Hall County to require Environmental Health septic approval before building permits

Hall County commissioners approved a procedural change on Feb. 25 that will require applicants whose properties use septic systems to obtain Hall County Environmental Health approval or a septic permit before applying for a building permit.

County Administrator Zach Probst told the board the change, requested by commissioners, will remove septic permit review from the county’s Acela permitting workflow and require applicants to have environmental health approval accompany the building permit application. Probst said staff plans internal training and public-facing updates starting in March and intends to implement the new intake workflow on March 31, 2025.

The change is intended to speed overall permitting by preventing building permit applications from entering the county’s review queue before a septic determination is made. Probst described the current intake steps: building inspections (up to two days), planning and zoning (up to three days), then review by the state-run environmental health office (two to four weeks on average), and then a final issuance step in building inspections. Under the new requirement, properties on septic must secure environmental health signoff before the county accepts the building permit application.

Probst said the county has been working to reduce a prior backlog and has improved permit intake, communication standards, staffing, and created a permit manager role; the department has also tracked performance measures and reported an increase in on-time permit issuance from 65% to 74% for the most recent weeks cited.

Commission discussion centered on accountability and speed. One commissioner, identified in the transcript as Commissioner, District 3, said the county was responding to builders’ requests and urged implementation: “Let's rip the band aid off,” he said. Another commissioner asked that staff track the change’s effects and return with a status report next January to consider whether further adjustments are needed; that request was incorporated into the motion. The board then moved and seconded the change and recorded the vote with the chair saying, “All in favor? Motion passed.”

Proponents argued the change will let the county hold itself and the state office accountable and reduce permit lead times; critics on the dais cautioned staff should monitor outcomes and return with data for the board to reassess.

Implementation steps Probst listed include staff education, customer communication updates, website and checklist revisions, Acela workflow changes, and a public launch date of March 31. Applications without environmental health approval for properties on septic will be rejected until the required documentation is provided.

The board’s action changes only county intake practice; Probst emphasized that Environmental Health operates as a state agency and that the county’s modification is an administrative reordering of reviews rather than a change to state permitting rules.

Ending

Staff will implement the revised intake workflow and update the board on performance; commissioners also asked for a follow-up status report approximately one year after implementation.