Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dickinson Commission approves Heart River 4th rezoning despite neighborhood opposition
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing with multiple neighbors warning of traffic, runoff and property‑value impacts, the Dickinson City Commission voted to rezone five lots in the Heart River 4th subdivision from R‑1 to R‑2 (Ordinance 18‑40). Staff said the developer will fund required road work; commissioners approved the ordinance 3–2.
The Dickinson City Commission voted Nov. 18 to adopt Ordinance 18‑40, rezoning Lots 32–36, Block 1 of the Heart River 4th Subdivision from low‑density residential (R‑1) to medium‑density residential (R‑2), clearing the way for up to three four‑unit multifamily buildings and a future lot replat.
City Planner Natalie Burczyk told commissioners the rezoning request would permit construction of three four‑unit buildings and that the applicant has said it will pay for the construction of 2nd Avenue Southwest through a development agreement rather than by special assessment. Burczyk said staff recommended approval; she also noted the planning commission had recommended the change.
Residents who live adjacent to the site urged the commission to keep the area R‑1. Presley Krebs urged denial, saying the rezoning would “change the low‑density, quiet nature of the neighborhood” and could enable transient workforce housing, increasing traffic and reducing privacy. Neighbor Larry Iverson, an appraiser, warned rezoning and denser development could depress nearby single‑family home values and asked whether future infrastructure upgrade costs would be charged to the developer; engineering staff said predevelopment reviews show existing lines have capacity and that developer‑funded improvements are the expected mechanism.
Neighbors raised stormwater and flood concerns. Kayla Fisher said a creek and culvert near 8th Avenue Southwest already floods after modest rains and asked whether added impervious area had been evaluated; city engineering replied that stormwater detention and detailed drainage design are reviewed at the site‑plan/engineering stage and are not a requirement at the rezone stage.
Supporters and development proponents argued the property is difficult to develop as single‑family lots and that multifamily buildings are a more economically viable use that would put the site into productive use. A proponent present told the commission a developer was willing to pay all site infrastructure costs.
Commissioners closed the public hearing and voted on final passage. Commissioner Frederick made the motion to approve; the tally was: Frederick — Aye; Bair — No; Riddle — No; Murphy — Aye; Chair (Mayor Decker) — Aye. The ordinance passed on a 3–2 vote.
Next steps: the developer must submit engineering and site‑plan materials for review; stormwater, access and construction timing will be addressed in subsequent permitting and development agreement negotiations.
