Coastal Panel Votes Today on New Bolsa Chica Plan

After raging for three decades, the battle over Bolsa Chica has now come down to deciding the fate of 183 acres, a tiny piece of the state’s majestic 1,100-mile coastline. But the project’s tortured history, passionate players and intense political scrutiny ensure that today’s California Coastal Commission vote on it will be anything but routine.

No one is willing to predict the result, but most agree that one member’s vote will be pivotal: Huntington Beach City Councilwoman and Coastal Commissioner Shirley S. Dettloff. A quarter-century ago, Dettloff co-founded the development’s longtime foe, Amigos de Bolsa Chica.

Dettloff said she won’t make up her mind until after the public hearing. But, “it’s something I’ve worked on for 30 years, from picking up trash to conducting tours to walking the halls of the state Legislature,” she said. “To finally be in a decision-making role is the chance of a lifetime.”

Dettloff’s role personifies the bizarre history of Bolsa Chica. The project was once envisioned as a marina, hotels and 5,700 homes on 1,547 acres, but commissioners will vote today on whether to allow Hearthside Homes to build 1,235 homes on a 183-acre mesa. Commission staff members don’t want to allow even that, recommending construction be limited to 60 acres.

Since the project’s inception in 1970, it has won Coastal Commission approval in 1985, 1996 and 1997, and seen involvement by Congress, federal agencies, and state and county officials. It has been dramatically scaled back after a series of court challenges by environmentalists.

“In the 30 years of working on this project, we’re hoping after hundreds of public hearings, thousands of pages of testimony and studies, and volumes of court litigation that closure could be achieved very soon,” said Lucy Dunn, executive vice president of Hearthside. “This project has been studied to death. I don’t think the public is served when it takes this long.”

Hearthside’s predecessor, Koll Real Estate Group, was pushed into bankruptcy reorganization because of the delays. More than 1,200 acres of wetlands have been saved in what has become one of the most costly restoration efforts in state history. The commission’s current chairwoman was appointed in the middle of a 1996 Bolsa hearing, after another commissioner resigned because of a conflict of interest.

Charged Atmosphere Expected at Hearing

Today’s hearing will be just as charged: Earlier this week, the Davis administration planned to send three state secretaries, but pulled back once it realized the unprecedented move would draw unwelcome attention, said a state worker who asked not to be named. More than 500 people are already expected to pack the public hearing at the Furama Hotel.

Mark Massara, director of coastal programs for the Sierra Club, said, “This vote is going to be one of the pivotal moments in the history of the commission.”

Peter Douglas, the commission’s executive director, who nearly lost his job in 1996 because of his disdain over a Bolsa Chica proposal, agreed: “This has been an ongoing controversy of the first order for a whole variety of reasons.”

Much of the current fight boils down to how much of a bluff-top mesa that overlooks coastal marshes can be developed. Hearthside wants more and the commission’s staff wants less.

The commission’s staff and activists say limiting the development’s size will ensure that the 1,200 acres of fragile wetlands beneath the mesa will not be destroyed by runoff and other impacts.

Both sides are trying to use the issue of hawks, crows and other raptors to buttress their proposals. While the commission staff and local activists say the lower mesa is key foraging habitat for the predatory birds, the developer says the raptors eat endangered birds.

Wednesday afternoon, a high-ranking state Department of Fish and Game official said that while the department was not taking sides, the commission should consider that predatory birds living on the mesa eat endangered species like least terns and Western snowy plovers. Deputy Director Ron Rempel said the Hearthside alternative, with more homes, would mean fewer predatory birds, while the staff plan would probably allow for more.

“What we don’t want to see is the jewel (of the wetlands) destroyed by what goes on in the uplands,” he said.

Historical as Well as Biological Import

Bolsa Chica boasts the largest wetlands complex in Southern California, which is a key stopover for migrating birds on the Pacific Flyway.

Environmentalists and Native Americans say the site also has invaluable prehistoric archeological treasures. Earlier excavation there has turned up ancient human remains, as well as rare stone artifacts believed to be thousands of years old.

J. Daniel Rogers, head of the archeology division at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History, wrote in 1999: “I am now convinced that every effort should be made to preserve as much of the site as possible . . . because of the site’s unique characteristics and the clear importance it had in the ancient history of California.”

The developer has spent considerable time and money trying to woo state officials. Hearthside’s parent company spent $445,761 on Sacramento-based lobbyists in 1999 and the first nine months of this year. The Bolsa Chica project is just one issue the developer has sought help on.

Hearthside also contributed $75,000 to the Voter Education Project, which sent out mailers on a number of state and local issues in last week’s elections. While Hearthside officials said they had no editorial control, four mailers sent to Huntington Beach voters labeled two candidates who have fought to preserve Bolsa Chica “radical anti-business interests” and “liberals.”

Connie Boardman and Debbie Cook were elected to the City Council anyway.

If the commission approves the project, the City Council could seek to annex it. Years ago, the developer was agreeable, but the city decided to wait until a final Coastal Commission decision. Now, Dunn said the city would have to come to Hearthside with an acceptable offer. Cook and Boardman, who support preserving the entire area, are likely obstacles.

“I’m a staunch supporter of saving all of the mesa, and I would not support annexation to make it easier for them to get services,” Cook said.

Boardman added: “What I’m hoping will happen is Hearthside will finally become a willing seller. It’s the best thing for the developer and the community.”

She and Cook sit on the board of the Bolsa Chica Land Trust, which is trying to purchase and preserve the mesa. Both said they plan to resign from the trust before taking office. The Land Trust has raised more than a half-million dollars to buy the land, said Flossie Horgan, a co-founder of the trust. She expects the land would sell for $60 million to $100 million, funds that she said could be acquired from the state and federal government and granting agencies.

Dunn, who declined to name a price, said Hearthside would be a willing seller if it received a reasonable offer. She doubted that public officials would want to spend millions saving a “local park” when they could buy ancient redwoods or land in the Everglades.

“We talk about it endlessly, but it’s such a phantom,” she said.

The Sierra Club’s Massara said the developer has already made $25 million on the sale of the wetlands to the state, and would make millions more developing only the upper tier of the mesa, as the commission’s staff recommends.

“For the life of me, I can’t understand why Hearthside has not embraced the staff recommendation,” he said. “If they truly wanted to put an end to three decades of Bolsa Chica wars, they would pull their hand out of the trough.”

No one has any illusions that the war will end today. The Orange County Board of Supervisors and a trial court judge still have to sign off on the commission’s decision. Before that, more litigation is expected. Dunn said Hearthside will sue if the commission approves the staff recommendation, and Land Trust board members say they’ll probably sue if the developer’s plan prevails.

But with so little land left compared to the original proposals, all sides agree the fighting can’t go on much longer.

Times staff writer Deborah Schoch contributed to this report.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

BOLSA CHICA CHRONOLOGY

1970: Signal Bolsa Corp. acquires 1,200 acres of Bolsa Chica from former owners.

March 15, 1973: Signal Landmark and the state sign a settlement agreement in which the state acquires title to a 300-acre parcel in the Bolsa Chica wetlands.

1978: The state builds a levee, enclosing 150 acres of its 300-acre parcel. Seawater once again pours into Bolsa Chica, restoring a portion of the damaged wetlands.

1979: Amigos de Bolsa Chica, a conservationist group, sues the state, alleging that the 1973 land-exchange agreement is a gift of public trust lands that violates the state Constitution and that certain actions by Signal and others violated the state Coastal Act.

Jan. 20, 1982: The Board of Supervisors approves a land-use plan that includes 600 acres of salt marsh, a navigable ocean entrance, a marina with 1,800 boat slips, coastal-oriented commercial support facilities, open-space recreation and 5,700 residential units. Signal maintains that only 453 acres of the property are environmentally sensitive wetlands.

January, 1983: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completes a progress report indicating that a navigable entrance at Bolsa Chica is technically feasible, pending further economic and other studies.

Oct. 23, 1985: The Coastal Commission unanimously approves a plan preserving 915 acres of wetlands and allowing for development of a 1,300-slip marina, open-space recreation, 5,700 residential units, and restaurants and hotels. Still to be settled is whether to carve a navigable ocean channel leading into the development.

Dec.18, 1985: Board of Supervisors approves the plan ratified by the Coastal Commission.

Oct. 16, 1986: Congress enacts the omnibus Water Resources Development Act, which includes a provision to establish a project at Bolsa Chica that would allow federal loans for a navigable ocean channel, if determined to be technically and economically feasible.

March 6, 1987: At the request of Signal, state Sen. Marian Bergeson (R-Newport Beach) introduces legislation to create a special, privately controlled district to govern the early stages of development at Bolsa Chica.

Aug. 17, 1987: Bergeson withdraws the Bolsa Chica bill from consideration in 1987, saying that she will resume the push for passage in 1988.

Jan. 29, 1988: Amigos representatives claim a significant victory after an Orange County Superior Court commissioner rejects Signal’s bid to dismiss the group’s nine-year-old lawsuit and permits the Amigos to add new claims.

May 22, 1989: Coalition reaches agreement, adopts Plan to restore 1,000 acres of coastal wetlands.

Nov. 6, 1991: Home builder offers to triple Bolsa Chica wetlands area to 1,100 acres in exchange for 4,884 homes on perimeter.

Feb. 14, 1994: Bone sites verified at Bolsa Chica, Native Americans say planned development is on burial ground.

Dec. 14, 1994: O.C. Supervisors give Koll go-ahead for Bolsa Chica project, opponents vow legal challenges.

Oct. 10, 1995: Koll rejects U.S. plan to purchase Bolsa Chica because offer was less than agreed-upon price.

Jan. 11, 1996: Coastal Commission OKs Bolsa Chica project, clearing last major government hurdle to Koll plan for 3,300 homes.

Feb. 12, 1997: State Lands Commission unanimously approves $91 million acquisition and restoration of 880 acres of Bolsa Chica.

May 27, 1997: Judge finds state panel erred in allowing 1995 Bolsa Chica housing project.

Nov. 18, 1997: O.C. Supervisors approve scaled-down development plan for bluffs above Bolsa Chica, allowing 1,235 homes on the mesa behind wetlands. Coastal Commission certifies plan later this year.

April 16, 1999: State appeals court upholds 1997 ruling, which sends proposal back to Coastal Commission.

Sept. 8, 2000: State officials reveal Bolsa Chica wetlands restoration could cost $30 million more than expected.

Nov. 16, 2000: The Coastal Commission will decide the fate of all that’s left--a 183-acre mesa. The developer wants to build 1,235 homes there, but the commission’s staff recommends limiting development to the 60-acre upper-tier of the mesa.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Decision Day

Originally approved by the California Coastal Commission at 5,700 homes plus commercial development on about 700 acres, a project planned for the Bolsa Chica has been repeatedly scaled back. The commission will decide the fate of a 183-acre mesa today at a meeting in Los Angeles.

Source: Hearthside Homes; California Coasta Commission