Holiday Trash Pickup Schedule
December 5, 2007
The residential trash pickup schedule for Christmas and New Year’s will be as follows:
Week of Christmas
- No trash pickup on Christmas Day (Tuesday)
- Tuesday’s pickup will occur on the next day (Wednesday)
- There will be no recycling pickup that week.
Week of New Year’s Day
- Trash and recycling will be picked up on the regular schedule, including New Year’s Day.
In addition, we are working on a couple of drop off locations the week between Christmas and New Year’s Day for those who wish recycle Christmas Trees. These will be announced as soon as arrangements are finalized.
A Redevelopment Proposal
June 22, 2007
I’m not opposed to stealing ideas, especially if they are good ideas and can help Cedar Hill.
One such idea is Richardson’s redevelopment plan. The idea is that we give people an incentive to fix up their aging homes.
Here’s how it works.
Let’s say you have a $100,000 home that is in need of significant repair. If you spend, say $20,000, on improvements, the value of your home will increase because now it is in better condition. But here’s the rub. You get a double whammy because you have to pay for the improvements to your home and you have to pay higher property taxes because the value of your home has gone up.
The Richardson redevelopment plan lets the homeowner avoid the redevelopment penalty. They won’t have to pay — or technically they get a rebate — on the increased taxes resulting from the improvements.
Builder Permit Ordinance
June 22, 2007
An excerpt from the Today Newspaper for June 21, 2007:
The council also unanimously OK’d an ordinance that would require builders to register with the city and provides for penalties if projects are never started or left abandoned.
The ordinance came about after attention was drawn to the number of abandoned properties in Lake Ridge, a neighborhood that has been heavily hit by the problem.
Councilmember Wade Emmert added language to the ordinance that would keep builders from doing business in Cedar Hill if they have problems on file in another city but haven’t built anything in Cedar Hill yet.
“Why should we wait for someone to hurt our residents if they’ve already done it somewhere else before?” Emmert asked when proposing his motion.
The Problem of Foreclosures
June 13, 2007
Yesterday, I attended a Foreclosure Summit sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. The summit was entitled, “Preserving Homeownership: Addressing the Foreclosure Issue” and it provided a lot of good information.
Foreclosure and mortgage fraud are two separate issues — both of which are a concern to cities. The truth is that most foreclosures occur without any fraud. Changes in employment, personal issues or a change in the economy all contribute to foreclosures.
The widespread use of adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) have also contributed in recent year. It is almost becoming an epidemic and it is not limited to Texas.
Drilling Operations North of Wildwood Subdivision
March 30, 2007
In mid-March, many Wildwood residents received an offer from the Harding Company and Petrocasa Energy to lease the homeowners’ mineral rights. It appears that the preferred drilling site is just north of the western portion of Wildwood.
The prospect of drilling near residences has caused understandable concern among some of the residents. I wanted to address some of the issues involved to help keep those affected informed.
Cedar Hill Ordinances
Simply put, current Cedar Hill ordinances prohibit drilling in residentially zoned areas. Drilling is only allowed in three zones:
- Commercial zones
- Industrial zones; and
- Industrial Park zones.
Before any drilling can be conducted in those zones, the operator must go through a permitting process through our Planning and Zoning Department. To date, neither the Harding Company or Petrocasa Energy have started the permitting process.
Firefighters Get Grant to Help Clear the Air Around Them
February 22, 2007
By LOYD BRUMFIELD / Today Newspapers
Firefighters are exposed on a daily basis to some of the most dangerous substances on earth, not just during calls, but in their own stations.
But an $87,092 grant will alleviate some of those problems for the Cedar Hill Fire Department, which was given the money to install comprehensive exhaust removal systems in each of its fire stations.
“Now when you get a call and you crank everything up, that exhaust immediately fills the whole room up,” Cedar Hill Fire Chief Steve Pollock said. “It gets in your clothes, it gets on your body and fouls up computer equipment. It’s just a real mess.”
The Assistance To Firefighters grant is dispensed through the Department of Homeland Security and was given to the department earlier in the month, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) announced.
“This funding will help ensure that Texas firefighters remain well trained and equipped for their important work of protecting our homes, families and communities,” a statement from Cornyn read. “The men and women on the front lines of emergency response need more support than ever, and I applaud the local first responders and area leaders for their work to obtain this important assistance.”
Grant money can be used on fire services, health and safety and wellness issues.
“Based on that, we knew we stood a good chance of getting a grant,” Pollock said.
The money will allow the department to install the MagneGrip exhaust removal system at its three existing stations and a fourth one in the planning stages.
A hose attached by a heavy magnet to a running track removes 100 percent of pollutants and other impurities generated by fire engines and other equipment, Pollock said.
The hose automatically disconnects and captures the exhaust once an engine leaves the station.
“This kind of equipment has been around since about the mid-1980s, and all of our stations are that old or older,” Pollock said.
Total cost to retrofit the existing stations is about $96,000, which includes a 10 percent match from the city.
The MagneGrip system is developed by Clean Air Concepts of Cincinnati and is also used by the DeSoto Fire Department.
“Once we get this going, we can use their equipment and they can hook up to ours,” Pollock said.
According to Clean Air Concepts, the MagneGrip system uses a friction-free, universal nozzle that connects with fire equipment.
With the nozzle attached, each time the vehicle’s engine is started, an exhaust fan starts automatically and vents the exhaust emissions outdoors, according to the company website.
As the vehicle leaves, the nozzle remains connected, traveling to the doorway along with the truck and then releases automatically as the vehicle exits.
Pollock is looking forward to a cleaner environment at each station.
“This type of health issue isn’t something that’s going to impact you in one day or one week, but when you’re looking at chronic exposure over something like 10 years, we’re talking about a severe impact on someone’s career and life,” he said. “That’s why this is such a high priority for us.”
City Ponders Hows, Whys of Saving Trees
January 25, 2007
By LOYD BRUMFIELD / Today Newspapers
It sounds easy on paper, crafting a tree ordinance. But as the city of Cedar Hill is finding out, ironing out the details and putting it into practice will be a long, time-consuming chore.
The city council and other members of the city’s staff held a workshop Jan. 18 at the Cedar Hill Recreation Center in an effort to get educated on the hows, whys and do’s and don’ts of a protective tree ordinance - something that many residents have long called for.
“I’ve talked to a lot of people in other cities, and each one tells me, ‘If you’re going to do this, you’re going to need a full-time person to monitor it,’” Planning Director Rod Tyler told the council.
Council member Wade Emmert asked him if he was going to include that suggestion in his next budget request, and Tyler said he was hoping the Parks and Recreation Department would hire an arborist.
The Jan. 18 meeting was held basically to get council members familiar with the language involved, the purpose of the ordinance and the path to get it approved.
Tyler and his staff constructed a purpose statement for the ordinance that calls for protecting a “diminishing natural resource (native and adapted trees), to balance the needs of land development with the goals of preserving mature trees, encourage the planting of trees to replace those lost due to land development and provide a means to ‘mitigate’ the loss of Protected Trees due to land development.”
Council members and Mayor Rob Franke were receptive to the creation of an ordinance, but many worried about the longterm costs.
“What I’ve seen so far seems too restrictive,” Council member Greg Patton said. “Overall I like it, but I’m concerned about the cost, because that’s going to be passed on to buyers.”
Tyler did not try to sugarcoat things.
“We’re talking tens of thousands of dollars (for developers),” he said. “And if your lot is particularly big, it could get into the hundreds of thousands.”
Protected trees are defined as any species of tree that is 8 inches or more in diameter, measured 4 feet above the ground and don’t belong to a few species of trees that have undesirable characteristics such as weak wood, are generally short-lived or have destructive habits, such as wild-growing, invasive roots systems.
The 8-inch number is just a rough figure and the city can change it to whatever it wants, Tyler said.
“How about 30 inches?” Patton said, drawing laughs.
Trees that branch out immediately from the ground, rather than sprouting a trunk and branches, would generally not be protected, Tyler said.
“Then the question is, is it a tree or a bush?” he said.
Developers would have several mitigation options in order to protect trees, Tyler said, including transplanting protected trees, planting smaller trees, preserving groves of smaller trees and cash payments to a reforestation fund for the city to use to replant trees.
“What if the transplanted tree dies?” Public Information Officer Corky Brown asked.
Tyler said it was doubtful very many developers would choose to transplant existing trees.
“Transplanted trees need a lot of heavy equipment and a lot of people to move it,” Tyler said. “The older the tree, the bigger its root zone, so I don’t think you’ll see this option a lot because it will be expensive.”
But if developers opt for replacing bigger trees with smaller ones, they’d have to do it “at a rate that is twice the total caliper inches of Protected Trees to be removed.”
If developers replace bigger trees with so many smaller ones that a congestive situation is created, some of those trees can be given to the city for planting on other lots, Tyler said in reply to a question raised by Council member Makia Epie.
Smaller trees to replace bigger ones must be described as a “large canopy” tree as listed in the city’s landscape ordinance and must be a minimum of 3 caliper inches, although the city can adjust those numbers when it sits down to craft the ordinance, Tyler said.
If the developer chooses to pay cash to the city’s reforestation fund, the city must come up with an appropriate fee, Tyler said, saying that his figure of $150 per caliper inch of protected trees removed was something he “picked out of the air.”
Developers would be asked to submit a tree protection plan when they platted their land, and it would have to be approved before any work or land clearing could start.
In order to ease costs for developers, no tree survey would be required, Tyler suggested, because it would save them from having to hire engineers and surveyors.
“I can tell you that it does get expensive,” said Franke, an engineer.
Instead of a tree survey, developers would simply have to list the trees on their property and say which ones would be protected, which ones wouldn’t and how they plan to mitigate any destruction of protected trees.
“I have competing opinions,” Council member Wade Emmert said. “On the one hand, I want to preserve our natural beauty as much as possible, but I’m also concerned about landowners’ rights. Generally speaking, everybody says they want to preserve trees until they’re the ones who have to do it.”
Emmert added that he was appreciative of the work the staff and Mayor Pro Tem Cory Spillman have done in working to construct an ordinance.
Franke supported the idea of a tree ordinance.
“It’s the right thing to do,” he said. “We don’t want the city to become, as people have called it, ‘Concrete Hill.’”
Tyler emphasized that any city ordinance would be largely aesthetic in nature rather than environmental, and Patton wondered about preserving trees that may be hundreds of years old.
“It seems like you’re not really saving Old Granddad you’re just replacing it,” he said.
Franke said any ordinance would not be geared toward stopping development.
“If Old Granddad is in the middle of where Dillard’s wants to go, then Old Granddad’s out of here,” he said.
Council Optimistic About Cutting Sign Clutter
January 25, 2007
By LOYD BRUMFIELD / Today Newspapers
Signs, signs, everywhere a sign, blocking out the scenery - generally causing consternation among citizens and officials alike.
The Cedar Hill city council expressed interest in doing away with those temporary signs drivers see every few feet along streets and highways, advertising everything from homebuilders to get-rich quick schemes.
In their place, the council hopes to craft an ordinance that implements a kiosk-style sign program in which temporary signage is displayed in professionally designed structures at different locations around the city.
Code enforcement officer Stacey Graves presented a program on kiosks at the Jan. 9 council meeting and had a receptive audience.
Any proposed ordinance would prohibit so-called directional signs in favor of free-standing structures that can promote local businesses and city events, Graves said.
The city would contract with an advertising company to construct the kiosks, install and maintain the signage and assist the city in determining where the kiosks would be placed, Graves said.
Under current ordinances, businesses must pay a $10 permit fee for signs, and they must be 10 feet apart from each other, at least 3 feet from the curb and 50 feet from any intersection.
Cedar Hill collected $10,400 in sign permit fees in 2006, Graves said.
In a kiosk program, businesses would pay the sign company for space on the kiosk, and the company in turn would give a designated portion of that amount to the city for permit fees.
Council member Wade Emmert expressed strong support for a kiosk ordinance.
“I think it’s much better than the current row of signs you see,” he said. “They’re ugly, they’re unsightly. Those big trucks park half on the road and half off it, and it’s dangerous.”
Emmert asked Graves if there was a way for average citizens to use the kiosks to advertise garage sales and things like that.
Unless something changes in the ordinance the city comes up with, individuals would have to apply for a sign permit, Graves said.
“I think we should make some concessions for average citizens to advertise their garage sales,” he said. “I think if they don’t remove them, we could probably do something about that, but I don’t think we should shut our citizens out of the process.”
Graves was asked how homebuilders felt.
“Some are for it, others are against it,” she said.
Keep Cedar Hill Beautiful Reception
January 20, 2007
Cedar Hill is blessed with natural beauty. I applaud those who give of their time to ensure that this beauty is maintained.
Keep Cedar Hill Beautiful one such an organization. I was honored to serve as their Treasurer for a couple of years, and I still support their mission.
This past Tuesday night KCHB hosted its annual Appreciation Banquet. Sheri Borth awarded Certificates of Appreciation to the Yard of the Month winners and all those who supported KCHB over the past year.
If you have an interest in participating in this worthwhile cause, please contact Sheri Borth (smborth@aol.com) for more information.
Tour Uptown Village at Cedar Hill
August 10, 2006
Uptown Village at Cedar Hill is the new lifestyle center being built at FM 1382 and Uptown Blvd.
And it is unlike any other in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex.
It is an open-air lifestyle center anchored by two regional department stores — Dillards and Foleys. It will feature high-quality stores, like the Pottery Barn, William Sonoma, and Talbots.
The design of Uptown Village is special too. It will reflect the distinctive and historic architecture of Cedar Hill.
Set over 73 acres in the uptown district of Cedar Hill, its design concept is that of a downtown street that has evolved into a visually rich and historic retail district.
Uptown Village will make its debut in Cedar Hill, Texas in fall 2007.
The City Council Likes Trees Too!
July 12, 2006
I’ve had a couple of citizens contact me to express concern about the loss of trees on the land where the lifestyle center is being built (FM 1382 & Uptown Blvd.). Given the importance of the issue, I thought I would provide all of you with a little information that might affect your impression of what’s going on.
I agree it is rather shocking to see the land with the trees removed. I too am used to seeing the Juniper and Cedar trees there.
I know first hand, however, that the City Council is committed to the preservation of Cedar Hill and its natural resources. I believe we have done more than most cities to preserve its natural beauty.
First, we have directed most of the retail development to major thoroughfares, like Hwy 67, Beltline, and FM 1382. In doing so, we are trying to balance the city’s need for retail growth, which results in sales tax revenue, with the desire to preserve our natural beauty.
This sales tax revenue is vital as the city is trying to increase police officers and firefighters. The importance of increasing police and fire protection cannot be understated. We are already behind the state average and are trying to increase our numbers in a responsible manner.
Second, we have created a number of nature preserves in the city, and are in the process of implementing a comprehensive hiking/biking trail system. Consider the preserves available in Cedar Hill:
- Calabria Nature Preserve — 750 W. FM 1382, approximately 76.5 acres. This property is an undeveloped special use nature preserve.
- Cedar Mountain Nature Preserve — 1300 W. FM 1382, approximately 110 acres. This joint (Dallas County Open Space Program/City of Cedar Hill) special use park offers 1,320 ft. (approximately .3 mile) paved trail, and 3,960 ft. (approximately .7 mile) unpaved nature trail, 1 bench, and 12 paved parking spaces (1 handicapped).
- Lester Lorch Nature Preserve — 1823 Texas Plume Road, approximately 86 acres. This special use nature preserve (Dallas County Open Space Program/City of Cedar Hill) offers a challenging 36 hole disc golf course suitable for tournament and casual play, 2 picnic tables, 1 pond, open play area, and paved parking.
That is in addition to our approximately 20 neighborhood or special use parks.
I would also like to point out that Cedar Hill and the Audubon Society are collaborating to purchase about 300 acres that will make up Dogwood Canyon. I haven’t looked at any statistics, but I would bet that Cedar Hill has the largest percentage of its incorporated city limits dedicated to nature preserves and parks than any city in north central Texas.
Third, we have held the developer to strict development standards. The developer, MG Herring Group, is incorporating many design elements into the lifestyle center to compliment Cedar Hill’s topography, stones, and foliage/fauna. They also will be planting some trees as part of fairly strict landscaping requirements.
As an aside, we are in the process of creating a comprehensive tree ordinance that will further protect our indigenous trees. Our Mayor Pro Tem Cory Spillman personally is heading up that effort.
In sum, I too am used to seeing the trees there. But I want you to know that the City Council has been very deliberate about this process and trying to balance the interests of the city as a whole.
Designs for Government Center
May 10, 2006
Last month, I asked for your input in selecting the stone color for the new Government Center. These are some illustrations of the new Government Center to help you put the decision into better context. These images are about 9 months old, and there have been changes that are not reflected in the drawings, but this should give you an idea of what to expect. The groundbreaking will be in July 2006. We expect an 18-month construction period, with a completion date of December 2007. Please give me your input.
Stone Color for the Government Center
April 25, 2006
Here’s your chance to help us make a decision that will last for the next 50 years.
As most of you know, we are in the process of designing a new Government Center. It will be located right across the street from the Cinemark movie theater. Construction is slated to begin in this year with an estimated completion date in early 2008 Before we can start building, however, we have to chose the color of stone.
There are two choices — white and rose. Below are pictures of facades made with both types of stone. If you want to see the samples first hand, you can drive by the site on Uptown Blvd. (just don’t stop in the street to look). Please leave me a comment with your preference.
City Opposes Fuel Terminal
April 17, 2006
By BRIAN ALLEN / Today Newspapers
UPDATE: On April 18, The Musket Corp; a subsidiary of Love’s Travel Stops and Country Stores, Inc. announced it has withdrawn an air permit application it filed with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to operate a bulk fuel terminal on the Mid-Texas Auto Park property.
In response to unprecedented community feedback on the issue (most of it not in favor) city officials have announced opposition to a proposed fuel terminal on environmental grounds.
The Musket Corp., a subsidiary of Love’s Travel Stops and Country Stores, Inc., filed an air permit application with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to operate a bulk fuel terminal.
They plan to put the terminal on the Mid-Texas Auto Park property (south of Holcim cement on Hwy. 67) and would use it to transfer ethanol and other fuels from railroad tanker cars to tanker trucks.
Musket has requested permission from TCEQ to transfer as many as 3,456,000 gallons of fuel per day, which would generate as many as 345 truckloads worth of fuel.
The city council, however, is not in Musket Corp’s corner. It has written a letter to the TCEQ asking it to deny Musket’s permit application.
“Our city’s formal opposition is based on a variety of factors, but is primarily centered on our concern about likely impacts on area air and water quality, and resulting risks to the health, safety and welfare of our citizens,” the letter reads.
Ellis County is designated as a non-attainment area re-garding air quality, and Mayor Boyce Whatley said officials are concerned the terminal will negatively impact the county’s non-compliance.
And he’s not alone in his concerns.
“I’ve had more phone calls in the past few weeks than I had in seven years on the council,” he said.
The council has also requested a public hearing on the issue.
The Midlothian Family Net-work, a group dedicated to “quality of life matters in the cement capital of Texas,” has been following the issue and is encouraging citizens to write Love’s management.
“Please write Jenny Love Meyer (Love’s spokesperson) at Love’s/Musket and ask her company to go away,” the network’s website urges.
No date has been set for a public hearing yet.
The proposed Midlothian site would be the second ethanol loading facility in Texas. Motiva Enterprises has a facility in south Dallas.
Ethanol’s chemical properties do not allow it to be mixed with gasoline in storage tanks.
Meyer has said that the ethanol at this facility would not be stored but moved from rail cars to truck tankers and then shipped to storage facilities in Dallas-Fort Worth.
City Plans to Dig Into Its Trash Contract
March 2, 2006
By LOYD BRUMFIELD
News Editor / Today Newspapers
Cedar Hill is staring a big can of worms in the face, Mayor Rob Franke said. The general reaction from most members of the city council was, “Open it.”
That “can of worms” is trash — the way it’s collected, how it’s disposed of and who does the collecting and the disposing.
The council conducted a workshop on the issue Feb. 21 at the Cedar Hill Recreation Center, and the consensus was that even though the city is satisfied with its trash service, it can’t hurt to take a closer look at see if it’s getting the best possible value out of its services.
The city’s contract with Allied Waste (formerly Trinity Waste Services) will expire in June. Cedar Hill has used the company for its trash pickup for about 25 years and has extended the contract regularly. The most recent extension took place in 2002.
During the workshop, the council took a look at several issues, including the bidding process for soliciting new services, whether to have separate contracts for hauling and disposal, the frequency of bulky/brush pickup and whether to go to once-a-week pickup instead of the current twice-a-week arrangement.
“I’m satisfied with Allied, but you don’t know what’s out there unless you look,” Council member Wade Emmert said. “I think we owe it to our citizens to see what’s out there.”
Franke said re-evaluating the city’s contract was probably an appropriate move.
A recent survey of city leadership and staffers turned up satisfactory results for the way trash is handled, said Melissa Valadez-Stephens, assistant to City Manager Alan Sims.
The city received 161 survey responses earlier in the year, with 13 percent of respondents saying they were “extremely satisfied” with the city’s current services and 52 percent were “satisfied.” Fourteen percent of respondents were “dissatisfied,” 5 percent were “extremely dissatisfied” and 16 percent were neutral.
In addition, survey respondents were extremely satisfied with bulky/brush pickup at an 8 percent rate, while 33 percent fell in the satisfied camp. Neutral responses total 37 percent.
City workers were also asked how they would change bulky/brush pickup, and 59 percent said they would increase the frequency of pickup and 20 percent said they would increase the amount allowed to be picked up. Currently, the city collects bulky items (tree limbs, etc.) on a quarterly basis.
“I don’t get too many complaints (about brush pickup), but people do want it to get picked up more often,” Council member Greg Patton said. “But if you picked up more often, I think you’ll see more complaints.”
Council member Daniel Haydin echoed Patton. “The biggest complaint I get is people who keep their trees trimmed don’t like it when it sits out forever,” he said.
Also in the survey, 48 percent of respondents said they would support roll-out poly-cart trash bins — giant bins designed to handle several loads of trash — while 38 percent wouldn’t.
A few council members said they didn’t hear much from citizens about trash collection. “The people I talk to are very satisfied with the services we provide them,” Patton said. “I’m surprised the poly carts showed 48 percent, because no one I talk to wants them.”
In evaluating the frequency of trash pickup, surveys indicated an overwhelming desire to stick with twice-a-week pickup rather than once a week. “I remember from having young children that once-a-week pickup gets a little raunchy in the summer with diapers,” Patton said, adding that food rots faster in hot-weather months.
Emmert said the survey results are fine but the city shouldn’t take them to heart too seriously.
“Let’s not forget the survey was sent to people on boards and on the city council,” he said. “It’s not a statistically valid survey … until we send it out to the citizens in general.”
Cedar Hill charges a $10.29 rate for residential customers, which puts it roughly in the middle of several other Metroplex cities studied, Valadez-Stephens said. Duncanville charged the highest rate among the other cities at $13.29, while Waxahachie turned in a low rate of $5.82. Several cities surveyed said they saved money by separating hauling and disposal contracts, including Duncanville, DeSoto, Allen, Plano and Highland Park, among others.
Most Cedar Hill council members expressed support for separate contracts if it meant saving the city money, but they are unclear on how it would work. As far as he knows, no city that has separate contracts has gone back to single contracts, Sims said.
“I don’t have a dog in that fight, but if it (the contracts) is separated, I would think the savings had better be pretty good,” Haydin said.
Council member Clifford Shaw said if there’s a sense of satisfaction with trash service, “the question’s going to be, if everybody’s satisfied, then why are we considering changing?”
Makia Epie had an eloquent answer: “It’s always nice to shake the body a little bit to see if the sugar has sedimented at the bottom.”
Contact Loyd Brumfield at cedarhill@todaynewspapers.net.
Welcome!
My name is Wade Emmert and I am a Council Member for the City of Cedar Hill. This web site is a way for me to share with you some of my thoughts about issues important to the City.
It is my sincerest goal to be a good steward of the citizens’ trust. Thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to serve you.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at Wade.Emmert@cedarhilltx.com or (214) 740-3164.