Sean T. Malone <br />Attorney at Law <br />259 E. Fifth Ave., <br />Suite 200-G <br />Eugene, OR 97401 <br />Tel. (303) 859-0403 <br />Fax (650) 471-7366 <br />seanmalone8@hotmail.com <br />October 5, 2016 <br />Via Hand Delivery <br />Eugene Hearings Official <br />Harris Hall - Lane County Public Service Building <br />125 East 8th Avenue <br />Eugene OR 97401 <br />Re: Testimony re remand in LUBA No. 2015-092 and -091 <br />On behalf of Laurel Hill Valley Citizens (LHVC), please accept this response <br />testimony. The September 28, 2016, letter submitted by Schirmer Satre, the applicant's <br />consultant (the applicant), alleges that "no two sets of referents can be utilized to <br />accurately locate the subject property on the Metro Plan Diagram." As LHVC has noted, <br />the goal here is to use multiple referents to be accurate, not to create perfection. <br />To the extent that the applicant argues that because perfection cannot be obtained, <br />then the most inaccurate map can be used, that argument must be rejected. The applicant <br />alleges that "additional referents have been considered, and that having more referents <br />did not provide more accuracy." The applicant appears to be looking for perfection <br />instead of an accurate depiction that utilizes all referents. Harmonizing all referents will <br />lead to a more accurate depiction than using a single referent that would result in a more <br />skewed depiction. Going back to the original appeal in this matter, LUBA indicated that <br />the parties "will have to do the best they can with the tools at their disposal." Environ- <br />metal Properties, LLC v. City of Eugene, Or LUBA (LUBA No. 2013-098, January <br />29, 2014), slip op at 21. The applicant appears to argue that because the map cannot <br />perfectly fit with every referent, then the applicant is somehow justified in using only a <br />single referent, regardless of the distortion. This argument is unavailing on its face. <br />The applicant spends much time critiquing LHVC 9/2/15-05, but there is no basis <br />to conclude that the applicant's methodology is sound. The methodology is made up of <br />numerous steps and measurements. These steps and measurements are subjective, <br />especially when "align[ing] the boundary. Where, for example, the applicant proposes to <br />