City council will review environmental report comments on Walden of Hastings 450-unit development could go before city planning commission this month

By John McLoone
Posted 1/31/24

The Hastings City Council will review comments received during the public input period on the environmental assessment conducted on the proposed Walden of Hastings project at its meeting Monday, Feb. …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

City council will review environmental report comments on Walden of Hastings 450-unit development could go before city planning commission this month

Posted

The Hastings City Council will review comments received during the public input period on the environmental assessment conducted on the proposed Walden of Hastings project at its meeting Monday, Feb. 5.
Community Development Director John Hinzman told the Hastings Economic Development and Redevelopment Authority (HEDRA) at its meeting Thursday, Jan. 25 there were 11 comments received.
The size of the project, planned on 71.1 acres at the intersection of Hwy. 316 and Michael Ave., required the environmental study and a traffic impact study be prepared. The environmental study material said the project would be 511 units, but Hinzman said a preliminary plate received for the project shows 450 units.
Walden at Hastings development is slated to start this year. It is being developed by LandEquity, LLC.
The property has been owned by Best Development for more than 25 years, which has leased the site for agricultural purposes.
Under the Walden at Hastings plan, 17.5 acres that are the Sand Coulee would remain as a nature preserve, and the developer is seeking to work with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to take ownership of that.
Walden at Hastings is planned as “life-cycle housing,” meaning housing for every stage of life. The development would have trails and park-like amenities, according to plans. The environmental study states, “The project aims to incorporate family living in one development. Whether a person is owning their first, having their second child, living their active lives in their senior years or needs assistance and care, they are welcome. The goal is to have families living and thriving in the same development.”
Proposed are 54 twin homes, 68 town homes, 170 apartments, assisted living unit complexes of 24 and 80 units and 60 active senior living units. In 2029, plans are for construction to start on 55 single family homes.
LandEquity plans for the development to be all rental units, with rents in the neighborhood of $2,000-$4,000 monthly.
The city approved annexation of the land into the city in the spring.
In addition to concerns over additional traffic on Hwy. 316 in the area, concern was also voiced at a December city council meeting about the loss of the prime agricultural land to development.
The public comment period ran through Jan. 11. He said the council will decide if further environmental review is necessary after reviewing comments on the plan.
“The Walden development, which is the annexation project on Red Wing Boulevard (hwy. 316) and Michael Ave., we have an application in for a preliminary plat, and this would be for 450 units. This is very similar to the concept plan that they have developed for the annexation, a little bit less units than they had within the environmental assessment. I think ‘s typical with an EA. You shoot for the high end of the case. You don’t want to go over if that changes,” Hinzman told HEDRA members. “We went through an initial review of that, waiting for a few bits of information before we deem it complete.”
He said the site plan could go before the city’s planning commission this month, with council approval in March.
“We’ll see what happens there,” said Hinzman. “The environmental assessment comment period has ended. I think we had 11 comments. We’re going to be addressing those comments at the Feb. 5 council meeting and seeing if the council is ready to determine that the environmental review is adequate and for them to move forward in allowing the project to be considered. There wouldn’t be any approvals related to the project (on Feb. 5). It would cease the environmental review aspect of it.”