Outrage has radiated from neighborhood e-mail lists since the city staff announced last week a plan to examine over the next nine months every facet of how development proposals are vetted, with an eye toward streamlining.

Developers say the process is deeply flawed, if not broken.

The myriad departments that review a project often send mixed messages, and there's a general lack of drive in City Hall to review projects in a timely fashion, they contend. Developers have gotten some support from Mayor Bill Bell, City Council member Eugene Brown and others who have pushed the staff hard in recent months to come up with a reform plan.

But citizens groups contend that the process is laborious for good reason: Land that can be developed is becoming scarce in Durham, so a rigorous review to prevent bad projects is essential.

They're worried that developers now have the ear of city leaders.

"This is a very sneaky attempt to undermine the neighborhoods by going around the neighborhoods and getting everyone on council lined up before opening up the plans, " said John Schelp, president of the Old West Durham Neighborhood Association.

City officials laid out a timetable for examining different elements of the plan in each of the next nine months -- rezonings in June, site-plan reviews in September and so on.

Members of the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce and other development leaders have been at the table with city staff members as they've formulated the reform plan. Schelp said residents have not been granted such access.

The process laid out last week would be the first broad examination of development procedures since 2005, when the city and county adopted a comprehensive land-use plan and a related set of zoning laws known as the Unified Development Ordinance.

Developers must get permission to rezone their property if a proposed project doesn't jibe with existing law.

Don Moffitt, a planning commission member, questions whether that should even be an option.

The comprehensive plan, produced after three years of community discussion, lays out how Durham County should and should not grow in certain areas. Moffitt said he thinks it should be reviewed every three years and changed if needed. Outside of that, he said, developers should submit only plans that conform with zoning laws.

"I am deeply disturbed by the process today, never mind the changes they want to make to it, because it treats the comprehensive plan as nothing more than an impediment to rezoning," Moffitt said.

"We're down to the most valuable property in Durham County, and we should be treating it that way."

Developers argue that clogging a development proposal at City Hall helps no one -- including those worried about incompatible growth.

"We're not asking for a reduction in requirements or for city staff not to pay attention to things," said George Stanziale, co-founder of a design and engineering firm with an office in Durham.

"The process needs predictability. [Developers] want to know how much time and how much cost is going to be involved, and they want to be able to count on that."

Too often, Stanziale and others say, city staff members don't follow the letter of the law when reviewing projects. They'll ask for items, such as construction of sidewalks on property the developer doesn't own, that aren't required by ordinance. That contributes to a bad reputation among developers, which could scare away good development while not necessarily preventing bad, Stanziale said.

"If we submit a plan that meets each of the requirements, then theoretically we should be able to go through a single review," he said.

Schelp said residents don't want unnecessary delays either, and he points out that his neighborhood has supported high-density developments in its midst.

But citizen review and comment, he said, should not be treated as an afterthought.

Schelp and many others were irked by a proposal last week to curb the ability of the City-County Planning Commission, a citizen advisory board, to delay decisions on proposed projects.

Residents living near a proposed development often first learn of it 10 days before it goes to the planning commission, via a legally required notice.

That leaves little time for neighborhood groups to make thoughtful comments, Schelp said, which is why the suggestion of limiting the commission's ability to delay a decision is meeting resistance.

"The planning commission is one of the few places where a neighborhood can have a say," he said. "We need more neighborhood involvement, not less."

But Nick Tennyson, executive vice president of the Home Builders Association of Durham, Orange and Chatham Counties and a former Durham mayor, said residents "get the first bite of the apple" in the form of the comprehensive plan.

"The burden of proof that it should be changed rests with somebody coming in saying it should be changed," he said.