Preaching Pragmatism on the Bolsa Chica Development Issue

* Your editorial “Bolsa Chica Plan Must Strive for Balance” (May 15) correctly states the key issue surrounding most developments: developer rights versus preservation of the environment. But shouldn’t the “pragmatic negotiations” start with factual representations of the issues, and doesn’t your paper have an obligation to discover and print those facts, even on its editorial page?

It’s hard for me to understand then why you would include a picture of already restored wetlands in the state’s Ecological Reserve with the caption “Koll Co. plans to build homes at Bolsa Chica.” How many hundreds of people now believe that homes will be constructed on top of these wetlands? The vast majority of the homes are proposed to be constructed on the bluffs, overlooking what used to be wetlands but are now oil fields.

Koll has agreed to restore these wetlands in exchange for entitlement. Why didn’t your caption read “this is what the wetlands will look like after Koll is complete” or include a picture of the oil fields with the caption “this is what the wetlands in question look like today?”

KEN MEDDOCK

Irvine

* I was astonished that your editorial on the Bolsa Chica failed to recognize the potential for a land swap to be a win-win solution and a way to preserve one of the state’s last remaining wetland ecosystems. This habitat is a precious resource that Orange County should be fighting to preserve.

Land swaps are not new--in fact they have been successfully negotiated to preserve other critical habitats. The idea has real merit because the tax dollars for acquisition are scarce, but government land holdings are plentiful. And, contrary to your assertion, much of the government-owned land which might be feasible for trade is not polluted.

The proposed land swap should not come as a surprise to the Koll Co. as it was first suggested to Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt nearly a year ago at a forum where Koll representatives were present.

Finally, taking private land for public use, with just compensation to the landholder, is authorized by the 5th Amendment. In many cases, the courts have upheld regulations prohibiting development on wetlands without any compensation paid at all.

ANNA AMARANDOS

Huntington Beach

* The Orange County Perspective of May 15 was correct in its conclusion about a “pragmatic negotiation and careful land-use planning” for the Bolsa Chica, but the facts were misleading.

The article made it seem that the Koll Co. had a pristine area to build on.

The facts are that:

There is an earthquake fault running right through the middle of the 400 acres they are planning on developing.

The 400 acres are the burial site of indigenous people. One of 26 unreported human remains in the EIR was 8,000 years old.

Over 400 “cogstones” have been found on the mesa. More were found here than anyplace in the world. Koll is one of seven other owners of record for the Bolsa Chica. They are not the sole owner.

It is zoned agricultural and Koll doesn’t have one permit to build.

The Bolsa Chica should be kept as a biodiversity park for generations to come. It should not be developed.

Let’s Save It, Don’t Pave It. Trade or buy them out. This is our last chance.

EILEEN MURPHY

Huntington Beach

* Development rights is one of the phrases in a Times editorial about Koll Real Estate Group’s proposed massive development of the Bolsa Chica. Excuse me, maybe I missed something, but what gives an owner of land that is zoned agricultural the right to build anything on it?

The landowner acquired the land at low cost that reflected the agricultural zoning in speculation that one day it would be rezoned, which would dramatically increase the value of the land. Now the speculator wants the rezoning to occur to allow the proposed massive development.

This is understandable. But in no way does the owner have the right to have the land rezoned.

The Koll Real Estate Group is a speculator, pure and simple, and while some speculators win their gamble, others do not.

In the case of the Bolsa Chica the rights belong to the public, not to the landowner. The public has the right, through its elected representatives, the Orange County Board of Supervisors, to say enough is enough. We cannot allow every square inch of land to be paved over and built on, which is what will happen if we do not draw the line.

And what better place to draw that line and to preserve an area for present and future generations to enjoy than the Bolsa Chica, 1,700 acres of coastal open space comprising mesas, lowlands and nearly 1,000 acres of wetlands.

SCOTT H. RUNGE

Huntington Beach