Orange County Voices : COMMENTARIES ON BOLSA CHICA : A Councilman and a Developer Clash Over Plans for Wetlands : Unanswered questions and dubious Koll Co. claims about costs and environmental impact must be settled first.

The Koll Co. justifies its extremely dense Bolsa Chica housing project by promising to restore the wetlands. However, Koll officials have stated publicly that, if the federal government does not allow them to build on the wetlands at the back of the Bolsa Chica (a distinct possibility), they will not restore any wetlands.

Therefore, we must insist that federal approval is secured before Koll is given entitlement for even one building. Otherwise, Huntington Beach could very well end up with an excessively dense housing project and no wetlands restoration!

The Bolsa Chica Coalition partners agreed that Huntington Beach should be the permitting agency for the project, since the city surrounds the Bolsa Chica and will be vitally affected by the development.

When it became obvious that the city intended to seriously pursue a thorough examination of the environmental and fiscal impacts of the project, the Koll Co. unilaterally reneged on the agreement with the coalition and asked Orange County to become the permitting agency.

This breach of faith is profoundly disturbing to the people of Huntington Beach.

When Huntington Beach was the agency in charge, it processed the state Environmental Impact Report and the Federal Environmental Impact Statement at the same time. The county, now in charge, is processing only the state EIR. Under this faulty procedure, the Koll Co. could get approvals for 75% of its project (the high-density mesa) without making any commitment to restore wetlands. I fear that this might be the company’s goal.

Koll Co.’s flight to the county for approvals will cost the residents of Huntington Beach tens of millions of dollars. Up front, the city will lose about $65 million in initial building fees to the county.

In addition, Huntington Beach taxpayers will pay tens of millions of dollars over the years to provide services such as fire, police, libraries and schools, as well as water and sewers. Koll Co. supporters are fond of using the phrase, “Restoration without taxation.” In fact, the county process likely may result in “Taxation without restoration” for the people in Huntington Beach.

Koll asserts that its project is of great economic benefit to the city. In fact, since property taxes fall far short of the costs of service that a city must provide, new housing costs a city money. This case is even worse because almost all of the property taxes will go to the county. The city will be left holding an empty bag.

The Koll Co. has tried to say that the Koll plan for 4,884 homes is the “Bolsa Chica Coalition Plan.” This simply is not true. The coalition plan does not grant 4,884 homes. The coalition plan states: “All final decisions on the type and densities in each geographical area will be determined by the county and city, through the usual public hearing process.”

What will it cost the city to add water for 12,000 to 15,000 residents? (There is less than one day’s reserve water supply in our city reservoirs.) How will it impact traffic on local streets such as Warner Avenue, Bolsa Chica Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway? What about liquefaction in a major earthquake? Is this a significant flood area? Will a proposed ocean jetty from the Bolsa Chica cause major erosion of the beach, our region’s most precious resource? Are the wetlands and mesa one integral ecosystem? Can housing coexist adjacent to viable wetlands? Will pesticide runoff and house pets kill the birds and fish of the Bolsa Chica? These are only a few of the questions to be answered.

Huntington Beach will insist that the impacts of this project be thoroughly addressed by the county via the same conscientious process that would have been followed with Huntington Beach in charge.

Only after this happens can the scope of the project be intelligently and fairly evaluated.