I Petitioner does not identify any errors in the method the city used to <br />2 develop the BLI maps. More importantly, petitioner does not identify any land <br />3 included on the BLI that petitioner believes is not designated residential by the <br />4 Metro Plan Diagram. To the extent petitioner challenges the Metro Plan <br />5 Diagram as failing to comply with the statutes that require the city to adopt a <br />6 BLI and maps, or with statutes that require development applications to be <br />7 subject only to "clear and objective standards," i.e., ORS 197.307(4), the <br />8 challenged decision does not amend the Metro Plan Diagram, and challenges to <br />9 the Metro Plan Diagram are not within our scope of review. Accordingly, <br />10 petitioner's arguments provide no basis for reversal or remand of the decision. <br />11 The third assignment of error is denied. <br />12 FIFTH ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR <br />13 Petitioner's fifth assignment of error is: <br />14 "The city lacks a local process to afford applicants relief under the <br />15 Needed Housing Statute and Goal 10 Rule when local regulations <br />16 conflict with the state law. This failure violates the state <br />17 prohibition against procedures that cause `unreasonable cost and <br />18 delay' and is otherwise contrary to law. ORS 197.307(4); OAR <br />19 660-008-0015(1); ORS 197.835(9)(a)(D)." Petition for Review 48. <br />[D]iagram's residential designations (the BLI). In addition, <br />acknowledgement of the Eugene-only BLI will allow the City to <br />take the next steps in the Envision Eugene process, which will <br />include numerous actions to address the issues raised by <br />petitioner." Response Brief 72 (footnote omitted). <br />According to the city, those actions include updating the Metro Plan <br />Diagram to make it parcel-specific and adopting that Eugene-only diagram into <br />the ECP. <br />Page 18 <br />