1 lines or features depicted on the survey map that are located some distance <br />2 from the property with lines or features shown on the enlarged Metro Plan <br />3 diagram that are also located some distance from the property. Because <br />4 surveyed lines, such as the property boundaries, the UGB line, the East 30`h <br />5 Avenue centerline, and the city limits line, have a determinable spatial <br />6 relationship with each other, if those surveyed lines are overlaid and matched <br />7 with available referents depicted on the enlarged Metro Plan diagram, one can <br />8 then determine how much of the subject property is subject to the POS <br />9 designation. <br />10 Environ-Metal argues that matching up with a portion of only one <br />11 referent, the portion of the black line on the enlarged Metro Plan diagram <br />12 representing East 30th Avenue that is closest to the subject property, is a <br />13 sufficient basis to determine with reasonable accuracy how much of the subject <br />14 property is subject to the POS designation. If that portion of East 30th Avenue <br />15 were the only available referent, we would likely agree. However, as LHVC <br />16 argues, the portion of East 30th Avenue closest to the subject property is mostly <br />17 a straight line running along a northwest-southeast axis. If the surveyed <br />18 centerline is matched only to this straight portion of East 30th Avenue, and not <br />been surveyed or established. However, on appeal no party attaches any <br />significance to whether and how well the surveyed property/UGB lines on the <br />maps offered by Environ-Metal and LHVC match up with the black rectangular <br />blobs that represent the UGB line on the 2004 Metro Plan diagram, and we <br />consider that question no further. <br />Page 29 <br />