Mr. Fred Wilson <br />September 16, 2015 <br />Page 7 <br />In order to reduce the plan boundary line to a metes and bounds one must start with a <br />metes and bounds survey of the subject property. The applicant has submitted a metes <br />and bounds survey of the subject property. It is the only such survey in the record. <br />No party has taken issue with its accuracy. <br />(3) The survey of the property includes the centerline of the 30th Ave. ROW adjacent <br />to the west. <br />301h Avenue is the most proximate referent on the Metro Plan Diagram, being <br />adjacent to the property's west boundary. Its centerline is known with respect to the <br />subject property. <br />(4) Per the text of the plan, the Metro Plan Diagram as a whole is generalized. <br />As the text of the Metro Plan explains, at page 1-5: <br />"The Metro Plan Diagram is a generalized map which is intended to graphically <br />reflect the broad goals, objectives, and policies." <br />See also Metro Plan at II-G-1 para 1. <br />(5) Per the text of the plan, the Metro Plan Diagram is not Tax Lot specific at this <br />location. <br />New text added to the Metro Plan in 2004 explained in what circumstances the Metro <br />Plan Diagram is parcel-specific after the Housekeeping Amendments. We submitted <br />the legislative version of the 2004 amendments as Exhibit R to verify changes, which <br />appear at Exhibit R page 58. The language appears on page II-G-2: <br />"The Plan designation of parcels in the Metro Plan Diagram is parcel-specific <br />in the following cases: <br />1. Parcels shown on the Metro Plan Diagram with a clearly identified Plan <br />designation, i.e., parcels that do not border more than one Plan <br />designation; <br />2. Lands outside the UGB within the Metro Plan boundary; <br />3. Parcels with parcel-specific designations adopted through the citizen- <br />initiated Plan amendment process; <br />4. Parcels shown on a parcel-specific refinement plan map that has been <br />adopted as an amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram." <br />The subject property does not meet this definition. It has a plan boundary line <br />running through it. Therefore, it is not tax lot specific at this location. <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 54 <br />