stating that, because it lacked a new environmental impact report, the alternative plan was ‘an egregious violation’ of state regulations.”

Los Angeles Business Journal, Parking Break? City of L.A. may ease space requirements, 
(May 9-15, 2011):
“’There are no assurances written into this ordinance that the parking burden won't be shifted to the community at large,’ said Wendy-Sue Rosen, president of the Brentwood
Residents Coalition, who testified before the Planning Commission in opposition to the ordinance. ‘You will see spillover parking into neighborhoods and more disruption of traffic patterns.’”

Zev Yaroslavsky, A sharp U-turn on Mulholland, (Posted March 3, 2011)
“At the same time, the Brentwood Residents Coalition filed a series of objections to the project, arguing that the new-bridge plan would hurt the Mulholland corridor’s scenic quality and violate the California Environmental Quality Act if it went forward without a comprehensive environmental review. . . . Wendy-Sue Rosen, a member of the Community Advisory Committee and also president of the Brentwood Residents Coalition, which challenged the new-bridge plan, predicted that the advisory committee would be able to put the differences of opinion behind them. ‘We are all strong advocates and disagreement is part of the process. But we pull together when necessary for a common goal,’ Rosen said in an e-mail. ‘I don’t think that the differences of opinion over the Mulholland Bridge will make it harder to work collaboratively with each other or with Metro to ensure the project moves forward in the least disruptive manner.’”

Palisadian-Post, Planning Commission Delays Action, (October 21, 2010):
“Brentwood resident Wendy-Sue Rosen, representing the Brentwood Residents Coalition, told the Commission that her group would like some of the wording changed in the proposal. ‘While the Planning Department's current draft is generally excellent, we believe that further revisions are necessary to achieve the department's goal of clarifying the mandated findings without changing the substance of those findings,’ the coalition wrote in its letter. Rosen, who served as Brentwood Community Council chair from 2006-2009, founded the coalition with her husband, Thomas Freeman, and resident Donald Keller in November 2009 with the purpose of preserving and enhancing the environment and quality of life in Brentwood. The coalition teams with other community organizations on issues of concern. Prior to Thursday's meeting, about 20 Westwood and Brentwood community leaders met twice with city staff to discuss the proposed ordinance. The coalition identified seven areas where they would like the wording modified. For example, they asked that the traffic provision be changed from ‘That the project will not create an adverse impact on street access or circulation in the surrounding neighborhood’ to ‘That the project will not impair access, ingress or egress to or from the project site or create traffic congestion or an adverse impact on street access or circulation in the area or surrounding neighborhood based on data provided by the City Department of Transportation or by a licensed traffic engineer.’”

Encino Patch, Bel Air Preschool Construction Project Kicks Up Dust, (September 19, 2010):
“The Brentwood Residents Coalition and Bel Air Skycrest Property Owners Association oppose the construction of the Bel Air Preschool, saying it will increase traffic and noise in the area. . . . In a letter to the Zoning Administrator, Maya Zaitzevsky, representatives of the Brentwood Residents Coalition and Skycrest Property Owners Association stated their main objections to the project in August. These included the proximity of the project site to the Bel Air Skycrest residential community; the fact that the proposed preschool makes allowances for a 4,500 sq ft gathering room, 3,500 sq ft of administrative offices and large outdoor facilities, which residents feel ‘are clearly designed to accommodate more than a 155-student preschool’ and the ‘significant adverse noise, light, parking and traffic impacts,’ of the school. The letter objected to the operation of the school as a multi-use facility where the church planned to hold ‘hundreds of evening and weekend events annually, having nothing to do with preschool use’, and stated that the Bel Air Church was ‘a destination church and a destination preschool’, which don't serve the local community.”