PCRES 1999-081PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-081
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA CERTIFYING AN
INITIAL STUDY/EIR ADDENDUM FOR A FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE 1992
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FOR THE COVE OASIS
TRAILHEAD
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-360
CITY OF LA QUINTA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did
on the 23`d day of November, 1999, hold a public meeting to consider the Environmental
Assessment of the Cove Oasis Trailhead; and
WHEREAS, the applications complied with the requirements of "The Rules
to implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended: Resolution
83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development
Department has prepared an Initial Study; and
WHEREAS, it is the determination of the Community Development Director
that the proposed application implements the General Plan for which an Environmental
Impact Report was certified by the City Council (State Clearinghouse No. 91122013) in
October, 1991, and that pursuant to Public Resources Code 21090, no further
environmental review is necessary beyond analysis of project -specific impacts. The
Community Development Department has prepared an Addendum to the EIR. No changed
circumstances or conditions exist which require preparation of a subsequent EIR, pursuant
to Public Resources Code 21166; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the EIR for General
Plan Update and Addendum thereto; and
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if
any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the
following facts, findings, and reasons to justify certification of said Environmental
Assessment:
1. Based on the measures outlined in the EIR for the La Quinta General Plan Update,
the City has consulted a wildlife biologist/horticulturist and an archaeologist to
identify project -related impacts on habitat areas and cultural resources on the site.
The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not have significant adverse impacts on
the environment, with compliance with standard conditions and applicable City
regulations.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ResoPc EA 99-360.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-081
Environmental Assessment 99-360
2. The potential impact of the project on nesting habitats for migratory birds will be
avoided by scheduling construction outside of the breeding season, as required by
the USFWS.
3. The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not be detrimental to the health, safety,
or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no
significant unmitigable impacts were identified by the environmental assessment.
4. The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment or reduce habitat for wildlife species in the area, since the
project is consistent with General Plan goals, policies and objectives and other
current City standards. The project does not have the potential to eliminate an
important example of California prehistory, as archaeological investigation of the
site has been conducted and no significant resources are located on -site.
5. The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead does not have the potential to achieve short-
term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals,
since the project would help to implement the Park and Recreation Element of the
La Quinta General Plan.
6. The limited size of the facility and its location within a designated open space area
would also preclude cumulatively significant adverse impacts when viewed with
other planned developments in the area. The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead
would not result in impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable when oonsidering planned proposed development in the immediate
vicinity as the proposed project is being undertaken pursuant to the City's General
Plan for which a final EIR has been certified, and no changes in conditions or
circumstances, as outlined in Public Resources Code Section 21166 have occurred.
7. The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not have environmental effects that
would adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as the
proposed project would develop a trailhead facility along Bear Creek Canyon trail
as contemplated in the General Plan Park and Recreation Element and analyzed
in the certified General Plan EIR.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning
Commission held on this 23`d day of November, 1999.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\ResoPc EA 99-360.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-081
Environmental Assessment 99-360
AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
IRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HEMAN, Community Development Director
ity of La Quinta, California
C:\My DocumentskWPDOCS\ResoPc EA 99-360.wpd
INITIAL STUDY
AND
EIR ADDENDUM
FOR THE
COVE OASIS TRAILHEAD
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 98-18
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-390
ADDENDUM TO FINAL EIR FOR THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
(SCH NO.91122013)
Prepared for:
CITY OF LA QUINTA
Prepared by:
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
November 12, 1999
INITIAL STUDY AND EIR ADDENDUM
for the proposed
COVE OASIS
Addendum to Final EIR for the La Quinta General Plan Update
(SCH No. 91122013)
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
November 12, 1999
Project Title:
Cove Oasis Trailhead
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: La Quinta
C mmm tyy Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Christine di Iorio
Phone Number: (760) 777-7125
4. Project Location: Ya mile south of Calle Tecate
La Quinta, California 92253
5. Project Sponsor's Name City of La Quinta
and Address: Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
6. General Plan Designation: Open Space
7. Zoning: Open Space
_ 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including, but not limited to, later
phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead project involves the development of a trailhead facility at an
area planted with date palms, located east of a small hill, and along the Bear Creek Canyon Trail.
This area is located at the toe of the Santa Rosa Mountains and is approximately '/4 mile south of
Calle Tecate. The project proposes the provision of a number of amenities and facilities at the
trailhead, including picnic tables, shade structures, a water feature, drinking fountain, emergency
telephone (call box), restroom, trash receptacles, lighting, and informational signs. Shade trees,
shrubs, and groundcover would also be provided at scattered locations on -site. In addition,
informational and directional signs would be provided at the dirt parking lot on Calle Tecate and
along the edges of the loop trail at the base of the Mountains.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The project site is located at the southwestern section of the City of La Quinta, south of an existing
residential community (known as the Cove). The site is vacant land which is currently used as
access to several trails that lead into the Santa Rosa Mountains. Approximately 39 date palms are
planted at the proposed site of the Cove Oasis Trailhead. Adjacent land uses are:
North — Calle Tecate and single family homes on Calle Tecate
East — Calle Tecate Detention Basin, CV WD water tank and vacant land
South —Training dike and vacant land within the Santa Rosa Mountains with trails and open space
west — Upper Bear Creek Detention Basin, vacant land and small hill
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement):
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
A grant application for the project has been filed with the California Department of Parks and
Recreation.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following
pages.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils
❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology / Water Quality ❑ Land Use / Planning
❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population / Housing
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic
❑ Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have
been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to�
applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-2
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed project and nothing further is required.
l �ru—J
Signature
CHRISTINE DI IORIO
Printed name
November 24, 1999
Date
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Department
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-3
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls
outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact' answer should be explained where it is based on
project -specific factors, as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with
mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact' to
a "Less Than Significant Impact'. The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from
Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses", may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,
an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within
the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated", describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a projects -
environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-4
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
Negative Declaration jar the
Project
Date
4-5
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
Less Than
significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorpmnted Impact No impact
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❑ ❑ E ❑
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
❑ ❑ ❑
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
❑ ❑ ❑
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
❑ ❑ ❑
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether
impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept.
of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown
on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment
❑ ❑ ❑
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied
upon to make the following determinations. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
❑ ❑ ❑
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
❑ ❑ ❑
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-6
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
Less Than
significant Less Than
Potentially With
significant Mitigation Significant
hnpact Incorporated Impact No hnpact
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
❑ ❑ ❑
number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
through habitat modifications, on any species identified as
a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in
local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section
15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ Cl ■
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Negative Declaration jar the
Project
Date
4-7
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist
for the area or based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-
B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
With
Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
hnpact
Incorporated
hapact
p
❑
❑
❑ ■
❑ ❑ ❑ r
❑
❑
r
❑
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
❑
r
❑
❑
❑
r
❑
❑
❑
r
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-8
❑ ❑
r ❑
❑ ❑
r ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ■
❑ ❑
❑ ■
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area? -
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with' wildlands?
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the course
of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the course
of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off -site?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
With
Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No lrnpact
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
❑
❑
❑ r
❑ ❑ ❑ r
❑ ❑
❑ r
❑ ❑
❑ r
❑ ❑
❑
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-9
❑ ❑
❑ ■
❑ ❑
❑ r
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ❑ ❑ r
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan?
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
Less Than
significant
Potentially
with
Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
❑
❑
■ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑
N ❑
❑ ❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
440
❑ ❑ ❑ t
❑ ❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less Than
'
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Ineoipomted
hnpact
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
❑
❑
❑ ■
groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial populatidn growth in an area, either ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
❑
❑
❑
■
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
❑
❑
❑
■
Police protection?
❑
❑
■
❑
Schools?
❑
❑
❑
■
Parks?
❑
❑
■
❑
Other public facilities?
❑
❑
❑
■
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-11
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
XIV. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either
the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio
on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location
that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transporkation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Less nnot
Significant
Potentially
Will,
Less Tlian
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No hnpact
hnpact
Incorporated
hnpact
❑
❑
M ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ a
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-12
❑ ❑
❑
0
❑ ❑
❑
■
❑ ❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑
❑ ❑
■
❑
❑ ❑
❑
SECTION 4: LIST OF REFERENCES
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand
in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten
to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the major
period of California history orprehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially
wilt
Less Than
significant
Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
❑
❑
K ❑
❑
❑
❑ ■
❑
❑
a ❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑ N ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Negative Declaration for the
Project
Date
4-13
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead use throughout the project involves construction of a trailhead in the
City of La Quinta and is an action anticipated in the la Quinta General Plan (1992). The La Quinta General
Plan provides a comprehensive framework which serves to guide the growth and development of the City.
The General Plan includes goals and policies addressing land use, housing, transportation and circulation,
open space, public safety, resource conservation, public facilities, and economic development.
The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead project implements the General Plan through the provision of
recreational opportunities for residents of the City. The project is consistent with applicable elements of the
La Quinta General Plan, including the Land Use, Circulation, Open Space, and Park and Recreation
Elements. The project site is designated as Open Space in the General Plan and is located within the area
designated for a 16.5-acre community park (Cove Community Park). This project would serve as a step
towards the development of facilities to support the recreational use of open spaces and trails in the
surrounding area. Thus, the proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead project would provide a community
recreational facility and would contribute to fulfilling the City's need for parks and recreational facilities.
The Park and Recreation Element refers to the development of a Trails System Master Plan for the City.
While this master plan has not been developed, the proposed trailhead would support the existing trails that
are found in the area and a future trail system that would be provided in the City. The proposed trailhead
would improve existing linkages between park facilities, trails, and open space areas in the City,
implementing this goal of the General Plan's Park and Recreation Element.
A Master Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the La Quinta General Plan and was
certified by the La Quinta City Council on October 1992. The Master EIR addresses issues focusing on
potential impacts associated with future development in the City and determined that, at buildout,
implementation of the General Plan has the potential to result in potentially significant, but mitigable
impacts associated with land use, earth, water, biota, cultural resources, aesthetics, public services and
utilities, traffic/circulation, noise and air quality.
The Cove Oasis Trailhead project is a discretionary action requiring approval by the La Quinta Planning
Commission and meets the definition of a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The Master EIR for the General Plan update was reviewed to determine if the proposed project and its
impacts have been adequately addressed in the EIR. In accordance with Section 21157.1 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this Initial Study analyzes the impacts of the proposed trailhead
project and determines that environmental effects of the proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead have been analyzed
and addressed in the Master EIR for the La Quinta General Plan Update (State Clearinghouse No.
91122013). In cases where a Lead Agency can determine that, with the addition of only minor technical
changes or additions, a previously certified EIR adequately evaluates the potential environmental effects of
the current action, then an Addendum to the original EIR can be prepared (CEQA Guidelines Section
15164). Therefore, as supported by the discussion included in this Initial Study, the City of La Quinta has
prepared this Addendum to the La Quinta General Plan Update EIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site for the proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead is located at the southwestern section of the City of
La Quinta, at the toe of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The project site is part of a 114.35-acre land that was
deeded by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) to the City of La Quinta. The site is part of a
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
12
floodplain that was graded by the CVWD in 1985-1986 for the provision of two detention basins at the
mouths of the Bear Creek and the Upper East La Quinta Channel.
Bear Creek Canyon Trail currently runs from Bear Creek Channel and the Bear Creek Channel bike path at
Calle Tecate, south towards the Santa Rosa Mountains. At an area along Bear Creek Canyon Trail and just
east of a small hill, a number of date palms were transplanted here in 1996. This area is referred to as the
Cove Oasis.
The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would be located approximately 'Amile south of Calle Tecate and the
residences along this street. It would be surrounded by vacant land on all four sides. The Coral Reef
Mountain is found farther east of site, and the Santa Rosa Mountains National Scenic area is found farther
south. A training dike runs along the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains, approximately 600 feet south of
the site. Several dirt trails that lead into the Santa Rosa Mountains are currently found in the area. These
include the Bear Creek Canyon trail which extends southwest from the Bear Creek Channel and runs along
the site. The Coral Reef Mountain Bicycle Lane runs along the south side of Calle Tecate, just north of the
site. At the western end of Calle Tecate, this bicycle lane joins the Bear Creek Channel bike path, which
runs north along Bear Creek, north of Calle Tecate. The Lake Cahuilla Trail, the Boo Hoff Trail, the
Morrow Trail, and the Guadalupe Trail are found near the site and would be served by the proposed
trailhead.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead is planned as a fully developed trailhead facility, with a complete set of
amenities for users of the nearby trails. On -site facilities would include three trellis shade structures with
picnic tables beneath the structures. Boulders which may be utilized as benches would be located at
appropriate locations throughout the trailhead site. These boulders would be taken from the surrounding
area or from the general vicinity. A drinking fountain would also be provided, as well as an emergency
telephone call box. A self-cleaning restroom would also be provided at the site. Trash receptacles of
natural stone would be located throughout the site. Electrical outlets and lights would also be provided for
small appliances and for nighttime use.
In addition, a water feature (bubbling rock) would be provided on -site and a spray head to cool off visitors
would be located nearby. Shrubs and groundcover to serve as accent plants would be provided around the
water feature and scattered 36-inch box trees would be planted at isolated areas to complement the existing
date palms. Plant tags would accompany the different plant materials. Directional signs and informational
signs would include information panels on flora, wildlife, and the history of the trails in the area, directions
to major topographical features, a compass, a thermometer, and drinking water needs for hikers.
A dirt parking lot that is accessible from the eastern end of Calle Tecate is surrounded by boulders and can
accommodate approximately 10 cars. The proposed project would also involve the provision of directional
signs at the parking lot and the placement of boulders along a planned trail from the parking lot to the
proposed trailhead. No other improvements to the trail or the dirt parking lot are proposed.
In an effort to provide a natural environment, the proposed improvements shall be designed with natural
materials, native plant species, and the materials typically found in the desert landscape. Trail signs/mile
markers made of native rock materials would be placed along the Bear Creek Canyon Trail. No impervious
paved areas are proposed, and no turf grasses would be planted.
Lighting proposed on -site would be solar -powered, and the telephone would utilize cellular technology.
This would eliminate the need to extend power and telephone lines to the project site, and would avoid the
need for overhead poles/underground lines.
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November24, 1999
13
INITIAL STUDY DISCUSSION
Issues discussed in this Addendum pertain directly to the proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead project's site -
specific impacts. This section of the EIR Addendum addresses the potential environmental impacts of the
proposed project and discusses the responses to the Initial Study Checklist. The issues identified as "No
Impact" require no further discussion and are only briefly discussed below. On other issues, a brief
discussion of the existing conditions is provided, along with the potential changes that would occur with the
proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead project. An explanation on why impacts were found to be insignificant or
which have been addressed in an earlier EIR and found to be adequate are also provided in the discussion
below.
Aesthetics
Environmental Setting
The project site is an approximately 1.0 acre area at the toe of the Santa Rosa Mountains and along the Bear
Creek Canyon Trail. The site has been planted with approximately 39 30- to 40-foot tall date palms. The
Bear Creek Canyon Trail is a dirt trail which extends from the western end of Calle Tecate, south for
approximately'/4 mile to the site, and farther southwest into the mountains. A small hill is located just west
of the trailhead site and farther west and south are a detention basin, dirt trails, and the open space areas of
the Santa Rosa Mountains. East of the trailhead site are vacant land, dirt trails, a detention basin, a water
tank, and the Coral Reef Mountains. Boulders line the south side of Calle Tecate, as well as the perimeter
of the dirt parking lot located south of the eastern end of Calle Tecate.
There are no light sources on the Cove Oasis Trailhead site or immediately along the trails. Views from the
site include the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and south and the Coral Reef Mountains to the east. The
nearby residential development and urban development in the City of La Quinta, including the San
Bernardino Mountains farther north, are also visible from the site. The surrounding mountains provide a
backdrop for the valley areas of the City and represent a major visual resource in the City. However, the
location, size and elevation of the project site at the toe of the mountains hide it from public views from
most areas of the City and from nearby streets. No streetscape image corridors are located near the site or
have views of the site, as identified in the La Quinta General Plan.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR addresses aesthetics and the changes in the visual and physical qualities of the City at
buildout of the General Plan. Measures to prevent negative aesthetic impacts include policies in the
General Plan which address the undergrounding of utility lines, street corridors and scenic vistas, urban
design standards and landscape design. The proposed project would not alter the conclusions of the Master
EIR. The proposed trailhead would introduce several new facilities and structures to the site. These
include shade structures over picnic tables, rock benches, drinking fountain and water feature, self-cleaning
restroom, call box, trash receptacles, and informational signs. Trees and shrubs would be planted at isolated
areas. These structures would change the visual quality of the vacant site to a more developed facility.
However, these amenities would be constructed of rock or natural materials to complement the natural
quality of the site and the surrounding mountains. Also, the proposed shade structures would be
approximately 10 feet tall and would not extend beyond the height of the existing date palms. Since the site
is at the toe of the Santa Rosa Mountains and at a slightly higher elevation than Calle Tecate, the proposed
trailhead would not be highly visible from Calle Tecate and the nearby residential neighborhood.
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
14
The proposed project would include the provision of lights at the trailhead to allow for their nighttime use.
These lights would consist of solar -powered lamps around the shade structures and trees. The site is located
'A mile from the residences on Calle Tecate. The area between the homes and the site rises slightly, hiding
the site from public views on the street. The low wattage of the lights and their distance from the nearest
residence would preclude light intrusion and spillover effects. No outdoor lights are proposed at the dirt
parking lot, avoiding potential effects to residents across the street.
The City regulates outdoor lighting to ensure that no detrimental effect on astronomical observations is
created; no inefficient use of energy resources occurs; and no public nuisance or safety hazards is created.
Lights at the trailhead shall be designed and shielded ,where necessary, in accordance with City regulations.
Also, all lights would be turned off by 10 PM, unless the site is in use after such time for organized events.
No significant adverse impacts relating to aesthetics are expected with the project.
References: Site Survey, La Quinta Municipal Code, and Final FIR for the General Plan Update
Agriculture Resources
Environmental Setting
The project site in not in agricultural production, nor are there agricultural lands or land designated or zoned
for agricultural use on or near the project site. Also, the site and the surrounding area does not contain
prime agricultural soils.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Mater FIR addresses the potential for significant impacts associated with the conversion of agricultural
lands to urban development. Measures to maintain the rural character of the City through the Rural
Residential Overlay and landscaping standards are included as policies in the General Plan. The proposed
project would not alter the conclusions of the Master EIR. The site is not in agricultural use and the
proposed trailhead would not affect any agricultural lands in the area.
References: Site Survey and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Air Quality
Environmental Setting
According to the Master FIR, the Coachella Valley, including the City of La Quinta, has a desert climate
characterized by extreme summer heat, cool winter nights, low precipitation and low humidity. Annual
rainfall is less than 6 inches per year and occurs mostly in winter and late summer. Summer temperatures
exceed 100 degree Fahrenheit for four months each year with summer nighttime temperatures in the mid-
70's. Gusty winds during spring and early summer contribute to airborne particulates (PM-10) and high
ozone levels. Blowsand hazards associated with strong winds are present at the northern section of the
City, but not within the project site.
The air quality analysis in the Master EIR concluded that vacant land, agricultural activities and other
ground disturbance lead to high PM-10 levels in the Coachella Valley. The Valley is a non -attainment area
for PM-10 and the City participates in the regional effort to mitigate PM-10 through dust control plans for
all construction projects and a street cleaning program.
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
15
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR addresses air quality and new sources of pollutant emissions that would accompany future
development in the City. The General Plan includes an Air Quality Element which outlines the City
policies and programs for maintaining air quality standards. The proposed project supports the Air Quality
Element by supporting an alternative form of travel and would not alter the conclusions of the Master EIR.
The proposed trailhead would involve the construction of three shade structures on the site and the
provision of other amenities and facilities. These facilities (trellises, drinking fountain, spray tower, and
water feature) involve limited construction or ground disturbance activities during the estimated 90- to 120-
day construction period. Many of the facilities (tables, trash receptacles, restroom, call box, signs) would
be pre -fabricated at off -site locations and would only involve installation at the site. The proposed project
is not expected to directly generate vehicle trips. Rather, it would serve hikers and bicyclists using the
nearby trails into the Santa Rosa Mountains. There are no sensitive receptors in the area, and the project is
not expected to generate objectionable odors.
In accordance with City regulations and as presented in the Master EIR, a fugitive dust mitigation plan
would need to be developed for the project. This plan would identify measures to reduce fugitive dust
nuisance during construction, and may include watering of disturbed surface areas; chemical stabilization of
unpaved roads and vehicle parking areas, installation of fencing around disturbed surface areas, installation
of wheel washers , etc.
No adverse impacts on air quality are expected from the proposed trailhead project.
References: Site Survey, La Quinta Municipal Code, and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Biological Resources
Environmental Setting
The project site and the surrounding area were graded in 1985 to 1986 for the construction of the adjacent
detention basins. The project site has approximately 40 date palms which were replanted from another site
in 1996. In addition, tamarisk and tumbleweeds are found under the palms.
According to the Master FIR, there are no native or sensitive plant species on the site. Animals in the area
include small mammals and reptiles commonly found in scrub and desert transition areas. The project area
is located east of the habitat range of the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep and is west of the Santa Rosa
Mountains State Game Refuge - an area designated for protection of the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. The
project area is considered possible habitat of the Magic Geko and is located in an area identified in the La
Quinta General Plan as a potential habitat area for the black -tailed gnatcatcher. The geko and gnatcatcher
are not listed as threatened or endangered under the state or federal endangered species act, but the black -
tailed gnatcatcher is protected under the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
There are no wetlands or riparian courses on the site or adjacent to the site. The project site is located
outside the habitat range and reserves for the Coachella Valley fringed -toed lizard, as identified in the
Habitat Conservation Plan for this species.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR addresses biological resources and the impact of urban development on the resident
indigenous plant and animal communities in the area. Measures to prevent adverse impacts include open
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
16
space designations for sensitive areas and consultation with biologists for individual development projects.
The proposed project complies with these measures and would not alter the conclusions of the Master EIR.
The proposed trailhead would include the planting of shade trees and accent shrubs at scattered locations on
the site. Native plant species would be selected to reflect the natural environment and plant diversity at the
nearby Santa Rosa Mountains. The existing date palms would not be disturbed as part of the project.
There are no sensitive animal species found on the site. However, the area is located within the habitat
range of the black -tailed gnatcatcher. The EIR for the General Plan update calls for the review of
developments by a wildlife biologist and horticulturist to identify project -related impacts on habitat areas.
The City has consulted a biologist regarding the proposed project and the black -tailed gnatcatcher. The
biologist has indicated that the black -tailed gnatcatcher is not listed as endangered or threatened under the
federal and state Endangered Species Act but is protected under the California Fish and Game Code and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The direct harm or destruction of individual birds, their eggs, or active nests
would be a potential violation of these regulations.
In order to avoid the potential for adverse impacts to the black -tailed gnatcatcher and other migratory birds,
as a condition of approval, construction activities should be scheduled between August to March, which is
outside the breeding season. If construction would occur between April and July, a survey should be
conducted prior to construction activities to determine the presence of the black -tailed gnatcatcher or their
nests within the scrub vegetation on the site. If bird nests are found, no construction should be conducted
within a 100-foot radius of the nests. Otherwise, a permit from the USFWS should be obtained prior to the
destruction of nests.
The additional trees, shrubs, and groundcover that would be planted as part of the project would provide
habitat areas for animal species in the area. The proposed project would also include the provision of
informational signs, which would provide information on native and sensitive plants and animals in the
area. This information would provide trail users with knowledge and a greater respect for sensitive species
and their habitats.
References: Black -tailed Gnatcatcher Memo, Site Survey, and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Cultural Resources
Environmental Setting
As described in the General Plan Update EIR, the City of La Quinta is located within the area formerly
occupied by the ancient Lake Cahuilla and is known to have rich deposits of archaeological and historic
resources. The project site is located at the south end of the La Quinta Cove area. The records search for
the site indicates that the site has not been previously surveyed for cultural resources and that no cultural
resources have been identified on or near the site. The project site was graded in 1985 to 1986 as part of the
construction of the nearby detention basins and training dike. Also, date palms were replanted on the site in
1996. Thus, no in -situ archaeological resources are expected on the site. A field reconnaissance further
indicated that no archaeological/historical sites are present on the site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR addresses cultural resources and the impact of urban development on cultural resources in
the City. Measures to prevent adverse impacts include open space designations for historic and culturally
sensitive areas, and preservation of historic sites and structures. The EIR for the General Plan update also
calls for the review of developments by an archaeologist to identify project -related impacts on cultural
resources. The City has consulted an archaeologist regarding the proposed project and the potential cultural
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
17
resources on the site. The archaeologist has indicated that no cultural resources are present on or near the
site and no adverse impacts on cultural resources are expected with the proposed trailhead facility.
The proposed project would not alter the conclusions of the Master EIR. The proposed trailhead would not
affect any archaeological or historical resources in the City or the surrounding area. The project would
involve the provision of informational signs which would include a history of the area and the historic use
of the trails.
References: Site Survey, Phase 1 Archaeological Survey, and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Geology and Soils
Environmental Setting
According to the Master EIR, the project site is located at the toe of the Santa Rosa Mountains, and at a
slightly higher elevation than Calle Tecate. The site is within the hillside terrace zone, which is comprised
of alluvial fans and stream deposits from the Santa Rosa Mountains. On -site soils consist of a combination
of stony, sandy alluvium and loose cobbles and stones (sands and granite and metamorphic rocks). The site
was graded in 1985 to 1986 as part of the construction of the detention basins and training dike at the Cove.
There are several earthquake faults which cross the City although no fault is known to traverse near the site.
The site is located with groundshaking zone III and is located approximately 8 to 10 miles of an active
earthquake fault. There are no ideqtified liquefaction, erosion, or blowsand hazards on the site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The La Quinta General Plan Update EIR provides an evaluation of potential impacts associated with
geological and soil resources in the City. Measures to protect these resources include open space
designations for areas with geologic constraints, and seismic and grading standards which have been
incorporated into the General Plan. The proposed project would comply with applicable measures and
would not alter the conclusions of the EIR. The facilities planned at the proposed trailhead would not lead
to extensive grading and would maintain the existing topography of the site. Permeable ground materials
would be used and foundations would be limited to the foundations for the shade structures and the
restroom. The only structures proposed are the trellis shade structures and the restroom. These structures
are considered low risk facilities and are not essential or critical during an earthquake event. The shade
structures and restroom would also be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code regarding
seismic design and expansive soils and are not expected to create a significant safety hazard to users during
earthquakes.
Septic tank systems are currently utilized at the Cove residential neighborhood, directly north of the site,
although sewer lines have been installed for connection by new development. Thus, the on -site soils are
expected to be capable of supporting the use of septic tanks. The septic tank system for the restroom at the
trailhead is not expected to have any adverse impact on geology in terms of the disposal of wastewater.
No significant adverse impacts related to geology and soils are expected from the project.
References: Site Survey, Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan, and Final EIR for the General
Plan Update
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Tradhead
November 24, 1999
18
Environmental Setting
Although this issue was not addressed in the Master EIR, the site is vacant and there are no hazardous
material users on or near the site. The nearest reported hazardous material handlers include a mini -mart,
hardware stores, an automobile repair shop, cleaners and a hotel along Calle Tampico, Eisenhower
Boulevard, Washington, and Highway 1 I1. These users are located more than 2 miles from the site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The proposed trailhead would not generate, utilize, or dispose of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials
used during construction would be limited to paint, solvents and cleaners in limited quantities and which
would be removed from the site and disposed of by contractors in accordance with County, State, and
federal regulations. Fertilizer use would be limited to the time of planting only and would not be regularly
used for landscaping on -site. Thus, no hazards or hazardous material impacts are expected from the
proposed trailhead.
References: Site Survey, EPA Envirofacts Database, La Quinta Municipal Code, and Final EIR for the
General Plan Update
Hydrology and Water Quality
Environmental Setting
According to the Master EIR, the City of La Quinta is underlain by the Coachella Valley Groundwater
Basin, which is utilized by the Coachella Valley Water District to supply domestic water to the City and the
surrounding areas. Other water sources for the City include imported water from the Colorado River
through the MWD.
The runoff flows from the Santa Rosa Mountains flow north and northeast through the site toward the
nearby detention basins. The runoff flows to the training dike at the base of the mountains and south of the
project site. The dike directs flows toward the Upper Bear Creek detention basin (northwest of the site) and
the Calle Tecate Detention Basin (northeast of the site). Although these detention basins are designated as
areas within the 100-year floodplain and the Cove residential neighborhood is located within the 500-year
floodplain, the site itself is located outside the boundaries of the flood plain.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR evaluates potential impacts associated with changes in hydrology and demand for
groundwater resources due to future development in the City. Measures to protect water resources include
coordination with the Coachella Valley Water District on water conservation, water service and drainage
facilities. The proposed project would not alter the conclusions of the EIR since the proposed trailhead
would not change the drainage patterns in the surrounding area. While some impervious surfaces may be
created on the site, the extent of these areas would be limited to the foundations beneath the three shade
structures and the restroom. The trailhead would not be paved and existing ground conditions would
essentially remain the same, except for the foundations identified above and isolated areas planted with
shade trees and accent shrubs and groundcover.
The trailhead is an outdoor facility and runoff flows during heavy rains are not expected to create hazards to
its users. The structures would also be designed to withstand flooding associated with runoff flows from
the Santa Rosa Mountains. Since the structures would not be used for residence or employment, evacuation
of the site during floods would be easy.
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Tradhead
November 24, 1999
19
As indicated earlier, fertilizer use would be limited to the time of planting and would not be regularly used.
Discharge from the restroom would be directed to a septic tank for the disposal of wastewater. This septic
tank would be constructed in accordance with pertinent regulations of the Uniform Plumbing Code and the
County Department of Environmental Health. Effluent from the wastewater would be disposed of at an
adjacent seepage pit also designed according to pertinent health regulations. Alternatively, a sewer line
may be installed from the site, north along the existing dirt trail, towards the CVWD sewer line at the
southern end of Avenida Madero (at the western end of Calle Tecate). Wastewater at this line would be
conveyed to the Thermal Plant for treatment. Thus, no hazards to public health would be created by the
proposed project.
References: Site Survey, Coachella Valley Water District, and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Land Use and Planning
Environmental Setting
The Cove Oasis is an area that has been planted with 30- to 40-foot high date palms. The site is located
along the Bear Creek Canyon Trail and just east of a small hill. The site is surrounded by vacant land and is
'/4 mile from the nearest single-family homes within the Cove neighborhood.
According to the Master EIR, the project site is designated as Open Space in both the La Quinta General
Plan Land Use Policy Diagram and the City's Zoning Map. In addition, the site is surrounded by land
designated as Open Space and Watercourse (associated with the Upper Bear Creek and Calle Tecate
Detention Basins and drainage control facilities). The site is located south of a residential community and
is not located in an area where a habitat conservation plan or natural community plan has been developed.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR addresses the extent of future development at buildout of the City. Measures to regulate
growth and development, as contained in the General Plan, as outlined in the EIR. The proposed project is
consistent with the development anticipated in the City and would not alter the conclusions of the EIR. As
discussed earlier, the proposed project implements the La Quinta General Plan Park and Recreation
Element. The proposed trailhead is consistent with the Open Space designation of the site and would not
conflict with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance or other conservation plans for the area. Since
there is the existing Bear Creek Canyon Trail along the site and several other trails into the Santa Rosa
Mountains begin near the site, the proposed trailhead would serve as an appropriate location for amenities
and facilities proposed as part of the project.
References: Site Survey and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Mineral Resources
Environmental Setting
Based on the Master EIR, the project site is not located within an area designated to have regionally
significant sand or gravel resources, as defined by the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA).
There are no other known mineral resources located on the site or near the site.
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
20
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR addresses impacts to earth and mineral resources in the City and outlines City policies that
would preserve these resources. The site is not located in an area identified to have mineral resources and
the proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead project would not have an impact on mineral resources found in the City
or the surrounding area. The project would not alter the conclusions of the EIR.
References: Site Survey and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Noise
Environmental Setting
The project site has a relatively quiet noise environment. The adjacent vacant lands and mountains provide
a natural environment where even traffic noise and noise from adjacent residential activities are not audible.
Based on the City's General Plan Master EIR, the site is located in an area where ambient noise levels are
less than 50 dB CNEL and projected noise levels would be 50 to 60 dB CNEL. There are no freeways,
airports, or railroad lines near the site, which directly generate noise impacts.
The exterior noise standard of residential land uses is 60 dBA from 7 AM to 10 PM and 50 dBA from 10
PM to 7 AM. Non-residential uses have an exterior noise standard of 75 dBA from 7 AM to 10 PM and 65
dBA from 10 PM to 7 AM. The City's noise regulations also address sound trucks, advertising by sound,
animal noises, nuisance noise, auctions, cabarets, and disorderly conduct.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR provides an evaluation of potential noise impacts associated with new development and
buildout of the City. Measures to maintain acceptable noise levels include separation of noise sensitive
uses and noise sources and the implementation of the City's noise control ordinance. The proposed project
would comply with the City's noise ordinance and would not alter the conclusions of the EIR. The
proposed project would involve minor construction activities associated with the trellis shade structures,
spray tower, water feature, and drinking fountain. Other facilities (tables, restroom, signs, call box, and
trash receptacles) would be brought into the site as finished components which would be installed or placed
on -site. Thus, construction noise impacts would be limited. Trail users would be subject to construction
noise on a short-term and temporary basis only. Also, the nearest developments are single family homes
located approximately 1/4 mile (1,320 feet) to the south. Noise from construction activities on the site is
not expected to be audible to these residences and would not violate the City's noise regulations.
No significant adverse impact on noise is expected with the project.
References: Site Survey, La Quinta Municipal Code, and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Population and Housing
Environmental Setting
According to the California Department of Finance, the City of La Quinta had a January 1999 population of
21,763 residents and a housing stock of 11,019 dwelling units. The project site is vacant and does not have
residents or housing units. Single family homes within the Cove residential neighborhood are located '/4
mile north of the site along Calle Tecate.
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
21
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master FIR evaluates the buildout population and housing stock of the City with implementation of the
General Plan. The proposed project would not have any impact on population and housing and would not
alter the conclusions of the EIR. Approximately 20 to 50 people (hikers and bicyclists) would use the trail
and the trailhead during the peak season. These users would consist of residents of the City and visitors to
the area. The proposed trailhead would have no direct impact on permanent population or the housing stock
in the City. No housing units would be affected, demolished, or built as part of the project. Likewise, no
increase in population in the City would occur due to the development of the Cove Oasis Trailhead.
References: Grant Application, DOF Population and Housing Estimates, and Final EIR for the General
Plan Update
Public Services
Environmental Setting
As indicated in the Master EIR for the General Plan Update, the Riverside County Fire Department
provides fire protection services to the City of La Quinta and the Riverside County Sheriffs Department
provides police protection services. Limited demand for fire and police services is generated by the vacant
site. The site is not developed and does not require school services.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master FIR addresses the demand for public services and utilities that would be expected at buildout of
the City. Measures to provide adequate services include coordination with service and utility providers,
parkland standards and a capital improvement program. The proposed project would coordinate with utility
and service providers and would not alter the conclusions of the EIR. The site is surrounded by vacant land
with no or little vegetation which could create a brush fire hazard. The proposed structures and
improvements on the site are not expected to create a fire hazard. The increase in the number of persons
who would use the trailhead could lead to increase in the need for police protection services from the
Sheriffs Department. The increase in police services may be related to property crimes (burglary, vehicle
theft, vandalism, etc.) that could occur at the site. A call box would be provided at the site to facilitate
emergency response to the site during a health or safety emergency.
The proposed trailhead would not generate students who would require school services. Maintenance of the
trailhead would be the responsibility of the City of La Quinta since the site is City property. The City
would continue existing maintenance of the site through regular visits by City personnel. With the project,
these visits would be expanded to include general maintenance of the facility and collection of the trash in
trash receptacles.
No significant adverse impacts on public services are expected with the project.
References: Site Survey, La Quinta Municipal Code, and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Recreation
Environmental Setting
The Master EIR identifies existing and proposed parks and recreational facilities in the area. The project
site for the proposed trailhead is an area planted with date palms located along the Bear Creek Canyon
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Tradhead
November 24, 1999
22
Trail, which runs along the Bear Creek Canyon in the Santa Rosa Mountains and connects to other dirt
trails in the area. The project area currently serves as the starting point to several trails which lead into the
Santa Rosa Mountains. The trails also serve as access roads to the water tanks and detention basins of the
CVWD.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR evaluates the City existing and future need for parks and identifies parkland standards and
programs in the Park and Recreation Element. The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead implements the Park
and Recreation Element of the General Plan and would not alter the conclusions of the EIR. The proposed
trailhead would improve trail use in the area by providing facilities to support hiking and trail use in the
area. The trailhead itself is not expected to serve as a recreational facility (such as a picnic area) but only as
a short-term stop on the way to and from the trails in the Santa Rosa Mountains. The on -site facilities
include a drinking fountain, restroom, call box, picnic tables, shade structures, benches, trash receptacles,
and informational signs which all serve to enhance the recreational enjoyment of the trailhead and the
surrounding trails. The increase in use of the adjacent trails is not expected to lead to adverse impacts on
these trails. Rather, the provision of facilities at the trailhead would limit such activities along the trail (i.e.,
trash disposal). Also, informational signs would prevent disturbance of sensitive plants and animal species
in the mountains and the call box and drinking fountain would reduce public safety risks associated with
trail use.
The project would have a beneficial impact on recreation in the area and in the City.
References: Site Survey, La Quinta General Plan, and Final FIR for the General Plan Update
Transportation/Traffic
Environmental Setting
According to the Master EIR, Calle Tecate is a two-lane local street which serves the residential
neighborhood located north of the project site. This roadway is designed to carry 3,000 vehicle trips per
day or less and has a speed limit of 25 miles per hour. Aside from residents, some trail users utilize local
streets to reach the dirt parking lot at the eastern end of Calle Tecate. The Sunline Transit Agency provides
bus services to the City and a bus stop is located approximately'h mile from the site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR evaluates the existing and future traffic volumes on city streets, based on buildout of the
City. Measures to maintain acceptable levels of service at roadways and intersections serving the City have
been identified in the EIR and in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The proposed Cove Oasis
Trailhead would not generate a significant amount of traffic that would alter the conclusions of the EIR.
The proposed trailhead is not expected to directly generate vehicle traffic since the site would not serve as a
destination point. Rather, the trailhead would provide amenities to support the use of the trails that lead into
the Santa Rosa Mountains. The City anticipates that 20 to 50 individuals would use the trailhead daily
during the peak season. Some of these users would include hikers and bikers from the nearby
neighborhood; bikers from the Bear Creek Channel bike path or the Coral Reef Mountain bicycle lane; or
other residents or visitors who would be driving to the area and parking at the dirt lot on Calle Tecate or on
the north side of Calle Tecate. Assuming a worst case scenario, the addition of 50 vehicles or 100 trip ends
on Calle Tecate is not expected to degrade the level of service at this roadway.
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
23
There has been no past problem with the lack of parking at the dirt parking lot. While the project may
increase trail users at the site, parking is expected to be adequate at the adjacent dirt parking lot. Overflow
parking may utilize the north side of Calle Tecate where parking is permitted (but is not allowed on the
south side of the street). Vehicles may also use adjacent local streets for parking. However, this use would
be temporary during the day and is not expected to be significant.
References: Site Survey and Final •EIR for the General Plan Update
Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Setting
According to the Master EIR, water and sewer services are provided by the Coachella Valley Water
District. Power service is provided by Southern California Edison Company, telephone service by GTE,
and gas service by Southern California Gas Company. A two-inch water line currently runs from the Calle
Tecate south into the project site and provides irrigation water for the date palms. There are no sewer,
power, gas, or telephone services at the site since the vacant area does not require these services. Storm
drainage is generally provided by runoff flows into the adjacent detention basins. Solid waste disposal
services are not needed.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
The Master EIR addresses the demand for public services and utilities that would be expected at buildout of
the City. Measures to provide adequate services include coordination with service and utility providers,
parkland standards and a capital improvement program. The proposed project would coordinate with utility
and service providers and would not alter the conclusions of the EIR. The proposed trailhead would utilize
the existing water line to provide water to the proposed drinking fountain and restroom at the site. Sewage
disposal would be made through a, septic tank system to be located near the trailhead and constructed and
maintained in accordance with County Department of Environmental Health regulations. Alternatively, a
sewer line may be installed from the restroom on the site to the sewer line on Avenida Madero.
No power or telephone lines are proposed since the proposed project would utilize solar -powered energy for
lighting and cellular technology for the emergency call box. Solid waste disposal would be made by the
City's maintenance crew through a weekly collection of trash. No gas services from Southern California
Gas Company are needed and thus, would not be provided. Storm drainage would continue to be primarily
through ground absorption and runoff flows into the adjacent detention basins.
The small size of the facility and its limited demand of utilities are expected to have no significant adverse
impacts on utility systems and services.
References: Site Survey, La Quinta Municipal Code, Riverside County Department of Environmental
Health, Coachella Valley Water District, and Final EIR for the General Plan Update
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Based on the Initial Study and the Environmental Analysis above, the following mandatory findings
significance can be made regarding the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Cove Oasis
Trailhead project:
Based on the measures outlined in the EIR for the La Quinta General Plan Update, the City has
consulted a wildlife biologist/horticulturist and an archaeologist to identify project -related impacts on
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Tradhead
November 24, 1999
24
habitat areas and cultural resources on the site. The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not have
significant adverse impacts on the environment, with compliance with standard conditions and
applicable City regulations.
• The potential impact of the project on nesting habitats for migratory birds will be avoided by
scheduling construction outside of the breeding season, as required by the USFWS.
• The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of
the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant immitigable impacts were identified
by the environmental assessment.
• The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment or reduce habitat for wildlife species in the area, since the project is consistent with
General Plan goals, policies and objectives and other current City standards. The project does not have
the potential to eliminate an important example of California prehistory, as archaeological investigation
of the site has been conducted and no significant resources are located on -site.
• The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental
goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, since the project would help to implement
the Park and Recreation Element of the La Quinta General Plan.
• The limited size of the facility and its location within a designated open space area would also preclude
cumulatively significant adverse impacts when viewed with other planned developments in the area.
The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not result in impacts which are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable when considering planned proposed development in the immediate vicinity
as the proposed project is being undertaken pursuant to the City's General Plan for which a final EIR
has been certified, and no changes in conditions or circumstances, as outlined in Public Resources Code
Section 21166 have occurred.
• The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead would not have environmental effects that would adversely affect
the human population, either directly or indirectly, as the proposed project would develop a trailhead
facility along Bear Creek Canyon Trail as contemplated in the General Plan Park and Recreation
Element and analyzed in the certified General Plan EIR.
CONCLUSIONS
The City of La Quinta prepared an EIR for the General Plan Update (1992). The Final EIR for the General
Plan Update addressed the impacts of future development within the City of La Quinta, including the
development of parks and recreational facilities in the City. The EIR addresses the impacts of new
development and outlines the goals and policies in the General Plan which mitigate these impacts. The
Master EIR is available at the Community Development Department of the City of La Quinta at 78-495
Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
The proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead project implements the goals, objectives, and policies of the Park and
Recreation Element of the General Plan. Thus, the environmental review for the project uses the previously
certified EIR for the General Plan Update. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed Cove
Oasis Trailhead have been analyzed above, in accordance with Section 21157.1 of CEQA.
While the EIR for the La Quinta General Plan Update (State Clearinghouse No. 91122013) analyzes all
impacts associated with future development and buildout of the City, it does not address site -specific
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
25
Relative to Section 15162 (a) (3) (C):
• No mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and
would substantially reduce one or more significant effect of the project, which the City of La Quinta
declined to adopt, have been identified.
Relative to Section 15162 (a) (3) (D):
• No mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different than those analyzed in the
previous FIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, which the
City of La Quinta declined to adopt, have been identified.
Relative to Section 15162 (b):
• A review of the existing conditions shows that there are no changed circumstances or conditions which
require preparation of a subsequent EIR. No changes to the General Plan or its circumstances have
occurred and no new information that became available after certification of the EIR for the General
Plan update require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, based on the findings above.
The La Quinta Planning Commission shall consider this Addendum with the Final EIR certified for the La
Quinta General Plan, prior to acting on the proposed Cove Oasis Trailhead project.
REFERENCES -
1. Final FIR for the La Quinta General Plan 1992; BRW, Inc.; October 6, 1992.
2. Recreational Trails Program Grant Application of the Cove Oasis Trailhead; City of La Quinta; October
1, 1999.
3. Memo on Black -tailed Gnatcatcher and La Quints General Plan; Impact Sciences, Inc.; October 28,
1999.
4. Park and Recreation Element of the La Quinta General Plan; BRW, Inc.; October 1992.
5. Population and Housing Estimates; California Department of Finance; January 1999.
6. Envirofacts Database, EPA, November 1999.
7. La Quinta Municipal Code; City of La Quinta, 1996.
8. Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; County of Riverside; 1984, as amended.
9. Bob Raskin, Riverside County Department of Environmental Health, personal communication,
November 1999.
10. Phase 1 Archaeological Survey; Archaeological Advisory Group; November 1999.
11. Bob Ford, Coachella Valley Water District, personal communication, November 1999.
Initial Study and EIR Addendum
Cove Oasis Trailhead
November 24, 1999
27