Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Land Use Drainage topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Centerton resident alleges engineer misled council; Warren Estate subdivision approval tabled

City of Centerton City Council · November 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

After an adjacent resident accused the city engineer of misleading the council about stormwater impacts from a nearby subdivision, council voted 5–1 to table final approval of the Warren Estate subdivision and requested the developer or their engineer appear at the next meeting to address drainage concerns.

A resident told the Centerton City Council on Nov. 10 that runoff from the nearby Warrant/Warren subdivision has dramatically increased flooding on his property and accused the city engineer of understating that impact, prompting the council to table final approval of the Warren Estate subdivision until the developer or the owner’s engineer can respond.

Amit Takri, who gave his address as 14137 Celt Cemetery Road, described repeated post‑construction runoff events he says have worsened since work began. "We believe the city engineer has willfully misled the city council into allowing this subdivision," Takri said, urging the council to visit the site and consider removing the item from the agenda. He said his property historically received about "3 million gallons of water a year" and that, in his estimate, that has grown roughly tenfold under the subdivision’s current design.

City staff and council members discussed the technical review. City Engineer Allan said he had reviewed project materials and told the council the submitted engineering data "meets all those requirements" used in the city's review. Allan also described natural flow paths and the role of detention in limiting peak flows, while cautioning that the city's review relies on the engineer’s calculations.

Council members pressed for more technical detail and for the developer or the owner's engineer to address neighborhood concerns. A motion to table final approval and ask the developer or Pinkley Construction’s engineer to appear at the next meeting carried on a roll call vote: Joshua Hagen, Josie Reed, Wendy Henson, Justin Calgary and Cody Miles voted to table; Cliff Thompson voted no (tally: 5–1 to table).

The council's action does not deny approval; it defers final action while allowing the involved parties additional opportunity to present technical evidence and proposed remedies. City staff said prior court proceedings had concluded that some relief would have to be sought from property owners rather than the municipality, but residents argued site design and pond outlet location have increased on‑site and downstream flows.

Next steps: the council asked staff to contact the project owner (Pinkley Construction) and invite their engineer to the next council meeting; the Warren Estate item will return to the agenda after that meeting. The council did not adopt or reject the subdivision at this session.