On remand, the issue is to properly determine the location of the boundary between the <br />LDR and POS designation on the Metro Plan. <br />DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE HEARINGS OFFICIAL <br />I have considered all of the documents in the planning file for the proposed zone change. (Z <br />15-5) as well as the testimony and documents provided at the public hearing and the evidence <br />submitted during the open record period. <br />ANALYSIS <br />To use LUBA's terminology, resolution of the issue in question involves generating an <br />"enlarged Metro Plan Dia=ram" (Metro Plan Diagram) and a -'survey map." The swveN map is <br />then placed on top of the Yletro Plan Diagram to create an "overlaid diagram." As LUBA <br />explained, the surveyed features on the survey map do not match up precisely with the Men, Plan <br />Diagram. Therefore, I had to ehouse behveen competing overlaid diagrams. In the original <br />decision, I agreed with the applicant that Exhibit L was the most accurate overlaid diagram. <br />One of the reasons LUBA remanded the decision was because I did not consider one of <br />Laurel Hill Valley Citizens' (LHVC) overlaid diagrams - LHVC Sheet 9/3/15-0-} (LHVC <br />Diagram). LUBA remanded the decision in order that the LHVC Diagram he considered. I actually <br />did consider the LHVC Diagram in the original decision, although l certainly understand \%hv <br />LUBA thought l did not. Originally. I chose Exhibit L (applicant's Diagram) over the applicant's <br />overlaid diagram with its position on the north arrow problem (Exhibit G) and LH 'C's Diagram.' <br />LUBA also remanded the decision for failing to properly consider the multiple referent <br />approach of LHVC's Diagram versus the single referent approach of the applicant's Diagram. <br />The Applicants Diagram uses one referent - East 30"' Avenue adjacent to the property - to align <br />the surveN' map over the Metro Plan Diagram to produce the applicant's preferred overlaid <br />dia---rare. LHVC argued that additional referents should be used to create a more accurate overlaid <br />diagram. In particular. LHVC argues that the western curve of East =0 Avenue northwest of the <br />applicant's East _0`h Avenue referent and the city limits line on the boundary of Spring Boulevard <br />and the green finger should be used.' LUBA stated: <br />LUBA agreed with my disposition of the north arrow problem, so I will not discuss that aspect further. <br />As LUBA explained. the green finger is "a thin rectangle or land designated POS depicted an the cnlat-,ed btetro <br />Plan diagram. which is located north of the intersection of East =0" Avenue and Spring Boulcsard, and which is <br />oriented in a north-south direction. ~fe understand that the green finger. on the ground. is a public trail or pathway <br />that runs north and south The significance of the green tinker is tied to the significance ofthe cna limits line. hecause <br />Hearings Official Decision (Z 15-5 Remand) Page 6 <br />