I walked my dogs by the site around 10:30 this morning. Just as I got to the
intersection of Comburg/ Comburg Castle, a cement truck rolled through the
gate. The gate was left open behind the truck.
I noticed that the original crash gate has been replaced with a higher privacy
gate with a keypad. Like others here, I too was under the impression that the
gate was supposed to be for emergency vehicles only. The fact that the new gate
has a keypad makes me think otherwise. Does anyone know if the agreement
between COVNA and the developer is written down somewhere?
Sent from a distant galaxy.
On Sep 7, 2017, at 11:02 AM, karen mattison (Redacted sender "karonj" for
DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Saw one this morning coming from development going South on Comburg. Turned
left at stop sign onto Toulouse and went into Tanglewood traveling East.
From the tracks I saw this morning this is a frequent route.
Karen
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 7, 2017, at 10:54 AM, Nelly P Ramirez <nelly.ramirez@xxxxxx> wrote:
Thank you for letting us know! Has anyone taken note of the route that they
are taking out of the neighborhood? Are they cutting over to Collingwood and
then Davis or are they taking a different route out towards Slaughter? Have
not yet been able to catch them in the act.
Also… if any of you manage to catch trucks in the act, could you snap a pic
and send our way?
- nelly
nelly.ramirez@xxxxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------
Nelly Paulina Ramirez | Toulouse Dr.
COVNA VP and Austin Neighborhood Council Rep
On Sep 7, 2017, at 7:02 AM, Rebecca Klier <rklier@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Cement trucks coming and going again this morning before 7 am.
Becky
rebecca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.deutschemexicana.com
www.instagram.com/deutschemexicana
On Sep 2, 2017, at 4:05 PM, margaret & pat roach
<margaretpatroach@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I second Rita's sentiments. I appreciate the time & effort of those who
advocate for our great neighborhood. . . .margaret on queenswood
Virus-free. www.avast.com
On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Rita Thompson
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I want to express my appreciation to those of you taking your time to
take care of our neighborhood. I myself have been involved in this type
of process in the past I know the effort it takes to address these
concerns. I have not contributed to our neighborhood in this manner but
hope to be more involved in the near future. Thank you so much
With gratitude
Rita
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 2, 2017, at 11:59 AM, nelly ramirez <nelly.ramirez@xxxxxx> wrote:
Jay,
Can you call me? Want to figure out how we can best support you. They
have 40 more units to squeeze onto that lot and it may be best to start
pleading our case with the city sooner than later.
I have an acquaintance pulling their permit and approved plans already.
--
nelly paulina
from the fon-de-i
512-609-9505
On Sep 2, 2017, at 11:37 AM, Jay Roberson <keemchaba@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am a COVNA member and direct neighbor to the condominium development
on Comburg Drive. Earlier this week they poured the footing/slab for a
new unit. Cement trucks were coming down Comburg Dr and
Comburg-Castleway all day. These were not disruptive to me even
although I do recall the City and the Developer agreeing that the crash
gate entrance would not be used for construction access. I am
concerned that the iron gate will not be secured and the wind will blow
it into the side of my vehicle parked on the street curb.
However, I need to pursue a bigger issue with the City. After every
hard rain (like the 10 inches we got last weekend from Harvey) the
development drain system overflows and the mud comes down the northeast
side of Comburg-Castleway and then down Comburg Drive to the drain
between 9003 and 9005 Comburg Drive to the settlement basin behind. It
also comes on my back lot through the fence despite the silt barrier.
It remains so damp that some of the trees the city made them leave have
damaged roots (rot). They have fallen across the property line onto me
destroying our boundary fence.
In addition, I asked the City to contact me as a 'direct impact'
neighbor before this development was approved. They never put me on
the list and so I was never contacted. I don't have access to a gate
on the NW corner of my back lot. It could have been easily provided
with an opening in the developed area security fence. All I need is
access 1-2 times per year to maintain my property per city ordinances.
I spoke to developer after it was approved and he declined to allow me
access even if I paid him for his trouble. I see he did respond to his
own tenant's request for a combination locked personal gate so they can
gain access to Comburg-Castleway. I really don't have a problem with
them coming through with their pets and exercising. It's a public
street after all. However, I doubt that personal gate was in the
original plans approved by the city (the excuse the developer gave for
not allowing me access).
Sorry for the diatribe....got to turn my venting into action.
J. Roberson
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:49 PM, <pcurtinmcleod@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We opposed speed bumps the last time the topic came up for
Crownspoint, and we continue to do so. In our last neighborhood,
we had to deal with the speed bumps that were installed on Seminary
Ridge every single time we left our home. While well-intentioned,
they were a real nuisance for people in small cars like us.
Oftentimes people would create a safety hazard by swerving into the
middle of the road to make it easier to get over the hump. The folks
who drove big fast vehicles continued to drive as they always had,
seemingly unaffected. I hope your experience on Monarch will be a
more positive one and that you will be pleased with the results.
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 1, 2017, at 7:45 PM, Stephen Anguiano <sranguiano@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I live on Monarch and I am in favor of speed bumps. Yes, City of
Austin Engineers decided that Monarch need speed bumps the data
supports it.
Thanks,
-Stephen Anguiano
2305 Monarch
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 1, 2017, at 10:00 AM, Nelly P Ramirez <nelly.ramirez@xxxxxx>
wrote:
I believe some of the residents on Monarch had been pushing for
speed abatement directly with APD and the city. I am sure the light
going in at Monarch/Manchaca is not going to help matters either for
them. Inquiring to see what exactly they are planning on installing.
Will report back on both this and conversations with developer.
Thanks everyone!
- nelly
On Sep 1, 2017, at 9:53 AM, Laurie Thomas <lthomas@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
We did discuss speed bumps before and voted them down! I am
opposed, also. Big trucks still run over them but those of us in
regular cars have to endure the bumps and the trucks zooming around
us.
Laurie at Mosswood Circle and Crownspoint
From: covna-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:covna-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of margaret & pat ;
roach
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 9:50 AM
To: covna@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [covna] Re: New development at end of Comberg
Was our agreement w/ the developer an oral, hand-shake
understanding, or do we have something in writing from him/her?
I'm opposed to speed bumps. Didn't we go through this discussion
before with the agreement that we didn't want them? Do the
residents on Monarch want this?...margaret on queenswood
Virus-free. www.avast.com
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 9:14 AM, DAVID ESTRADA <destrad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
This morning I saw that the emergency gate was open and a truck and
trailer leaving. Can anything be done to remind the developer that
this gate was supposed to be used for emergencies only.
I see that signs have been posted on Curlew and Monarch for
upcoming speed humps. I hoped that the traffic engineers factored
in the effect of more traffic on Crownspoint, Queenswood and
Castlewood.
Thanks,
David Estrada
This email and any attachments are intended for the designated
recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error, please
delete this message. However, if you have obtained this email via
electronic eavesdropping, you are in violation of the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act. Furthermore, disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the contents
hereof is strictly prohibited without the explicit consent of UFCU.
