Public's Say in Planning Widens

The planning agency also suffered from sloppy record keeping, poor management and a culture that was hostile to residents, according to a November report by the council's Office of Legislative Oversight.

The planning agency had neither the staff nor the procedures to adequately monitor developers to make sure they were abiding by approved plans, according to the report.

The controversy threatened to undermine Montgomery's reputation for diligent planning. It also posed a potential political problem for council members seeking reelection this year and for Duncan, who is running for governor.

Yesterday, some council members appeared mindful of the political environment, rebuffing the concerns of planning leaders in favor of those expressed by civic activists.

"We are in an atmosphere of intense mistrust, which is being aggravated by self-appointed citizen leaders," Council President George L. Leventhal (D-At Large) told Hamer. "I am very reluctant to give ammunition to the permanent critics of this process. . . . There are some fights not worth having."

The council voted unanimously yesterday to require developers to explain any future proposed project with neighbors even before planners begin considering whether to approve it.

The change, supported by Planning Board Chairman Derick Berlage, comes in response to residents' complaints that they often do not know about a proposed project until it's too late to aggressively fight it.

The council also voted unanimously to strengthen the requirements for what must be on a site plan, the legally binding document that the Planning Board uses to decide whether to approve a project. The council says the plans must now include all the details of a project.