is still good law, it is appropriate to seek additional information in the Laurel Hill Plan for <br />clarification or "refinement" of the proportion and delineation of the Parks and Open Space <br />designation. This approach seems consistent with the direction given in the Metro Plan: <br />The Metro Plan is the basic guiding land-use policy document, but is not the only <br />such document. As indicated in the purpose section, above, the Metro Plan is a <br />framework plan, and it is import that it be supplemented by more detailed <br />refinement plans, programs, and policies. Section 1-5. <br />"Land use designations shown in the Metro Plan Diagram are depicted at a <br />metropolitan. scale. Used with the text and local plans and policies they provide <br />direction for decisions pertaining to appropriate reuse * * <br />As all parties note, the Laurel Hill Plan contains a land use diagram. The diagram shows three <br />land use designations: low density residential, medium density residential, and commercial. <br />There is no Parks and Open Space designation on the Laurel Hill land use diagram. As such, the <br />Laurel Hill Plan is uninformative, and there is no additional information by which the Metro Plan <br />Diagram can be refined. <br />Here, the Hearings Official agrees with staff and Mr. Malone, that if the applicant's position <br />were accepted, the fact that the Laurel Hill land use diagram shows the subject property to be <br />low density residential represents a contradiction of, or conflict with, the Metro Plan text and <br />Metro Plan Diagram. It represents a conflict because the refinement coming from the Laurel <br />Hill plan would completely eliminate the Parks and Open Space designation for part of the <br />subject property that the text and mapping of the Metro Plan strongly suggest that the City <br />Council intended to implement. Staff and the opponents are correct that in cases of a conflict <br />between a refinement plan and the Metro Plan, the Metro Plan prevails. The Metro Plan text <br />is clear on this point. <br />Refinements to the Metro Plan can include * * * (c) neighborhood plans or <br />special area studies that address those issues that are unique to a specific <br />geographical area. In all cases, the Metro Plan is the guiding document, and <br />refinement plans and policies must be consistent with the Metro Plan. Should <br />inconsistencies occur, the Metro Plan is the prevailing policy document. 1-6. <br />Instead of relying on the Metro Plan direction for resolving such conflicts, the applicant wishes <br />to substitute the holding in Knutson to resolve an implied ambiguity in the Metro Plan Diagram. <br />On this issue, the Hearings Official finds that the applicant's contrary theory and application of <br />Knutson is unpersuasive for at least three reasons. <br />First, while the 2004 amendments to the Metro Plan did add provisions regarding parcel <br />specific mapping in the Metro Plan Diagram, those amendments did not state that in all other <br />instances reference to a refinement plan would automatically be required to establish the <br />correct plan designation for specific properties. There is no such language in Section 11 G. <br />Hearings Official Decision Z 12-2, PDT 12-2, TIA.12-6, SDR 12-5 10 <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 1030 <br />