Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Public Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City staff recommends accepting public improvements for Rolling Hills Section 1; as‑builts and minor punchlist remain

5515054 · July 31, 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

City staff recommended that council move forward with accepting public improvements for Rolling Hills Subdivision Section 1 after final inspection; as‑built plans and completion of minor right‑of‑way items remain before final acceptance and maintenance bond adjustments.

Sunbury — Sunbury staff presented an overview July 30 recommending council accept public infrastructure in Rolling Hills Subdivision Section 1, subject to receipt of as‑built plans and developer completion of minor right‑of‑way items.

Staff member Miss Zadabrowski told council that the developer (Romanelli and Hughes) requested a final inspection and that the city engineer conducted a walk‑through with the developer’s representative, Jim Olin. The inspection followed at least two prior walkthroughs and produced a final punchlist of primarily aesthetic items in the public right‑of‑way that the developer has agreed to correct.

Zadabrowski said she expects to receive as‑built drawings before the second reading and that, once the city engineer issues a certificate of completion, council can formally accept the improvements by resolution or utility letter. Acceptance would transfer ownership and maintenance responsibility to the city and trigger a one‑year maintenance/warranty period backed by a maintenance bond (typically 3% of the estimate) after the developer's performance bond is released.

Zadabrowski noted the developer typically has up to six months to correct outstanding items discovered during inspection. The item will return to council for the second reading once as‑builts and the certificate of completion are in hand; Romelli and Hughes’ representative planned to attend the second reading if council members had developer questions.

The council received the staff report and no formal vote was taken at the July 30 meeting.