Dickinson approves Heart River rezoning over neighborhood opposition

The Dickinson City Commission voted on Nov. 18 to adopt Ordinance 18‑40, approving a zoning map amendment that changes Lots 32–36 in the Heart River 4th subdivision from Low Density Residential (R‑1) to Medium Density Residential (R‑2) to allow construction of three four‑unit multifamily buildings.

City planner Natalie Birchak told the commission the rezone would permit three 4‑unit buildings and would require a future replat to 16,000‑square‑foot lots per building; she said the applicant proposed to construct 2nd Avenue Southwest under a development agreement and would not specially assess adjacent residents for that street work. Birchak said planning staff and the planning and zoning commission recommended approval and presented local traffic and complaint history gathered from the police department: three documented driving complaints, two accidents and one citation in the nearby area.

During a lengthy public hearing, multiple nearby residents urged the commission to deny the rezone. Presley Krebs, who said the lots sit inside a predominantly single‑family area, said the change would “alter the low‑density, quiet nature of the neighborhood” and warned of increased noise, traffic and parking strain. Kayla Fisher and Ryan Fisher raised flooding concerns tied to a creek and culvert west of 8th Avenue Southwest and asked how increased impervious surface would affect runoff; Birchak and engineering staff said stormwater and detention will be addressed at the development and engineering review stage and that rezone decisions are limited to allowable land uses rather than detailed engineering design.

Other speakers, including Dylan Schock and Mary Adziro, said local apartment vacancy rates argue against adding more units and expressed worries about reduced property values, increased trash and pressure on emergency services and schools. Larry Iverson, who described himself as an appraiser and home inspector, asked the commission to confirm the developer would pay special assessments; commissioners and staff replied that the developer is expected to pay for required infrastructure tied to the development, and that the assessor will value neighborhood properties through the normal process. Cassandra McWhorter and Kevin Prowse echoed safety and service‑capacity concerns; Prowse noted 77 petition signatures against the rezone were submitted and included in staff packets but had not yet been verified.

Commissioners discussed feasibility and infrastructure responsibility at the dais. Commissioner Murphy and planning staff argued the site meets city ordinances and that leaving the lots R‑1 could render the property undevelopable because the cost of required road infrastructure would be prohibitive for single‑family lots. Commissioner Frederick moved to approve the ordinance; the motion passed on a roll‑call vote (Frederick yes; Bair no; Riddle no; Murphy yes; chair yes).

Ordinance 18‑40 now stands adopted. The next steps are typical post‑rezoning actions: the applicant must submit a site plan and any required development agreement and engineering plans (stormwater, access and utilities) for staff review and permitting. Opponents asked the commission to monitor parking, emergency access and stormwater during review and permitting.