A final reading and approval of an ordinance that allows for the annexation of 72 acres of land into the City of Hastings to make way for a new development will be held at the Monday, March 20 Hastings City Council meeting.

The property, at Hwy. 316 and Michael Street, is currently in Marshan Township.

The development – Walden of Hastings – would be “lifecycle housing,” a mix of apartments, upscale townhomes and single-family homes, as well as senior and assisted living. Nearby residents have said that the development, with 450 housing units planned, will cause more problems on an area of Hwy. 316 that already has back-ups at times.

The city originally received plans from a developer to subdivide the property into 160 single family lots in November 2021. During the process of working to annex the property, that development was taken off the table. The city had already held a public hearing for the annexation, but without a development, the matter was tabled. The city council last Monday night voted to take it off the table to scrutinize the Walden plan, which is proposed by LandEquity Development.

LandEquity invited nearby property owners to a neighborhood meeting to introduce the project in January. The city council’s planning committee and the plan commission have also reviewed plans.

The traffic concerns were raised.

The various types of residences will all be rented, not sold, with monthly rents projected in the $2,000-$4,000 range. The planning committee questioned if Hastings could support that.

In its initial announcement of the project, LandEquity President Chris Beadle said, “Walden of Hastings is referred to as a life cycle housing development. Life cycle housing developments have quickly gained nationwide popularity. Walden of Hastings and similar life cycle housing embrace the value of maintaining connection between each of us as we age, and our housing needs and tastes evolve. Lifecycle housing has been proven to be a dynamic factor in lowering the feeling of isolation and loneliness not only for seniors but in children and younger generations are alike. While neighborhoods are separate and distinct, they are connected through common architecture, parks, proximity, trails, shared amenities and more.”

About 50 acres of the site would be developed. About 20 acres of it are Sand Coulee, which developers hope to sell to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

If annexed, it will remain in agricultural use until development plans are finalized and approvals are granted. Developers predict it could be five years until the development is finished.

City council members expressed concern that they’d like to see the results of a traffic study and environmental study. City Community Development Director John Hinzman said an Environmental Impact Study will be prepared for city review after annexation.

An initial traffic review by MnDOT on the project didn’t raise any serious objections, said Hinzman.

The units being rentals is a new concept, Hinzman noted.

“This is a new concept for Hastings. The council and public will likely have questions pertaining to the valuation of the project, effect on neighboring property owners, overall maintenance and potential for individual home ownership in the future,” Hinzman wrote in his staff analysis.

The main entrance point would be at Michael Avenue. Steven Engstrom, whose property abuts the Walden site, raised concern over traffic.

“The impact of the increased volume of traffic from a proposed development of this size is a significant safety hazard. The intersection of Hwy. 61 and 316 currently experiences backups, particularly during rush hour, caused by southbound 61 traffic attempting to turn left onto 316,” he said. “The roundabout installed on Red Wing Boulevard in 2021 have done nothing to address these problems. The heavy traffic on 316 was a topic of concern when the South Pines subdivision was annexed, and nothing has significantly changed since.”

Councilmembers agreed.

“I know there have been concerns about the congestion of Hwy. 316. I would feel better about this to have that study completed, just because I know that’s a main concern for many of the residents in that area,” said Angie Haus.

Hinzman noted that the annexation is just the first step, and the city and council will have multiple reviews of the project through permitting. He said the traffic study and environmental review can be done in the next couple months.

“I will stress this is a conceptual plan at this point. This is an idea brought forth by the developer,” he said.

He said there are similar single-family home rental developments in Woodbury and Inver Grove Heights.

“These are expenses homes from the leasing standpoint, but there appears to be a market,” Hinzman said.

Councilmember Trevor Lund said, “This is a lot of houses. I know market drives a lot of this. We’ve been in situations in the past where a development has been planned and things change. We’ve already stepped into it. How do we know this is going to be similar to this whatsoever. I’m asking because of the traffic study and things like that. You have a fair amount of senior living here and that may not affect the rush hour traffic. What if we all the sudden realize it’s a different housing type that goes in there.? It’s a rush hour type of traffic that moves in there. What assurances do we have these are going to be senior living apartments in the middle?”

“That’s a difficult question to answer,” said Hinzman. “It’s difficult to look into a crystal ball and say this will go through as is. If you approve a plan of “X,” the developer is obligated to do that.”

Lund continued, “It can’t become so much different that it is no longer what we had planned for and has downstream negative effects.”

Project plans are for development to start next summer. Phases of the development would be completed all at one time.

The council could have approved the annexation at its March 6 meeting. However, the decision was held over to March 20, as two council members – Lisa Leifeld and Tina Folch – were absent.