Attachment D <br />Eugene Planning Commission <br />October 8, 2015 <br />Page 2 <br />2. Attachment 43c - A marked-up copy of the applicant's diagram ZC-4. This copy here <br />has hand-drawn markings applied by the appellant. This marked-up diagram, presented here as <br />Attachment 43c, is not on the record. It is new evidence. It is not allowed in this appeal. <br />3. Appeal Statement, Page 1, para 3: the accompanying sheet ZC-4... " is referring to <br />Attachment 43c. As Attachment 43c is a marked-up copy of sheet ZC-4 and, because it is <br />marked-up, is new evidence, then any narrative discussing sheet ZC-4 is also new evidence and <br />is not allowed in this appeal. <br />4. Appeal Issue 1. There are two references to ZC-4 and one reference to Attachment 43c, <br />which is a marked-up copy of ZC-4. As noted above, this copy of ZC-4 is new evidence. These <br />three references, therefore, are new evidence and are not allowed. <br />5. Appeal Issue 1. The middle section of this issue narrative, beginning on line seven, is a <br />detailed explanation of how to use Attachment 43c. As Attachment 43c is new evidence, so is <br />this detailed explanation. Specifically, the statement is: <br />"As shown on Attachment #3C this can be done by placing Point A of the overlay <br />(Attachment #3A) at Point C of the Metro Plan (Attachment #313) and making <br />Line A-B parallel to the green finger (having the little trapezoid of City up against <br />the east side of the finger). This proper overlay can be seen in LHVC Sheet <br />912115-01 (Attachment #2) which was included in the LHVC Post Hearing <br />submission." <br />This is new evidence and is not allowed. <br />6. Appeal Issue 1. The last sentence of this issue narrative refers to Attachment 41. As <br />Attachment 41 is new evidence, so is this sentence. Specifically, the statement is: <br />"That this is the proper location of the Eugene City Limits relative to the Spring <br />Blvd "finger" can be verified by examining area maps such as the Eugene Zoning <br />Map (Attachment #1)" <br />This is new evidence and is not allowed. <br />7. Appeal Issue 4. The statement "City of Eugene staff has estimated that there appears to <br />be approximately 42 acres of PRO designated land on the subject property" does not appear in <br />the record. It is, therefore, new evidence and is not allowed. <br />8. Appeal Issue 4. The statement "This acreage of steep slopes and unstable soil contains <br />the headwaters of a federally protected creek and wildlife corridor to the Willamette River" is <br />not in the written record. It is therefore new evidence and is not allowed. <br />PC Agenda - Page 19 <br />