Builders complain of multi‑week wetlands review delays; county says hires and SOPs will reduce bottlenecks

Contractors and builders at a Walton County public workshop reported multi‑week delays and inconsistent reviewer comments for projects with wetlands or environmental reviews, at times forcing extra surveys and costs.

An industry participant described a case where a foundation survey was resubmitted and stalled for weeks while a single environmental reviewer did not respond. "It cost us $500 for another survey and 3 weeks of time to be able to move on the project," the contractor said, recounting an application submitted June 30 that was later reapproved by another reviewer on July 21.

Development Services Director Stephen Shenin acknowledged a bottleneck and said the county is actively recruiting staff to address it. "We have two senior planner positions and an environmental/floodplain specialist open; the environmental specialist will do the bulk of BPR reviews and allow Bradley Bowen to focus on DO and other review types," Shenin said. He added that standardized operating procedures and reviewer training should reduce variance in comments and shorten review cycles.

Staff and participants discussed procedural fixes including a greater use of conditional approvals — for example, approving a submittal "pending" receipt of a narrowly defined item — so that minor clarifications do not hold a permit for weeks. Donise Wei, the BPR manager, said the department has begun issuing conditional approvals in some cases and expects SOPs and additional staff to improve turnaround times.

Attendees praised the county’s permit portal but flagged file‑upload problems for elevation certificates and foundation surveys; staff said they are addressing upload issues and that GIS‑driven checklists will help applicants know which documents are required before submittal.

County staff said they will bring summarized feedback and proposed procedural changes to the BOCC on July 26.

Because the claim of unjustified delays concerns the county’s review process, staff encouraged parties who experienced specific cases to share application numbers or documentation so the department can investigate individual complaints.