Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Wastewater Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Centerton council hears developers, engineers on temporary decentralized wastewater systems as capacity debate continues

5866599 · September 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Developers urged the Centerton City Council to consider state-authorized decentralized wastewater systems as a short-term option while municipal sewer capacity and interconnection plans continue; council asked for state documentation and feasibility studies before deciding.

Centerton — Developers and an engineer told the Centerton City Council on Sept. 9 that decentralized wastewater treatment systems remain a lawful, feasible short-term option for new subdivisions when connection to a publicly owned treatment works is not cost‑effective or timely. Council members and staff said they would request formal documentation from Arkansas regulators and receipt of any feasibility studies before permitting or approving such systems. Why it matters: The city and local developers are facing a capacity bottleneck for sewer service that is delaying multiple housing projects. Developers say a temporary treatment plant could allow new construction while larger regional connections are completed; city staff and the council want clear regulatory and legal guidance before taking action. Developers and technical representatives outlined why they believe the systems are viable. Gavin Edwards, a local developer, said the time and financial uncertainty for a regional hookup makes on‑site treatment a practical alternative. "It's still allowed," Edwards said, summarizing his conversations with state regulators. Tom Bartlett of Aquatech described typical packaged treatment systems — a settling tank, equalization tank and treatment unit followed by a pressurized drip field — and said they can be installed and operated under state permits. Bartlett said permits and engineering reviews typically take months and estimated a timeline of roughly nine months to a year to have a functioning system on site if approvals go smoothly. "You can build them and have them on‑site within a few months," Bartlett said, then added permitting time makes the whole timeline longer. City officials repeated that any approval path requires state review. Utilities staff said a feasibility study demonstrating that connecting to an existing public treatment works within five miles is not cost‑effective is required by state law; that study is part of the state permitting record. Mayor Bill Edwards and council members asked that developers obtain written guidance from the Arkansas Department of Health (ADH) or the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) showing the permitting pathways and any limits. "Get something from them so we can look at it and their attorney can look at it," a council member said. Discussion vs. decision: The council did not take formal action. Utilities staff and council members said they would circulate regulator guidance and feasibility studies to the utilities commission and city legal counsel for review. Several council members and staff described previous legal advice that paused a draft city ordinance; they asked the utilities attorney and city attorneys to reconcile any differences in interpretation. Concerns and constraints: City staff and multiple speakers warned that even if a regional connection is approved by December (as some have forecast), downstream pinch points — right of way acquisition, utility relocations and construction sequencing — could delay physical hookups for a year or more, meaning a temporary plant might be on site until capacity is available. Developers acknowledged that if a regional connection becomes available, the temporary plant would need to be removed or integrated; Bartlett said such plants are often resold or decommissioned and the land reused. The council also noted concerns about long‑term liability and contract language and asked that those legal protections be made explicit before any local approvals. Next steps/forward‑looking: Council members directed staff to ask the developer and Aquatech to submit: (1) any written correspondence or guidance from ADH/ADEQ showing the permitted path for a decentralized system; (2) a feasibility study showing a lack of cost‑effective alternatives to connection; and (3) draft contract language addressing operations and liability to share with the utilities commission and city attorneys. No ordinance or permit was approved at the Sept. 9 meeting.