"Accordingly, we agree with LHVC, at least in the abstract. that a frill lti-referent, multi- <br />axis approach is likely to produce a more accurate and reliable result than a single-referent. <br />single-axis approach. In our view, if multiple referents are available, a reasonable decision <br />maker would at least consider the -tit' provided by multiple referents, and would not limit <br />consideration to the tit provided by a single-referent, single-axis approach." Laarel Hill <br />Valley Citeens, Slip Op 30. <br />In the original decision. I did not consider the city limits as shown on the LHVC Diagram <br />because the city limits are not depicted on the Metro Plan Diagram. LUBA stated: <br />"On the merits, we agree with LHVC that the hearings official erred in declining to consider <br />evidence retarding the matchup between the surveyed cite limits line and Spring <br />Boulevard and the green finger. While the city limits line is not depicted on the enlarged <br />Metro Plan diagram. neither is the centerline of East 30th Avenue on which Fnviron-Metal <br />exclusively relies. Both the city limits and center line are surveyed, and there is no dispute <br />that the depiction of their location and relationship on the survey map is accurate. Both <br />the centerline and the city limit line bear close physical relationships to features depicted <br />on the 3004 Metro Plan diagam: the survey map centerline to the enlarged Metro Plan <br />diagram black line depicting East 30`h Avenue. and the survey map city limits line to the <br />boundaries of Spring Boulevard and the green finger. If there is some reason to regard the <br />centerline matchup as a reliable referent. while regarding the city limits line matchup as an <br />unreliable referent. neither the hearings official nor Environ-Metal identify it. Like the <br />western curve of East 30`h Avenue, the city limits line is positioned at various angles to the <br />portion of East ,0`h Avenue that Environ-Metal relies upon as its sole referent, and thus the <br />city limits line matchup acts as an additional referent to check the accuracy of Environ- <br />Metal's preferred location of the match benveen the survey map and the enlarged Metro <br />Plan diagram." Laurel Hill 6alle Citizens, Slip C)p 37-33. <br />Therefore, on remand I must consider LHVC's Diagram and consider the additional <br />referents of the East 30`h Avenue curve and the city limits depicted on LHVC's Diagram. <br />On remand. the record was reopened to allow additional evidence to be presented on the <br />proper location of the boundary between LDR and POS designations.a The applicant submitted <br />four additional oversized overlaid diagrams (ZC-4A, ZC-4B. ZC-4C. & ZC-41)). The four overlaid <br />diagrams attempt to respond to LUBA's directions by creating overlaid diagrams based on multiple <br />referents. Each of the four maps take a surveyed location for one referent and overlays the survey <br />map on the Metro Plan diagram to create an overlaid diagram. The overlaid diagram then also <br />according to LHVC a portion of the cit}, limits line runs down the eastern boundary of the 11curl finger." Lama/ Hill <br />la(/er Citizen. Slip C )p at '7-18 n 7. - <br />' A number of opponents testified against the application an the grounds of traffic. wildlife. climate change, and the <br />need for additional ripen space. As explained by city staff and the Hearings Official. such ar_euments are beyond the <br />scope of this remand and will not be cnnstdered. <br />Hearings Official Decision (Z 15-5 Remand) Page 7 <br />