Wetlands Report Renews Debate Over Its Future : Development: Koll Group will restore most of Bolsa Chica for OK to build on rest. Most environmentalists want it left alone. County seeks compromise.

Release of the county’s long-awaited environmental impact report on development of the Bolsa Chica wetlands has renewed a decades-old debate--but it has not changed the bottom line, officials said Wednesday.

On one side are environmentalists who contend that the area next to Pacific Coast Highway should be left alone or restored to its natural state, but have no money to either purchase or replenish it. On the other is the Koll Real Estate Group which, as owner of the property, has offered to pay for the massive restoration of most of it in exchange for the right to build houses on the rest. And in the middle are many members of the public who want the best of both plans: minimum development with maximum restoration.

“It really gets down to a matter of choosing,” said Ron Tippets, the county’s chief of coastal planning.

The county report released Tuesday includes what it terms a “modified project alternative” as a response to public criticism of an earlier environmental report. But county officials say they know of no source of funding for the plan.

Under Koll’s plan, 4,286 homes would be built on 400 acres. In exchange for permission to build those homes, the company would spend about $48 million to restore 1,100 acres of wetlands by constructing a tidal inlet to the ocean to reintroduce a natural marsh, among other things.

The alternative in the county report would reduce the number of homes to slightly more than 3,000 and significantly increase the space devoted to parks. But it also would relieve the developer of having to restore the wetlands and eliminate plans for the tidal inlet.

In a third alternative, characterized in the report as “environmentally superior,” the wetlands would be completely restored in the form of a “biodiversity park” devoid of commercial development.

But the report identifies no funding sources for either alternative to the Koll plan. And thus the bottom line remains the same: Is the company’s restoration-for-development offer acceptable or not?

On Wednesday, people involved in the process offered their answers.

Jim Cirgliano, a spokesman for the Sierra Club’s Preserve Bolsa Chica Task Force, opposes development even near the wetlands.

“The land needs to be preserved as open space,” he said. While his group favors restoration in principle, Cirgliano said, “we question the effectiveness of any restoration plan that depends on a massive housing project surrounding the wetlands that is to be restored. . . . You can’t take little pockets of wilderness and not give them any breathing space at all.”

Some of those sentiments were echoed by Grace Winchell, a member of the Huntington Beach City Council and, until recently, the city’s mayor.

“The priority for me,” she said, “is preserving the wetlands; I consider it absolutely nondevelopable because it is a public resource.”

While she might favor some development on the rim of the wetlands--a raised area called the mesa--Winchell said she absolutely opposes building anything on the floor of the wetlands itself as proposed by the Koll plan.

At least some environmentalists, however, have begun to back away from previous hard-line positions opposing the development of Bolsa Chica. Conceding that restoration by the Koll Group may be the only viable alternative, for instance, Amigos de Bolsa Chica--for years a champion of preserving the wetlands--in recent years has begun working with the developer to incorporate its ideas into the plans.

While keeping the wetlands untouched is a “wonderful idyllic goal,” said Adrianne Morrison, the group’s executive director, “I don’t think there’s a sugar daddy out there who’s going to buy it.”

Consequently, Morrison said, her group generally favors development by Koll while arguing for fewer houses. “The reality is that the clock is ticking and the process has started.”

Most public officials, meanwhile, adopted a wait-and-see attitude.

“I view this report as a beginning for discussion,” said Harriett M. Wieder, chairman of the county Board of Supervisors. “There have to be trade-offs, and I wait and welcome the opportunity of being part of that.”

Victor Leipzig, another Huntington Beach city council member and former planning commissioner, agrees. “Neither plan is perfect,” he said. “What the citizens will have to do is see to it that a better plan emerges that incorporates the best concepts of both.”

A final report now will be prepared by the county, and another series of public hearings held.

So far, Koll isn’t budging.

“Our plan is almost all wetlands and very little development,” said Koll Group senior vice president Lucy Dunn. “There are no other feasible alternatives that will get the wetlands done; how much more can you give?”

How the Plans Compare The alternative plan contained in the county’s environmental impact report for development of the Bolsa Chica area differs from the Koll Co. plan in two ways: By devoting nearly 200 more acres to recreational activities, it would both increase the amount of open space and reduce the number of houses. Koll plan

Housing Estimated density Acres units High 82.0 1,870 Medium-high 52.0 844 Medium-low 53.6 596 Low 207.4 976 Total 395.0 4,286*

* Maximum number of units allowed

Koll County plan alternative acres plan acres Conservation 1,097.4 1,097.4 Recreation 101.3 285.6 Total open space 1,198.7 1,383.0 Public facility 6.4 6.4

County alternative plan

Estimated Acres units 0 0 179.4 2,798 17.0 107 210.7 3,070*

Sources: Koll Real Estate Group; Orange County Environmental Management Agency