Developing Wetlands Criticized : Environment: County report prefers restoration of Bolsa Chica area.

The proposed development of the Bolsa Chica wetlands could alter its natural look, significantly increase traffic and result in the loss of 4% of the beach along Pacific Coast Highway, according to a new environmental impact report released by the county.

Dissemination of the long-awaited report is sure to renew a simmering, decades-old debate between developers and environmentalists over the future of the Huntington Beach site.

“This is a very controversial project, primarily because it is one of the few remaining wetland areas on the coast,” Tom Mathews, director of planning for Orange County’s Environmental Management Agency, told reporters at a press briefing on Tuesday. “Reviewing all these technical studies has been almost a Herculean task, but we think that all will find it a readable document.”

The proposed development would put 4,286 homes on 400 acres, and restore 1,100 acres of wetlands by reintroducing a natural tidal marsh.

Unlike most environmental impact reports, this one includes what Mathews called a “modified project alternative” which, he said, addresses many of the environmental concerns raised by an earlier report issued by the city of Huntington Beach last year.

It also contains a proposal for a “biodiversity park”--essentially complete restoration of the wetlands with no residential construction--which the report characterizes as an “environmentally superior” alternative to commercial development.

The 1,500-page report, Mathews said, represents the culmination of 20 years of discussion and research regarding the fate of the Bolsa Chica wetlands.

“Wetland issues are among the most significant issues facing developers,” he said. “My hope is that, with this document, the decision makers will be able to come up with a land-use plan based on a complete and adequate analysis of the impacts.”

Such a plan, in fact, has been the object of intense debate for several years as a succession of would-be developers have proposed various uses for the area. The current proposal was put forward by the Koll Real Estate Group, which, despite the negative environmental impacts identified in the report, characterized the document as favorable to it.

“The EIR appears to support the Koll proposal as the most feasible alternative because it doesn’t require any expenditures (of public funds) and yet there are millions of dollars in public benefits,” said Lucy Dunn, senior vice president of the Koll Real Estate Group. “The report didn’t surprise me.”

*

Not everyone read it the same way, however.

Dr. Gordon LaBedz, a spokesman for the Huntington Beach chapter of the Surfrider Foundation--a national environmental organization based in San Clemente--said that he supported the “biodiversity park” alternative--in other words, no commercial development.

“We’ve been working day and night to find sources of funding (for wetland restoration),” he said. “We hope that the EIR will convince all the responsible agencies to refuse any permits for this development; there is nothing good about the project.”

County officials said they decided to include their own modified alternative plan in the report to address concerns raised by members of the public following the 1992 publication of Huntington Beach’s environmental report.

At the time, said Ron Tippets, the county’s chief of coastal planning, most people said they wanted less residential development. Consequently, he said, the county’s modified proposal would reduce the number of houses at the site to about 3,000, add 200 acres of parks in the lowland area and maintain the 1,100 acres of restored wetland.

The biodiversity park alternative, Tippets said, was included mainly at the behest of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “It’s the least damaging alternative environmentally because it preserves all the open space,” he said.

Neither alternative has any identifiable sources of funding, according to the report.

Officials said the new environmental review will be available at various county offices and public libraries through Feb. 18 during which interested parties are invited to review it and submit responses in writing to the county.

Eventually, Tippets said, those responses will be incorporated into a final report to be reviewed by county planners in their preparation of a land-use plan. After a series of public hearings, he said, that plan will be submitted to the California Coastal Commission for approval, followed by a similar certification process on the federal level.

At the earliest, Tippets said, actual development of the site is still a year away.