ABSTRACT
Public hearings and court appeals, intended in part to ensure that government officials follow the rules, are also powerful tools for opponents of development. The consistency with which regulators viewed organized citizen opposition as affecting the time lines of development approvals demonstrates the impact of requirements for public hearings. Regulators attend more hearings and work on a more regular basis with the decision-making boards. The chapter presents the case studies to provide information about regulatory practice in specific contexts. In New Jersey, comparable percentages of developers and regulators mention regulators’ lack of training, excessively long review periods, and inadequate staffing as major contributors to permitting delays. The surveys reveal that New Jersey developers request variances or waivers for subdivision, zoning, and both local and state environmental regulations much more frequently than their North Carolina counterparts. No set of rules can address every possible contingency in every proposal; thus, virtually all ordinances affecting development have provisions for waivers, special exceptions variances.
