would not be focused on the relevant limitation on the development of the land, i.e., the existing <br />site review plans. Accordingly, the City correctly focused its analysis on the modifications of <br />the 1988 Plans, not the previous use of the Property. <br />The substance of the appellants' arguments in the appeal statements are the same <br />as those they made in past comments, which were considered and rejected by the Director in the <br />Decision. Because the appellants fail to engage in the correct comparison of the 1988 Plans and <br />two modifications, there is little relevant material to respond to. Accordingly, WinCo directs the <br />hearing official to the in-depth analysis of the lack of significant impact in its August 3, 2020, <br />letter, sections 9 and 10 (Exhibit 7, at 15-21) and the Director's analysis in the Decision (pp. 11- <br />13).) <br />In short, it is clear that the reconfiguration of the loading dock is not only an <br />insignificant change to the physical appearance, use, and impact of the Property, but will benefit <br />the public, especially appellant LSL. Under the proposed modification, the loading docks will be <br />moved further south into the existing building footprint, further from the public right-of-way and <br />the LSL apartments across the street. The reconfiguration will allow WinCo to better screen the <br />loading activities, and reduce the sound therefrom, by the construction of a block wall and roof <br />over the docks. The reconfiguration also includes new landscaping. The lack of significant <br />change and benefit to LSL is obvious from a comparison of the current and future appearance of <br />the loading area: <br />Page 24 - WinCo Foods, LLC's Response to Appellants' Statements of Alleged Errors <br />MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW 4816-6071-2143.6 <br />TELEPHONE: 503.224.5858 <br />3400 U.S. BANCORP TOR'ER <br />I11 S.W FIFTH AVENUE <br />P ORTLAND. OREGON 97204 <br />