1 boundary of Spring Boulevard and the "green finger" shown on enlarged Metro <br />2 Plan diagram.9 We turn to those arguments. <br />3 2. The Western Curve of East 30th Avenue <br />4 As explained above, Environ-Metal's overlaid diagram Exhibit G <br />5 matched the East 30th Avenue centerline from the survey map with the black <br />6 line on the enlarged Metro Plan diagram depicting East 30th Avenue where the <br />7 latter is closest to the subject property, but the two lines depicting East 30th <br />8 Avenue from the survey map and enlarged Metro diagram diverge in the <br />9 western curve of East 30th Avenue. The same divergence is seen on overlaid <br />10 diagram Exhibit L, the map ultimately adopted by the hearing official. <br />11 Schlieder argued to the hearings official that this divergence is evidence that <br />12 the overlaid survey lines had been slid too far to the northwest, thus creating <br />13 the divergence <br />14 The hearings official rejected that argument: <br />15 "LHVC also takes issue with how the applicant aligned East 30th <br />16 Avenue with the subject property. According to LHVC, aligning <br />17 the location of East 30th Avenue on the map of the property with <br />18 East 30th Avenue on the 2004 Metro Plan diagram results in the <br />19 two depictions of East 30th Avenue diverging from each other, <br />20 particularly the farther you get from the property. LHVC <br />21 attempted to align East 30`h Avenue differently to show more POS <br />22 plan designation for the property. The 2004 Metro Plan diagram is <br />9 To the extent LHVC argues about other potential referents, those <br />arguments are not sufficiently developed for review. <br />Page 31 <br />