Report Details Impact of Planned Bolsa Chica Development : Environment: Scarce wetlands would be restored by the controversial project, but up to 4,884 new houses would increase air pollution, the study concludes. Both sides find support in findings.

Proposed residential development of land ringing the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve would present some pluses and minuses for the environment, according to a massive study released Friday.

The environmental impact report assesses the proposed development by the Koll Co. of up to 4,884 housing units. On the plus side, the report noted that the “proposed plan would create full tidal salt marsh restoration” of some of the now-degraded wetlands. But the report also said that “residential development would change the character of a large portion of the site.”

Both critics and supporters of the proposed development found support for their arguments in the report.

“I’m very encouraged about what it has to say,” said Lucy Dunn, a senior vice president of the Koll Co.

By contrast, Ralph Bauer, an official of a Huntington Beach group opposing the size of the proposed development, said the report “talks about the air pollution problem that will be created. You can’t get around the fact that there’s going to be more traffic and air pollution.”

Bauer is spokesman for the Consortium of Organizations Planning for Bolsa Chica (CoOp). His organization wants to reduce the number of houses in the project by about three-fourths.

At issue are 1,200 acres near the intersection of Warner Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway. The undeveloped land fans around the 300-acre Bolsa Chica, the largest active wetlands in Southern California.

An agreement in 1988 between the state, county, city and the conservation group Amigos de Bolsa Chica calls for allowing some residential development around the Bolsa Chica wetlands, including about 100 acres of actual wetlands. In exchange, the proposed developer would donate land and money to help restore more of the wetlands.

The report released Friday and a draft released last spring both said that the least amount of environmental damage would occur if nothing was built. But Laura Phillips, a Huntington Beach city planner, noted on Friday that virtually all environmental reports routinely contain such statements. “Almost all developments of natural places have that statement,” she said.

The report issued Friday said that it would be “environmentally superior” simply to restore the wetlands and use part of the land as a park. But it also concluded that “the feasibility of this alternative is questionable” because of funding.

Most of the EIR was devoted to analyzing what would happen to the land if it is developed by the Koll Co. as proposed.

Some of the negative findings were:

* More homes will bring more cars and more air pollution. “The long-term impacts due to air pollutant emissions associated with vehicular travel and energy use are adverse and significant,” the report says.

* The project would require more city water than Huntington Beach has planned for. “Water demands are expected to exceed the city’s Water System Master Plan.”

* Scenic views will be ruined. “Development on Bolsa Chica Mesa will degrade existing views from Bolsa Chica State Beach and Pacific Coast Highway.”

* Development will cause loss of burrowing owls and the California horned lark from land near the wetlands. There would also be “significant loss of raptor habitat and loss of coast scrub habitat on the mesa areas.”

Some of the positive findings were:

* More former wetlands would be restored. “An overall beneficial biological impact to the wetland area is projected assuming that the entire wetland is restored.”

* A proposed cut in the beach to allow ocean flushing of the Bolsa Chica will cause a buildup of sand on the shore--a “beneficial” move for the environment, according to the report.

* A proposed road across the development, called the Cross Gap Connector, would alleviate traffic and would help the environment. “Impact . . . is beneficial.”

* Some land now privately owned would be donated to public use.

Bauer, of CoOp, said he thought the overall report was much too favorable for the proposed development.

“It might as well have been written by someone on the developer’s staff,” Bauer said. “It’s weighted in favor of the developer. I think it’s a piece of trash.”

But Dunn said she believes the overall report, written by the Chambers Group Inc., a private organization, was both fair and objective. Although it “is not intended to advocate or recommend what should or should not occur at Bolsa Chica, it states strong scientific, regulatory and practical reasons for implementing the (1988 compromise) coalition plan,” Dunn said.

City, state and federal officials on Friday generally declined to comment on the report, pending further study. They noted that the public at large will be invited to comment on the report during the next three months. After that, the city’s Planning Commission, and then the City Council, will debate the EIR and decide whether to accept it or reject it.

Even if city agencies approve the report, the proposed housing development has many more hurdles to cross. The project must get approval of the state Coastal Commission and the Army Corps of Engineers. The city must also formally annex the Bolsa Chica land, which is now unincorporated. And the Planning Commission and City Council must vote on specific plans and housing densities when they come up, separate from the EIR.

Phillips, in the city’s Community Development Department, estimated that it would be 1995 at the earliest before any construction could begin.

Critical Landmass The Koll Co. has proposed building up to 4,884 homes on land surrounding the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. The company would then donate more land to the reserve. An environmental impact rerport released Friday said the proposed projefct has pluses and minuses.