DOCSLIB.ORG

Endangered Species Act - Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Endangered Species Act - Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion Endangered Species Act - Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion Action Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Activity: Re-licensing of the South Carolina Public Service Authority (SCPSA) Hydroelectric Project (FERC #199-205) Consulting Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Southeast Regional Office (SERO), Protected Resources Division (PRD) SERO-2018-00325 Date Issued: ___________________________ Approved By: ___________________________ Roy E. Crabtree, Ph.D. Regional Administrator 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6 1.0 Consultation History ........................................................................................................... 8 2.0 Description of the Proposed Action and Action Area ...................................................... 12 2.1 Proposed Action ................................................................................................................................ 12 2.1.1 Project History .............................................................................................................................. 12 2.1.2 Current Fish Passage ..................................................................................................................... 14 2.1.3 FERC Proposed License ............................................................................................................... 16 2.1.3.1 License Term ............................................................................................................................. 16 2.1.3.2 Formalize Existing Rule Curve .................................................................................................. 16 2.1.3.4 Drought Contingency Plan, Operations and Flow Monitoring Plan, and Adaptive Management Program ................................................................................................................................................... 17 2.1.4 Proposed Fish Passage/Relocation/Management ........................................................................... 18 2.1.5 Sturgeon Enhancement Plan .......................................................................................................... 28 2.2 Action Area ....................................................................................................................................... 28 3.0 Status of Listed Species and Critical Habitat .................................................................... 31 3.1 Species (DPSs) and Designated Critical Habitat Not Likely to be Adversely Affected ................... 31 3.2 Species Likely to be Adversely Affected .......................................................................................... 34 4.0 Environmental Baseline .................................................................................................... 55 4.1 Status of Species in the Action Area ................................................................................................. 55 4.2 Factors Affecting Sturgeon within the Action Area ......................................................................... 56 5.0 Effects of the Action ......................................................................................................... 65 5.1 Stressors ............................................................................................................................................ 66 5.2 Exposure ........................................................................................................................................... 66 5.3 Response ........................................................................................................................................... 84 6.0 Cumulative Effects............................................................................................................ 90 7.0 Jeopardy Analyses ............................................................................................................ 92 7.1 Shortnose Sturgeon ........................................................................................................................... 92 7.2 Atlantic Sturgeon Carolina DPS ....................................................................................................... 97 8.0 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 101 9.0 Incidental Take Statement............................................................................................... 102 9.1 Anticipated Amount of Incidental Take .......................................................................................... 102 9.2 Effect of the Take ............................................................................................................................ 103 9.3 Reasonable and Prudent Measures (RPMs) .................................................................................... 103 9.4 Terms and Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 104 10.0 Conservation Recommendations .................................................................................... 109 2 11.0 Reinitiation of Consultation ............................................................................................ 110 12.0 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................... 111 Appendix A Outcomes Document 3 List of Frequently Used Acronyms BMP Best Management Practice CFR Code of Federal Regulations DPS Distinct Population Segment ESA Endangered Species Act FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FPA Federal Power Act NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service RMT Resource Management Team RTE rare, threatened, endangered species SCDNR South Carolina Department of Natural Resources SCPSA South Carolina Public Service Authority USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service YOY young-of-the-year Units of Measurement °C Degrees Celsius °F Degrees Fahrenheit cm Centimeter(s) ft Feet ft2 Square feet in Inch(es) g Grams kg Kilograms lb Pound(s) mi Mile(s) mi2 Square mile(s) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 SCPSA Hydroelectric Project Area Figure 2.2 Dams and Hydroelectric Stations within the Action Area Figure 3.1 Carolina Unit 7 Figure 3.2 The North American Atlantic coast depicting 3 Shortnose Sturgeon Metapopulations Figure 3.3 The Carolina DPS, including the adjacent portion of the marine range Figure 5.1 The Fish Lift at the St. Stephen facility Located on the Re-Diversion Canal Figure 5.2 The Navigation Lock at the Pinopolis Dam between Cooper River and Lake Moultrie 4 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 ESA-Listed That May Occur In The Action Area and Assessed in this Consultation Table 3.2. Designated Critical Habitat In The Action Area and Assessed in this Consultation Table 3.3 Shortnose Sturgeon Populations and Their Estimated Abundances Table 3.4 Projected Temperature Increase in the Southeast Under Two Model Projections and Time Series Table 4.1 Summary of ESA Section 7 Consultations for Sturgeon Conducted in Santee River Basin 2002-2016 Table 4.2 Relevant Shortnose Sturgeon Research Permits Authorized for Research Activities Utilizing Wild Fish Under ESA Section 10 (a)(1)(A) permits Table 4.3 Relevant Atlantic sturgeon – Carolina DPS Research Permits Authorized for Research Activities Utilizing Wild Fish Under ESA Section 10 (a)(1)(A) Permits Table 9.1 Summary of Anticipated Annual Take Estimates 5 Introduction Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.), requires each federal agency to insure that any action that it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of any critical habitat of such species. To fulfill this obligation, Section 7(a)(2) requires federal agencies to consult with the appropriate Secretary on any action they propose that “may affect” listed species or designated critical habitat. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) share responsibilities for administering the ESA. Consultations on most listed marine species and their designated critical habitat are conducted between the action agency and NMFS. The consultation is concluded after NMFS concurs with an action agency that its action is not likely to adversely affect listed species or critical habitat or issues a Biological Opinion (“Opinion”) that identifies whether a proposed action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species, or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If jeopardy or destruction or adverse modification is found to be likely, the Opinion identifies reasonable and prudent alternatives (RPAs) to the action as proposed, if any, that can avoid jeopardizing listed species or resulting in the destruction/adverse modification of critical habitat. The Opinion states the amount or extent of incidental take of the listed species that may occur, specifies reasonable and prudent measures (RPMs) that are required to minimize the impacts of incidental take and monitoring to validate the expected effects of the action, and recommends conservation measures to further
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Santee National Wildlife Refuge Road 2125 Fort Watson Summerton, South Carolina 29148 803/ 478 2217 U.S
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rogers Road Santee National Taw Caw Refuge Creek Entrance Wildlife Refuge State Potato Migratory Creek Wildlife Drive Bird Information Sanctuary Kiosk Interpretive Guide 12 1 8 2 Woods Road 3 5 2 4 6 7 9 Cuddo West 1 11 Cuddo East North Loop 15 Black Bottom 3 Pond 10 Timber 14 Island Plantation Islands Field (proposed) 4 10 11 9 Wilderness Otter Trail Black 5 Area Bottom South Loop 13 12 8 Alligator Alley Hundred Acre Island Shuler's 6 7 Refuge boundary Round Auto tour route, interpretive markers 1-12 Island Foot access only Boundaries represented Bicycle and foot access only are approximate. Canoe trail, markers 1-15 Goat Cuddo and Area closed to all entry Island West November 1 until March 1 Santee National Wildlife Refuge Road 2125 Fort Watson Summerton, South Carolina 29148 803/ 478 2217 http://fws.gov/santee U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1 800/344 WILD September 2010 1. Santee National Wildlife Refuge 7. Bluebird boxes 10. Wildlife Drive - Otter Trail Starting at The Santee National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1941 Wooden boxes mounted on posts along the To continue down the Wildlife Drive, turn RIGHT at this as a migratory bird sanctuary. The refuge boasts nearly 300 edge of the road are nesting boxes for eastern intersection. the Cuddo bird species recorded on the refuge. Mammal species found bluebirds (Sialia sialis), which nest on the refuge Wildlife on the refuge include white-tailed deer, beaver, river along field and forest edge habitats. Bluebirds 11.
    [Show full text]
  • Santee-Cooper: a Lock on Fish Passage Success Steven Leach Normandeau Associates, [email protected]
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst International Conference on Engineering and International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage Ecohydrology for Fish Passage 2012 Jun 7th, 10:50 AM - 11:10 AM Session B7 - Santee-Cooper: A Lock on Fish Passage Success Steven Leach Normandeau Associates, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_conference Leach, Steven, "Session B7 - Santee-Cooper: A Lock on Fish Passage Success" (2012). International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage. 5. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_conference/2012/June7/5 This is brought to you for free and open access by the Fish Passage Community at UMass Amherst at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Santee-Cooper: A Lock on Fish Passage A brief review of upstream passage of American shad In the Santee Cooper System, South Carolina Steve Leach Normandeau Associates, Inc. [email protected] Objective: To briefly describe the Santee Cooper, South Carolina system and outline American shad passage in the system by navigation lock and fish lock Cooper R. Santee R. History of the Santee-Cooper System • Large-scale anthropogenic perturbations • Santee Canal : 1800 -1850, first summit canal in U.S. • Santee-Cooper Project – Santee River Diversion – online 1942. Santee Dam Jefferies Station / 3,400 ft. long spillway Pinopolis Dam,130 MW 8 mi. long earthen dam rm 48 rm 89 Cooper River Fish Passage • Striped bass can live out their life cycle in freshwater1 • Santee Cooper striped bass preferentially prey on blueback herring2 • Blueback herring use the Pinopolis Lock for upstream passage3 • Since 1957, the lock has been operated in season specifically for fish passage (more on that in a couple of minutes) • But……… 1Scruggs, G.D., Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • A Message from the Principal Chief David W. Hill
    A Message from the Principal Chief David W. Hill Hesci! As Principal Chief I am humbled and honored to establish the Mvskoke Reservation Protection Commission. This Commission is tasked to comprehensively undertake research, analysis and fact- finding to determine what actions and changes are necessary to develop new economic development, public safety, and social services policies that ensure a better future for tribal members and our neighbors as a result of the Supreme Court’s affirmation of our jurisdictional sovereignty over Mvskoke lands. The individuals on our Commission have been selected for their knowledge, education and experience in many specific areas that our historic victory concerns. As Muscogee (Creek) citizens, we are all heirs to a legacy of survival, perseverance and strength. Our ancestors dreamed that one day, we might find ourselves where we are right now. We have assembled the best and the brightest of us, from coast-to-coast all across the country to rise and meet this moment. No matter where you are if you are a citizen of this Nation, the Mvskoke Reservation is your home. And it’s up to each of us to protect it. The victory in the Supreme Court and the affirmation of our sovereignty was historic and will always be a day we fittingly celebrate. But, it’s the work we do now and moving forward that will ultimately stand the test of time and lead us to full victory. We have to work together to educate our neighbors that this decision is about clarity, not chaos. The opportunity in front of us to thrive is far greater than our Nation or the state of Oklahoma has ever seen.
    [Show full text]
  • CAROLINA SANDHILTS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Mct3ee, South
    0 CAROLINA SANDHILTS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Mct3ee, South. Carolina. s ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year 1.985 0 U . S . Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTE24 REVIEW AND APPROVALS CAROLINA SANDHILLS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 4 McBee, South Carolina ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year 1985 A ~~dZ0, 3-,5-~~ 'r /Ij, A . Refuge ManagerC'I,Date Refuge Supervisor Review Date z Regional Office Approval Date TABLE OF CONTENTS IN'7RODUCTION A. 1.I:cc ;i 9*, 1,'G1 r1':; 13 . C'T.l.Ml\`1'IC CONDIT.I ON :, I C. LAND ACQUISIT .10N 1 . Fee Title 2 2 . Easements Nothing to Report 3 . Other Nothing to Report D . PLANNING 1 . Master Plan Nothing to Report 2 . Management Plan 2 0 3 . Public Participation Nothing to Report 4 . Compliance with Environmental and Cultural Resource Mandates 3 5 . Research and Investigations 3 6 . Other Nothing to Report .E . ADMINISTRATION 1 . Personnel 4 2 . Youth Programs 5 3 . Other Manpower Programs Nothing to Report 4 . Volunteer Program 7 5 . Funding 7 6 . Safety 8 7 . Technical Assistance 9 8 . Other Nothing to Report F. HABITAT MANAGEMENT 1 . General 9 2 . Wetlands 9 3 . Forests 1 0 4 . Croplands 12 5 . Grasslands Nothing to Report 6 . Other Habitats Nothing to Report 7 . Grazing Nothing to Report 8 . Haying Nothing to Report 9 . Fire Management 13 10 . Pest Control 14 11 . Water Rights Nothing to Report 12 . Wilderness and Special Areas 15 13 . WPA Easement Monitoring Nothing to Report Pa e G. WILDL.1 Fl: 1 . Wildlife Diversity 0 .
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina the Portal of Native American Genocide in Southeast………….Still Haunts…The Southeastern Coastal State
    South Carolina the Portal of Native American Genocide in Southeast………….Still Haunts…the southeastern coastal state By Will Moreau Goins Ph.D. Charleston has been called "the most haunted city in North America". I would like to think that the Ghosts haunting Charleston are not only the many pirates, endentured servants, European colonists and enslaved Africans that historically passed through this port city, but I would like to believe that many of those spirits that linger in this monumental city and throughout this state are those of the many indigenous people that once called South Carolina their home. Maybe it would be nice to think of these Native spirits as still here, at the coastline, to welcome newcomers as they did hundreds of years ago and to remind residents that South Carolina is still Native American Indian sacred land. Or even just to tell their stories from their grave as they rattle their chains. Possibly they are here to tell their haunting story of the American Indian Holocaust that took place on this soil. I know that one of those Natives that are hauntingly reminding us of this, is that of the famed Seminole Chief, Osceola. Yes, Osceola’s decapitated body is interred here in South Carolina today. It was on December 1837 that Captain Pitcairn Morrison of the 4th U.S. Infantry transferred Osceola and 202 other Seminoles to Fort Moultrie in South Carolina, after his capture from their stance in the Florida everglades. The steamship Poinsett landed the Seminoles on Sullivan's Island on New Year's Day 1838.
    [Show full text]
  • 03050201-010 (Lake Moultrie)
    03050201-010 (Lake Moultrie) General Description Watershed 03050201-010 is located in Berkeley County and consists primarily of Lake Moultrie and its tributaries. The watershed occupies 87,730 acres of the Lower Coastal Plain region of South Carolina. The predominant soil types consist of an association of the Yauhannah-Yemassee-Rains- Lynchburg series. The erodibility of the soil (K) averages 0.17 and the slope of the terrain averages 1%, with a range of 0-2%. Land use/land cover in the watershed includes: 64.4% water, 21.1% forested land, 5.4% forested wetland, 4.1% urban land, 3.1% scrub/shrub land, 1.4% agricultural land, and 0.5% barren land. Lake Moultrie was created by diverting the Santee River (Lake Marion) through a 7.5 mile Diversion Canal filling a levee-sided basin and impounding it with the Pinopolis Dam. South Carolina Public Service Authority (Santee Cooper) oversees the operation of Lake Moultrie, which is used for power generation, recreation, and water supply. The 4.5 mile Tail Race Canal connects Lake Moultrie with the Cooper River near the Town of Moncks Corner, and the Rediversion Canal connects Lake Moultrie with the lower Santee River. Duck Pond Creek enters the lake on its western shore. The Tail Race Canal accepts the drainage of California Branch and the Old Santee Canal. There are a total of 43.8 stream miles and 57,535.3 acres of lake waters in this watershed, all classified FW. Additional natural resources in the watershed include the Dennis Wildlife Center near the Town of Bonneau, Sandy Beach Water Fowl Area along the northern lakeshore, the Santee National Wildlife Refuge covering the lower half of the lake, and the Old Santee Canal State Park near Monks Corner.
    [Show full text]
  • Muscogee Lodge 2018 Planbook
    MUSCOGEE LODGE 2018 PLANBOOK Table of Contents Letter from Lodge Chief 3 Letter from Scout Executive 4 Muscogee Lodge in Brief 5 Lodge Leadership 6-7 Chapter Information 8-12 Lodge Goals 13 Lodge Calendar 13 Lodge Budget 14-15 Lodge Rules 29-34 Lodge History 19-28 Lodge Events 16-18 2 Letter from the Lodge Chief “Friends, the ones who chose you need you. Who among you now is ready? Who will go upon this journey? You must choose.” Allowat Sakima urged us as we took the great Ordeal. I believe his great words ring true still today. 2017 was a landmark year for Muscogee. We had the opportunity to host Dixie for the first time in over a decade, we were represented well among Operation Arrow staff at the 2017 National Jamboree, and we celebrated our 75th year of giving service back to our units, our council, and our communities. As we enter into the new year let us strive to be the best we can be, do the best we can, in all the ways we can. Let us go above and beyond what is expected of us. Let us show everyone that we are Muscogee. This year our lodge has a chance to make our mark once again through Dixie and NOAC. I hope that all of us will work together and make these events successful. Over the past few years, the leadership quality of the lodge has decreased from the quality of those in the past. The showing of arrowman for lodge events and participation for Ordeals could be a lot better.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Models, Landscapes, and Large Dams: an Ethnographic And
    CULTURAL MODELS, LANDSCAPES, AND LARGE DAMS: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY OF THE SANTEE COOPER PROJECT, 1938-1942 by ELIZABETH MARIE HARVEY LOVERN (Under the Direction of J. Peter Brosius) ABSTRACT This work systematically explores the discourse of the human and environmental impact of the Santee Cooper hydroelectric system developed in the South Carolina coastal plain. This federal New Deal government project occurred during 1938-1942 and inundated over 160,000 acres of wetlands and climax forest, displacing many long-time residents, their homes, farms, and communities, with dammed lakes and hydroelectric facilities. A major question addressed by this research is, “How do people perceive large-scale environmental change?” In a text analysis of primary documents, I analyze the discourse strategies the promoters of the development and those protesting it employed to support their assertions about the Santee basin landscape. I then introduce a broader cultural model framework in the form of an oral history ethnography to show how citizens in Berkeley County remember and currently interpret the changes wrought on the local landscape and in their lives. Shared by each of the cultural models through analysis are the themes of progress and destruction attributed to the development of the project. INDEX WORDS: Cultural Models, Landscape Anthropology, Environmental History, Memory, Political Ecology, South Carolina Coastal Plain CULTURAL MODELS, LANDSCAPES, AND LARGE DAMS: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY OF THE SANTEE COOPER PROJECT, 1938-1942 by ELIZABETH MARIE HARVEY LOVERN B.S., Georgetown University, 1996 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ATHENS, GEORGIA 2007 © 2007 Elizabeth Marie Harvey Lovern All Rights Reserved CULTURAL MODELS, LANDSCAPES, AND LARGE DAMS: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY OF THE SANTEE COOPER PROJECT, 1938-1942 by ELIZABETH MARIE HARVEY LOVERN Major Professor: J.
    [Show full text]
  • Santee Cooper Cross Generating Station Modeling Report
    AIR MODELING REPORT Santee Cooper > Cross Generating Station 1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS Compliance Demonstration Modeling Prepared By: J. Russell Bailey – Principal Consultant Jon Hill – Managing Consultant Allison Cole – Consultant Andrew Kessler – Consultant TRINITY CONSULTANTS 15 E. Salem Ave. Suite 201 Roanoke VA 24011 540‐342‐5945 January 2017 Project 164701.0045 Environmental solutions delivered uncommonly well TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1-1 1.1. Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.2. Facility Description ............................................................................................................................................... 1‐2 1.3. Location .................................................................................................................................................................... 1‐2 1.4. Nearby Facilities .................................................................................................................................................... 1‐3 2. MODEL SELECTION 2-1 3. MODELING DOMAIN 3-1 3.1. Sources to Include ................................................................................................................................................. 3‐1 Primary Sources .......................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • From Rice Fields to Duck Marshes: Sport Hunters and Environmental Change on the South Carolina Coast, 1890–1950 Matthew Allen Lockhart University of South Carolina
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2017 From Rice Fields to Duck Marshes: Sport Hunters and Environmental Change on the South Carolina Coast, 1890–1950 Matthew Allen Lockhart University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Lockhart, M. A.(2017). From Rice Fields to Duck Marshes: Sport Hunters and Environmental Change on the South Carolina Coast, 1890–1950. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/4161 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FROM RICE FIELDS TO DUCK MARSHES: SPORT HUNTERS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE ON THE SOUTH CAROLINA COAST, 1890–1950 by Matthew Allen Lockhart Bachelor of Arts Wofford College, 1998 Master of Arts University of South Carolina, 2001 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina 2017 Accepted by: Robert R. Weyeneth, Major Professor Janet G. Hudson, Committee Member Kendrick A. Clements, Committee Member Daniel J. Vivian, Committee Member Cheryl L. Addy, Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School © Copyright by Matthew Allen Lockhart, 2017 All Rights Reserved. ii DEDICATION In memory of my brother Marc D. Lockhart, who began this journey with me iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I want acknowledge with gratitude my splendid dissertation committee. Getting to this point would not have been possible without my director, Robert R.
    [Show full text]
  • RETENTION TIME and FLOW PATTERNS in LAKE MARION, SOUTH CAROLINA, 1984 by Glenn G
    RETENTION TIME AND FLOW PATTERNS IN LAKE MARION, SOUTH CAROLINA, 1984 By Glenn G. Patterson and Richard M. Harvey U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4145 Prepared in cooperation with the SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL Columbia, South Carolina 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey District Chief Earth Science Information Center U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports Section Stephenson Center- Suite 129 Box 25286, Mail Stop 517 720 Gracern Road Denver Federal Center Columbia, SC 29210-7651 Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Page Abstract....................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and scope........................................................................................................... 2 Description of study area................................................................................................ 2 Methods of study...................................................................................................................... 5 Retention time and flow patterns..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Hotel Santee
    MARKET STUDY Proposed Hotel Santee RIVERVIEW PARKWAY SANTEE, CALIFORNIA SUBMITTED TO:PROPOSED PREPARED BY: Ms. Pamela White HVS Consulting & Valuation City of Santee Division of TS Worldwide, LLC 10601 Magnolia Avenue 100 Bush Street, Suite 1625 Santee, California 92071 San Francisco, California 94104 +1 (619) 258-4100 ext. 223 +1 (415) 896-0868 July‐2018 September 10, 2018 Ms. Pamela White City of Santee 10601 Magnolia Avenue Santee, California 92071 HVS SAN FRANCISCO Re: Hotel Market Analysis 100 Bush Street, Suite 1625 San Francisco, California, 94104 Santee, California +1 (415) 896‐0868 HVS Reference: 2017021673 +1 (415) 896‐0516 FAX www.hvs.com Dear Ms. White: Pursuant to your request, please find attached our study of the Santee, California, hotel market. Our investigation reveals that the market has the potential to support new hotel development. This engagement addresses market demand for new hotel development; no analysis of financial feasibility has been undertaken. We hereby certify that we have no undisclosed interest in the property, and our employment and compensation are not contingent upon our findings. This study is subject to the comments made throughout this report and to all assumptions and limiting conditions set forth herein. Sincerely, TS Worldwide, LLC Suzanne R. Mellen, MAI, CRE, FRICS, ISHC, Senior Managing Director - Practice Leader [email protected], +1 (415) 268-0351 McKenna K. Luke, MAI Director [email protected], +1 (303) 704-2636 Superior results through unrivaled hospitality intelligence. Everywhere. Table of Contents SECTION TITLE PAGE 1. Executive Summary 4 2. Market Area Analysis 9 3. Hotel Supply and Demand Analysis 31 4.
    [Show full text]