My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
LHVC Response 9-9-15 (Schlieder)
>
OnTrack
>
Z
>
2015
>
Z 15-5
>
LHVC Response 9-9-15 (Schlieder)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/11/2015 4:00:58 PM
Creation date
9/10/2015 12:34:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
Z
File Year
15
File Sequence Number
5
Application Name
LAUREL RIDGE
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
9/9/2015
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
Mr. Fred Wilson <br />September 9, 2015 <br />Page 2 <br />After all the testimony that was already in the record, and given the applicant's own <br />evidence in the form of the 4 different versions of the Metro Plan Diagram (1980, 1987, <br />2004, and 2010), we do KNOW what the problem is. But the applicant wants us to <br />believe that because they can't figure it out, nobody can. <br />The Metro plan itself states (see also online pages 477 and 478 of the Applicant's 9/2 <br />submission) that questions regarding the Metro Plan should be directed to either the <br />City of Eugene, City of Springfield, Lane County, or LCOG. Questions regarding the <br />diagram itself and its periodic updates should be directed to LCOG. <br />When LHVC first noted the discrepancy regarding the north arrows, WE DID EXACTLY <br />THAT!. We contacted LCOG and found out what the problem is. And we submitted this <br />as testimony, we explained it at the hearing: The latest version of the ESRI software <br />does not auto-rotate the North Arrow to True North anymore. LCOG has not <br />implemented the manual work-around for that issue except on the "Unofficial MetroPlan <br />Diagram" submitted by LHVC as part of the first round of evidence. <br />Rather than go through two-and-a-half pages of inconsequential speculation, the <br />applicant's consultant could have called the authors of the Metro Plan Diagram and <br />found out what LHVC determined months ago. Mystery solved. <br />The applicant submits 4 versions of the Metro Plan Diagram (1980, 1987, 2004 and <br />2010). Even cursory review of these four versions shows that the entire diagram is <br />rotated to place North at the top of the page on the 1980 and 1987 versions, where <br />essentially N-S roads run straight up-down and E-W roads run straight left-to-right on <br />the page. On the 2004 and 2010 version the entire diagram is rotated to the State <br />Plane Coordinate System (2° clockwise), and N-S roads do not run straight up and <br />down on the page. The official 2004 Metro Plan Diagram has the N arrow rotated to <br />match the diagram. THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. <br />Are a Fuzzier Diagram and Even Fewer "Referents" Really Better? <br />Despite their previous protestations to the contrary, the Applicant now admits that they <br />did not use the scanned 2004 diagram in their application. They used the digital <br />version. Besides their admission, this can now be proven, because in their never- <br />ending quest for authenticity, they have now actually scanned the printed (copied) <br />version and are proposing to use it. <br />Once again, the applicant's land use consultant is making a huge issue out of nothing. <br />The small print in the right lower corner of the ADOPTED 2004 METRO PLAN <br />DIAGRAM states in the first sentence: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.