Exhibit 4 <br />AM <br />• Attorney's Office <br />Date: October 23, 2015 <br />To: Planning Commission <br />From: Anne C. Davies <br />Memorandum <br />Subject: Planning Commission Deliberations-Laurel Ridge Zone Change (Z 15-5) <br />This memorandum is intended to assist the Planning Commission with its deliberations <br />on the appeal of the Laurel Ridge zone change this coming Monday, October 26, 2015. During <br />deliberations on Tuesday evening, it became apparent that appellants' first assignment of error is <br />the pivotal issue in this case. Appellants' first assignment alleges that the Hearings Official erred <br />in not taking into consideration the city limits line. <br />The issue presented to the Commission, and the issue that the Commission was already <br />grappling with on Tuesday, was whether the Commission is legally permitted to use referents or <br />other sources outside the Metro Plan Diagram itself, in locating the subject property on the Metro <br />Plan Diagram and, thus, determining the location of the split between Parks and Open Space and <br />Low Density Residential designations. The Hearings Official concluded that he could not use <br />the city limits line to assist in his decision. HO Decision at 6; PC Record at 44: <br />"In fact, if the question were where the boundary is most likely located using any <br />available information, I would likely agree with LHVC. In determining the <br />boundary, however, we are all bound by the 2004 Metro Plan diagram. As staff's <br />September 2, 2015 memorandum explains, LHVC used maps generated by LCOG <br />from a digital version that is different from the 2004 Metro Plan. Even though <br />that digitized version is likely more accurate than the 2004 Metro Plan, even <br />LCOG acknowledges that only the 2004 Metro Plan is the official version of the <br />diagram. Furthermore, city limits and tax lots are not depicted on the 2004 Metro <br />Plan diagram. So even though LHVC's maps may be theoretically more accurate, <br />they are not more accurate for determining the boundary by using the 2004 Metro <br />Plan diagram."' <br />The applicant has also taken that position. <br />i The parties and Hearings Official recognize that LUBA misunderstood the status of the Metro Plan Diagram, i.e., <br />the City does not have an adopted digitized map. The 2004 Metro Plan Diagram was "derived" from a digital <br />database; however, the hard copy of the 11 x 17 map was the only diagram that was officially adopted. <br />City o Fuyeiie • 175 F. Sth Ave.. . FL.iyerie. OR 97,101 • 541 6~7 S'}47 • 541-6852-5414 Fax. <br />~ti+ti^d^:r.e rJ~ ne nr.gav <br />100183489;1 } PC Agenda - Page 3 <br />Exhibit 4 <br />