WAYZATA — In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, the Wayzata City Council approved the Landmark Wayzata redevelopment, clearing the way for the former TCF headquarters at 200 Lake Street East to be replaced with a six-building, mixed-use development along the city’s most visible stretch of lakefront.
The council adopted Resolution 13-2025, approving a Planned Unit Development (PUD) concept plan, general plan, zoning amendment, shoreline conditional use permits, and a design deviation for street tree spacing. It simultaneously denied a requested deviation related to massing breaks, affirming that each building core must be separated by a full three-story void.
Consultant Planner Eric Zweber opened the discussion with a concise presentation outlining the scope of the request. The project includes six distinct building cores stretching between Ferndale Road and Barry Avenue, with a mix of ground-floor commercial space, upper-level residential units, and underground parking. “This is a long, narrow site with high visibility and significant impact on the downtown lakefront,” Zweber said. “The proposal meets city code for height, parking, and shoreline requirements, with 162 parking stalls provided for 156 units.”
Zweber emphasized that although the development includes massing breaks at the ground level, the applicant had sought approval to connect the second and third floors between the cores—effectively eliminating the upper portions of the breaks. City staff and the Planning Commission had recommended denial of that request.
The council concurred, with each member offering remarks before the vote.
Council Member Jeff Parkhill supported the resolution, calling the requirement for full massing breaks “a reasonable compromise.” “These voids amount to just 5.5% of the project,” he said. “It’s not a big ask, and the added light and air—especially on the north side in winter—will benefit everyone.”
Council Member Alex Plechash, who served on the Design Standards Task Force, reflected on the original intent behind the city’s architectural rules. “The term ‘massing break’ was created to prevent exactly what we see in the lakeside rendering—a single, massive structure,” he said. “This requirement is about ensuring the building remains consistent with Wayzata’s scale and character.”
Council Member Ken Sorensen agreed. “This long façade without full breaks just doesn’t align with the purpose of the PUD district or our comprehensive plan,” he said. “We’ve talked about this at length, and the planning facts are clear.”
Council Member Molly MacDonald added that she was “proud of the work done by staff, the Planning Commission, the applicant, and the community” in bringing the project to this final stage. “I support the resolution as written,” she said.
Mayor Andrew Mullin acknowledged he had a “slight difference of opinion” regarding the definition of a massing break but agreed that the subjective and objective criteria of the PUD provided sound rationale for requiring the open separations. “I would’ve preferred something closer to the Planning Commission’s version,” he said, “but there isn’t the will of the council to move in that direction, and I support the consensus.”
Following a roll call vote, the council unanimously adopted the resolution. A second vote approved the first reading of Ordinance 849, which updates the official zoning map to reclassify the site from its 1989 designation for office and banking uses to a 2025 PUD district for mixed-use residential and commercial.
“Congratulations to the developer,” Mullin stated. “We wish you well as you bring this project forward to construction.”
Final permitting is expected to proceed later this year, with construction anticipated to begin shortly thereafter. The development joins other transformative lakefront projects such as Panoway, Meyer Place, and The Promenade—redefining the western gateway to downtown Wayzata.
City Manager Jeff Dahl, Interim Police Chief Jamie Baker, Community Development Director Alex Sharp, Councilmember Molly MacDonald, Public Works Director Mike Kelly, Councilmember Ken Sorensen, Mayor Andrew Mullin, and Fire Chief Kevin Klapprich.
WAYZATA — Residents of the central core gathered at The Wayzata Depot on Monday evening for a public listening session led by MayorAndrew Mullin, City Manager Jeff Dahl, and members of the Wayzata City Council and staff. The event aimed to deepen community engagement and foster direct dialogue on key city priorities, including revenue diversification, public safety, and lakefront improvements.
“Our brand new mayor has made engagement a top priority,” said City Manager Jeff Dahl in his opening remarks. “Events like this show how seriously our elected officials take that responsibility.”
Among those present were longtime Councilmember Molly MacDonald, owner of Highcroft on Lake Street, and Councilmember Ken Sorensen, the council’s newest member, who brings a background in development.
Dahl also introduced key city staff, including Interim Police Chief Jamie Baker, Deputy City Manager Aurora Yager, Community Development Director Alex Sharp, Public Works Director and City Engineer Mike Kelly, Fire Chief Kevin Klapprich—who was recognized for over 46 years of service—and Communications Coordinator Liv Marandino.
The city’s legislative priorities took center stage as Dahl outlined plans for a local option sales tax and a potential food and beverage tax to reduce dependency on property taxes. “We’re working to capture some of the revenue generated by visitors to help offset the cost of police, public works, and keeping our city safe and clean,” said Dahl. He noted that state approval would be required and that upcoming engagement sessions will be held next week to gather feedback from residents and business owners.
Other discussion topics included updates to Wayzata’s short-term rental ordinance, with the city now exploring additional regulations following concerns about neighborhood disruption.
On the Panoway front, Dahl provided an update on the lake walk, noting that redesigned dock bumpers will be piloted in coming weeks to better protect boats. He also announced that long-anticipated step-down platforms—allowing public access to the lake—will be installed shortly.
City Manager Jeff Dahl shared an encouraging update on the Section Foreman House restoration, describing it as “the most shovel-ready project we have.” According to Dahl, all design work is complete, and a significant portion of the necessary funding has already been secured. The city is currently awaiting additional private contributions or the approval of a state bonding bill to move forward. Once finalized, the long-anticipated project would restore the historic lakefront structure as a public asset, reinforcing Wayzata’s commitment to preservation and placemaking.
Public Safety
Interim Police Chief Jamie Baker concluded the session by addressing seasonal public safety concerns as summer activity ramps up in Wayzata.
Interim Police Chief Jamie Baker addressed current staffing levels, enforcement priorities, and ongoing public safety efforts as Wayzata enters the busy summer season.
“I’m Jamie Baker, the Interim Police Chief for the City of Wayzata,” she said. “I’ve been with the department for about three years and bring 21 years of prior law enforcement experience.”
Baker reported that the department currently has 15 sworn officers, with a full complement of 18 positions. “Due to recent retirements—including our former chief and a sergeant—we’re temporarily below full strength, but we’re actively working to fill those roles,” she said. “That includes the hiring of a new sergeant and a permanent Police Chief.”
Join the Wayzata Police Department: Now Hiring Officers
In addition, the city is onboarding three new Community Service Officers (CSOs), with training expected to be completed by early summer.
Baker emphasized the importance of community involvement in maintaining safety. “While our officers are committed and responsive, they can’t be everywhere at once,” she said. “We rely on residents to be our eyes and ears. If there are recurring issues, especially in specific locations, please call us with details like dates and times. That makes all the difference in how effectively we can respond.”
A growing concern across the metro, she noted, is the misuse of electric bikes and scooters—particularly among juveniles. “We’re not alone in this,” she said. “Every agency in the area is dealing with it. That’s why we’re drafting a citywide ordinance tailored to e-bikes and e-scooters. It’s critical we get the language right so we can enforce it properly.”
Chief Baker also reminded residents to call 911—not the city’s non-emergency number or email—for anything that seems suspicious or requires a timely response. “It might seem unusual, but the same dispatchers answer both lines,” she explained. “911 ensures your concern is prioritized and acted on immediately. Emails, on the other hand, are not monitored in real time.”
She closed with an update on a new security feature coming to the Mill Street parking ramp. “For those who live above the ramp, you’ve likely noticed some late-night activity over the years. We’ve approved and ordered a security gate to limit access after hours. It should be installed within the next month.”
City Engineer on Infrastructure
City Engineer Mike Kelly provided a brief update on key infrastructure projects underway in Wayzata this season, most of which are focused on maintenance. “Most of what we’re doing this year involves mill and overlay work—removing the surface layer of the street and repaving it,” Kelly explained.
One active project includes a water main replacement and resurfacing in the East Neighborhood—specifically on Hampton Street, LaSalle Street, Wise Avenue, and Central Avenue. Broadway Avenue, north of Wayzata Boulevard, is also undergoing improvements. “If you experienced delays last week, it was related to that intersection project and the installation of a new traffic signal,” he noted, estimating completion in about three weeks.
Looking ahead, Kelly flagged a major Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) project scheduled for next year: resurfacing Highway 12 from I-494. “There will be delays, and we want residents to be aware that it will impact travel through the area,” he said.
Quality of Life Issues Addressed by Mayor Mullin
Mayor Andrew Mullin took the mic to thank residents for showing up. “It’s encouraging to see so many people here,” he said. “We’ve heard that formal community meetings can feel intimidating, so we’re trying new formats like this one—and others across neighborhoods—to make it easier for residents to speak up.”
Mullin also highlighted his informal monthly meetups at Wayzata Bar & Grill. “On the second Monday of each month, I’ll be there for anyone who wants to talk—whether over a beer or water,” he said.
Mullin addressed the community’s growing frustration with traffic, noise, public disturbances, and late-night behavior. “We’re hearing you loud and clear,” he said. “More people bring more problems, and we’re taking it seriously.” He pointed to new investments in police staffing, including increased patrols, community service officers on foot and bike, and even a reserve officer scheduled to start this summer. “He’s actually a urologist by profession, and he’ll be helping report issues while biking the city,” Mullin added.
In addition to increased staffing, the city has raised fines for various ordinance violations. “Exhibition driving, public drinking, noise—if you get cited twice for something like exhibition driving, it’s now a mandatory court appearance and a $1,000 fine,” Mullin said. “We’re sending a clear message that we will not tolerate behavior that degrades quality of life in Wayzata.”
Mullin concluded with a candid acknowledgment: “I’m not going to pretend we’ve solved it all. But we’re taking specific, meaningful steps to address your concerns.”
Public Engagement and Resident Feedback
Following city updates, the evening transitioned into an open forum where residents had the opportunity to ask questions and share concerns directly with city staff and councilmembers. Community members raised a range of issues—many focused on livability, enforcement, and neighborhood integrity. Councilmembers Molly MacDonald and Ken Sorensen remained on hand to field questions, while staff members provided clarification on policies, ongoing projects, and next steps.
Following city updates, the evening transitioned into an open forum where residents had the opportunity to ask questions and share concerns directly with city staff and councilmembers. Community members raised a range of issues—many focused on livability, enforcement, and neighborhood integrity. Councilmembers Molly MacDonald and Ken Sorensen remained on hand to field questions, while staff members provided clarification on policies, ongoing projects, and next steps.
City leaders reiterated their commitment to transparency and responsiveness. Residents were encouraged to attend upcoming meetings, submit feedback through official channels, and continue participating in the city’s evolving engagement efforts.
Samantha Capen Muldoon, representing the Muldoon family and Dray Trustee, LLC, alongside attorney Patrick Steinhoff of Malkerson, Gunn Martin LLP, at the Wayzata City Council meeting on April 15, 2025.
WAYZATA, MN — The Wayzata City Council voted 3-2 to deny the proposed Ferndale Bluffs subdivision at 565 Ferndale Road West on Tuesday, April 15, 2025, following a lengthy and contentious discussion that raised critical issues about the proposed road’s impact on the neighborhood, its compliance with city codes, and the potential legal ramifications of the decision. The project, which sought to subdivide an 11.87-acre lot into three residential lots, faced a variety of concerns from both city officials and local residents, and the failure to approve the subdivision sets the stage for potential litigation.
The Ferndale Bluffs subdivision has sparked disagreement among some of Wayzata’s most prominent residents, with long-time property owners and influential figures on Ferndale Road voicing differing opinions on the project’s impact. While some support the development, others are concerned about its effect on the neighborhood’s character and environmental integrity.
The applicant, represented by Dray Trustee LLC (Samantha Capen Muldoon, Allison Capen, Heather Capen Cox ), had initially proposed a four-lot subdivision but reduced the plan to three lots after consulting with city staff and addressing community concerns. This proposal had already garnered unanimous support from the Wayzata Planning Commission, which voted in favor of the project on February 24, 2025. The planning commission’s approval was based on the belief that the subdivision met all zoning and environmental requirements, with the design carefully accounting for the property’s steep topography and its sensitive environmental features.
“I felt this addressed their concerns as much as we could within the fire code, a 20 foot road, a hammerhead, at 10% grade–that’s as good as it’s going to get.”
Samantha Capen Muldoon
However, when the project reached the city council on March 25, 2025, council members expressed concerns about the public road’s impact. In particular, the road’s grading, the removal of trees, and the proposed retaining walls were seen as potential disruptions to the neighborhood’s character. The council tabled the item and directed the applicant to meet with city staff to discuss potential road design modifications.
Following a collaborative meeting on April 2, 2025, the applicant and city staff presented two revised options for the road design. The applicant favored Exhibit A (Hammerhead design), which would have had a narrower road and a steeper grade, believing it would reduce environmental impacts significantly. However, city staff endorsed Exhibit B (Cul-de-Sac design), arguing that it better met fire safety and road design standards.
In addition to the proposed road modifications, the applicant’s legal team presented a letter to the city council requesting approval of the preliminary plat with a condition that the final plat be modified in the final application, contingent upon the council’s approval of a text amendment to the city’s subdivision code. The proposed amendment would allow for the creation of a new category of “Minor Local Roads,” which would provide flexibility for small subdivisions like Ferndale Bluffs.
The applicant’s attorney, Patrick Steinhoff of Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP, stated that the project fully complied with the city’s subdivision ordinance and that denying the application based on subjective criteria, such as the neighborhood’s character, would not be legally supportable. The applicant’s legal team emphasized that past experiences with similar projects had resulted in litigation, and they warned the city council that denying the project could lead to another lawsuit.
“Voting to deny the proposed preliminary plat because the proposed road purportedly adversely affects the ‘character of the neighborhood’ is also not legally supportable…”
Capens Advocate for Property Rights and Rule Adherence After 60 Years
Joan and Gary Capen, the parents of the applicant for the Ferndale Bluffs subdivision, shared their perspective on the proposed project in a letter to the Wayzata City Council. Having owned their property and paid taxes on it for 60 years, they expressed that, during their long tenure in the neighborhood, it never occurred to them to object to a neighbor’s development or the use of their property, even when it wasn’t to their personal preference. They reflected on past neighborhood changes, such as the demolition of a nearby house and the removal of trees for better views, which they accepted as part of the natural evolution of the area.
“Our daughters are following the rules, and have already made concessions to accommodate the neighbors while following the rules. This shouldn’t be up to a popular vote by the neighbors. It is about the rules, and the rules are clear.”
Joan and gary capen
The Capens emphasized the importance of adhering to the established rules and regulations, rather than making decisions based on the opinions of neighbors. They urged the council to consider property rights and the broader community’s long-standing norms when making a decision, reflecting their deep respect for the city’s code and the need for consistency in its application.
The Public’s Response: Strong Division Between Support and Opposition
Public comments were divided, with several residents expressing strong opposition to the project, particularly due to the proposed public road and its potential impact on the neighborhood. Sue Schwalbach, a resident of Lower Ferndale Road West, voiced concerns about the width of the proposed road, the loss of trees, and the visual impact of the retaining walls. She argued that the road would disrupt the natural landscape and change the character of the neighborhood permanently.
Geoff Martha, another resident, echoed these concerns, pointing out that Ferndale Road is already narrow and adding a new road that is wider would be visually jarring. He also raised concerns about the potential disruption caused by construction traffic.
However, other residents, including Kathy Jones, voiced support for the project, highlighting the applicant’s commitment to environmental sustainability and thoughtful development. Jones noted that the applicant had taken care to preserve the environment and reduce tree removal, while also complying with zoning regulations. She argued that the project would blend well with the community and that the proposed road modifications would significantly minimize its impact.
After hearing public comments, the council began deliberating on the proposal, carefully considering the concerns raised by residents as well as the applicant’s efforts to address those concerns.
Parkhill Prefers Existing Driveway
Councilmember Jeff Parkhill acknowledged the applicant’s efforts to address the concerns raised by the city council, particularly in reducing the road’s environmental impact. However, he emphasized that the primary issue remained the road’s impact on the neighborhood, particularly its grading and the loss of trees. He commended the applicant for bringing forward creative solutions but expressed a preference for a different approach. Parkhill noted his interest in utilizing the existing private driveway as the road, as it could reduce the overall disruption. However, he recognized that the current city code and fire code made this approach difficult.
“I would like to explore something that uses what is there. Let’s use the road that is there already and just add one more home.”
jeff parkhill
Ultimately, Parkhill voted against the project, believing that while the road design modifications were a step in the right direction, they did not go far enough to minimize the impact on the neighborhood. He stated that the road’s effect on the neighborhood was too significant to approve, even with the proposed changes.
MacDonald on Neighborhood Character and Subjective Evaluation
Councilmember Molly MacDonald expressed concerns that, while the application met the objective criteria, it did not sufficiently address the subjective criteria, particularly the impact on the neighborhood’s character. She pointed out that while the proposal complied with city codes, it did not fully take into account the effects on the surrounding area. MacDonald stated that the road’s grading and width, as well as the loss of mature trees, would significantly alter the character of the neighborhood.
“I believe this proposal is not compliant. It was quite clear.”
molly macdonald
MacDonald also emphasized that the council should not make decisions based solely on the fear of litigation, stating that the public interest should not be driven by concerns about potential lawsuits. She felt that the proposal, as presented, did not adequately respect the character of the neighborhood, and therefore, she voted against subdivsion.
Plechash Concerned with Road Width
Councilmember Plechash acknowledged the efforts made by the applicant to address concerns, particularly the road design, which he saw as a positive step. He commended the reduction from four to three lots and the attention to environmental concerns. However, Plechash raised a significant concern about the width of the proposed new road, especially in comparison to the existing 19-foot Ferndale Road.
“Listing the width of Ferndale—19 feet—actually argues against this new street, as the new street would be wider than the main street. To me, that’s a bit of an issue.”
Alex Plechash
While recognizing the design’s compliance with city codes, Plechash felt it did not adequately consider the subjective impacts on the neighborhood’s character. He believed the new road would materially affect the neighborhood, particularly in terms of disruption and visual impact. As a result, Plechash voted for denial of the subdivision.
Sorensen Prefers Hammerhead Design
Councilmember Ken Sorensen acknowledged that the subdivision met the objective criteria but emphasized that the primary issue remained the proposed road’s impact. He commended the applicant for their collaborative efforts with city staff, consultants, and legal advisors, noting that the process had been productive. Sorensen felt that the modifications made to the road design were a significant step toward addressing the concerns, especially regarding the road cutting through the hill.
“I think what we’ve come up with together with the staff and the applicant has been creative, it’s been collaborative, it’s gone significantly down the path of meeting the objectives of trying to deal with the adverse conditions that we saw in the road.”
ken sorenson
While Sorensen supported moving forward with the project, he also expressed concerns about the potential of using a Planned Unit Development (PUD) or a private road, noting that it would still be constrained by fire code regulations. He ultimately favored Exhibit A (the Hammerhead design) as the best solution to minimize the road’s impact on the neighborhood, emphasizing that it was the most non-intrusive option available, and voted in support of the subdivision.
Mayor Mullin: Creative Solution Instead of Litigation
Mayor Andrew Mullin supported the approval of the Ferndale Bluffs subdivision, recognizing the applicant’s efforts to engage with city staff and neighbors to find a solution that would minimize the road’s impact. He proposed the idea of an “Option C,” which would modify the road design even further to reduce its impact on the neighborhood, including a narrower road, a slightly steeper grade, and a hammerhead turn-around. Mullin argued that this approach would provide a balanced solution that addressed both safety concerns and the community’s desire for a less intrusive development.
Mullin also raised the issue of the city’s subdivision code, which he believed forced the applicant into a public road design that was not ideal for the project or the neighborhood. He warned that denying the project could lead to legal battles, citing previous experiences where the city was forced to approve a private road over a public road mandated by the city’s subdivision ordinance.
“What I’m genuinely fearful of, if this goes down with the denial, is we’ll end up right back in court, we’ll end up right back in a situation where this is pressed and guess what will happen as an outcome? A public road will prevail, a public road will have to be built, the neighborhood loses, the applicant loses, the City loses.”
andrew mullin
Despite his strong support for the subdivision and the proposed road modifications, Mullin ultimately faced opposition from his fellow council members, who felt the changes still did not adequately address the concerns about neighborhood character and environmental impact.
The Council’s Votes: Denial of the Project
After a lengthy deliberation, the city council first voted on the motion to approve the subdivision with the proposed road modifications. This motion failed, with Councilmembers Parkhill, Plechash, and MacDonald voting against it due to concerns about the road’s impact on the neighborhood.
The second motion, to deny the subdivision and preliminary plat, passed with a 3-2 vote, with Councilmembers Parkhill, Plechash, and MacDonald voting for the denial. The council cited the significant impact of the proposed public road, including its grading, the loss of trees, and the alteration of the neighborhood’s character, as the primary reasons for denial. The resolution highlighted that the proposed road did not meet subjective criteria related to the neighborhood’s character and that the environmental impact was too significant to approve.
Looking Ahead: Potential Legal Challenges
With the 3-2 vote to deny the project, the Ferndale Bluffs subdivision may now move toward litigation. The applicant’s legal team has indicated that they believe the project fully complies with the city’s subdivision ordinance and that the denial could result in a legal challenge. The proposed text amendment to the subdivision code, which was not approved by the council, could have allowed for greater flexibility in future small subdivisions, but that option was not pursued.
“My wish for City leadership is to seek compromise as a reasonable outcome and continue moving things forward.”
Andrew mullin
Wayzata.com will keep you updated on any potential legal filings related to the denial, as the applicant and their attorneys stated that the request was fully compliant with city regulations.
This article has been updated to accurately reflect the name of a public commenter and to clarify previous legal battles the city faced during the Enchanted Woods subdivision action that involved private roads and safety personnel access.
Future Klapprich Park warming house design. City of Wayzata.
WAYZATA — At its March 25 meeting, the Wayzata City Council voted unanimously to authorize the solicitation of construction bids for the long-planned Klapprich Park improvements — a multi-year project aimed at revitalizing the city’s signature community park. But MayorAndrew Mullinmade clear he’s not ready to sign off on the full $2.6 million price tag.
The comprehensive plan includes ADA-compliant playgrounds and trails, new plaza areas, parking upgrades, and renovations to the warming house — with several items bid as alternates, including a hillside slide and stairway, a Minnetonka Avenue sidewalk, and a refreshed Bell Courts cabana.
Parks and Environment Planner Nick Kieser, who’s led the effort, said the project is organized into two primary bid packages: one for all site work and another for the warming house. A trio of alternate bids will give the Council flexibility to scale up or down depending on the final numbers.
Base improvements include:
Site grading, drainage, and irrigation
An 18-stall parking lot with grass pavers
A new natural-themed 4,800-square-foot playground
A landscaped outdoor patio with fire pits and seating near the warming house
The warming house renovation — budgeted at just over $800,000 — would nearly double the usable interior space, add air conditioning, a gas fireplace, direct restroom access, and expanded equipment storage.
Council Discussion: Options and Oversight
Councilmember Molly MacDonald requested the hillside slide and stairs be split into separate alternates, noting their differing functions. “They are two different priorities,” she said, adding she’d prefer to preserve stair access even if the slide had to be scrapped.
The project team expects to receive 6 to 8 bids from contractors, with construction beginning as early as spring 2025. Major site and warming house work is scheduled for completion ahead of the winter skating season.
Mayor Mullin Voices Budget Concerns
Despite voting in favor of going to bid, Mayor Andrew Mullin voiced serious reservations about the financial scope.
“No matter what these bids come back, I’m not supportive of the full engagement of draining the parks fund to whatever the number is,” he said.
He also expressed skepticism about relying too heavily on city estimates, saying:
“We don’t have a very good track record, even using a construction manager, ever coming with a bid in anywhere near staff’s personal estimate — which is why we’re doing this, right?”
Mullin emphasized that the next stage — evaluating actual bids — would be the true decision point for determining what components can realistically move forward.
Next Steps
The Council voted unanimously to authorize the bid solicitation, incorporating Councilmember Molly MacDonald’s recommendation to separate the hillside stairs and slide into two distinct alternates. This adjustment gives the City greater flexibility to prioritize access and manage costs once bids are returned. With all members in agreement, the project now moves forward to the bidding phase, with final decisions on construction to follow based on actual pricing and available funding.
The bid documents will be published in early April, with bids due later in the month. Council is expected to review the bids at its May 6 meeting.
Construction would be phased:
Spring: Site grading and irrigation to allow for grass establishment
Summer: Playground, parking, and warming house work
Fall: Completion of all priority items before winter
The vision for Klapprich Park remains ambitious — but final decisions will rest on actual bid results and the Council’s willingness to balance community enhancements with financial restraint.
A high-profile land use proposal on one of Wayzata’s most iconic streets is testing the balance between property rights and neighborhood character.
The owners of 565 Ferndale Road West are seeking to subdivide their 12-acre estate into three buildable lots, prompting months of public feedback, detailed staff analysis, and a split vote by the Wayzata City Council. The outcome could shape future development along the city’s prized western shoreline—and it’s not yet final.
The Wayzata City Council took up the agenda item on March 25th, 2025.
Planner Outlines Scope and Standards of 565 Ferndale Subdivision Proposal
Wayzata City Planner Valerie Quarles delivered a comprehensive overview of the 565 Ferndale Road West subdivision application, outlining the project’s history, compliance with zoning standards, and environmental review process.
Quarles noted that the current application differs from an earlier version that proposed four lots and a longer road requiring a variance. That plan was withdrawn in 2024 after the Planning Commission recommended denial. The revised proposal now includes three riparian lots and a 526-foot public cul-de-sac that meets city code.
“The only request in front of us is the preliminary plat for three R-1A lots,” Quarles explained, adding that the project meets requirements for lot size, density, and the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
The site includes steep slopes, bluff setbacks, wetlands, and over 600 significant trees, including 24 heritage trees. While the road construction would result in some tree loss, Quarles clarified that it would not affect any heritage trees. She also noted that proposed home sites appear to avoid grading in sensitive bluff impact zones.
The project includes two stormwater holding ponds and two retaining walls—one as tall as eight feet on the west side and another up to seven feet on the east. “The street meets the City’s subdivision standards for width, right-of-way, and fire access,” she said.
Outlots will be created to ensure future maintenance of the retaining walls remains a private responsibility, not the City’s.
Quarles acknowledged the public concern around the project. “As of this afternoon, we’ve received 39 public comments,” she said. “Supporters say the plan is aligned with the comprehensive plan and is reasonable. Opponents cite environmental impacts, tree loss, and the overall land disturbance.”
She concluded by noting that the Planning Commission voted 6–0 to recommend approval of the preliminary plat.
Samantha Capen Muldoon Emphasizes Family Legacy, Environmental Care in Subdivision Proposal
Samantha Capen Muldoon. Image courtesy City of Wayzata.
Samantha Capen Muldoon, one of the property owners and a lifelong member of the Wayzata community, addressed the City Council to explain the background and intentions behind the proposal to subdivide her family’s land at 565 Ferndale Road West.
“This is not a commercial developer,” she said. “It’s a family that has lived here for over 60 years.” Muldoon shared that her parents bought the property in 1964 and raised their family on Ferndale Road. She and her sisters—an architect and a landscape architect—have shaped the plan alongside a team of local environmental and engineering experts.
The current proposal, she explained, is the product of years of collaboration with city staff, environmental consultants, and neighbors. The family originally explored a four-lot layout, but after listening to concerns about density, slope impact, and neighborhood character, they revised the plan to three riparian lots and a shorter road.
“This is a 100% compliant, variance-free subdivision,” Muldoon said. “It reduces the number of lots, protects the most significant trees, avoids wetlands and bluffs, and is consistent with both zoning and the comprehensive plan.”
She stressed that the proposed road is shorter than many in the neighborhood, follows much of the existing driveway, and is designed to minimize visibility and tree loss. “Our goal has always been a thoughtful, small-scale development that brings vitality and new families to Ferndale,” she said. “Not seasonal homes that sit empty.”
Muldoon also addressed what she believed were public misconceptions. She clarified that the retaining walls are largely cut into the hill, not built above grade, and that the stormwater features are rain gardens designed to hold water temporarily after major storms. “The walls won’t be visible from Peavey Pond,” she said. “They’ll be hidden behind trees and topography.”
In closing, she reiterated the family’s pride in the plan: “This isn’t complicated—it’s detailed. Three lots on 12 acres, fully compliant, and designed to be sensitive to the land and community we care so much about.”
Neighbors Weigh In on Ferndale Subdivision: Concerns Over Trees, Topography, and Neighborhood Character
The proposed subdivision of 565 Ferndale Road West—an approximately 12-acre parcel on the western shore of Peavey Pond—has generated strong reaction from the Wayzata community. While a handful of residents expressed support, the overwhelming majority of public comments submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council voiced concerns.
Opponents cite environmental disruption, safety, and aesthetics.
Many residents took issue with the proposed construction of a 526-foot public road and cul-de-sac, the removal of more than two acres of trees, and the introduction of large retaining walls and stormwater holding ponds.
“This road is the same length as one and three-quarters football fields,” wrote Phil Soran of 532 Ferndale Road West. “It entails digging…with a 50-60 foot width. This is an enormous amount of earth and tree removal.”
His wife, Margaret Soran, added that while the applicants may have met objective zoning requirements, “this project will have a significant negative impact on the character of our neighborhood.”
Longtime Wayzata resident Donald MacMillan echoed those sentiments in a brief letter: “A whole new road is disruptive to the overall aesthetic of the current landscape and neighborhood. It is very impactful to the natural habitat of the marshland.”
Many neighbors pushed for a more scaled-back alternative. Geoff and Stephanie Martha of 520 Ferndale Road West called the proposal “excessive and detrimental,” urging the City to consider limiting the site to two homes accessed by a private lane.
Others, like Steve and Rita Howarth, questioned whether the development aligns with Wayzata’s long-term vision: “The proposed plan is too aggressive and does not align with the values and aesthetics that Wayzata is known for.”
Don and Penney Birdsong, who own the property immediately west of the site, described the plan as overly invasive, citing the proximity of new infrastructure to their lot line. “We’re not trying to block development,” they wrote, “but asking the City Council to consider ways to mitigate the invasive nature of the proposed road.”
A few voices in support
Not everyone opposed the plan. Bruce and Martha Atwater, longtime residents with deep roots on Ferndale Road, said the proposal was consistent with the area’s history and character. “This thoughtful and well-designed project is ready for approval now,” they wrote, noting that the lot density is well below the maximum allowed.
Bill and Kathleen Wanner also expressed support, stating that the homes “would be barely visible from Ferndale Road” and were appropriate for the heavily wooded site.
Frankie and Taylor Bennett, prospective buyers hoping to build their family home on one of the lots, described the location as “the ideal environment to establish permanent roots.” They emphasized a desire to be “responsible stewards of the land and active participants in the community.”
City Council Deliberates Ferndale Subdivision, Decision Tabled After Deadlock
Toward the end of the agenda item, the Wayzata City Council discussed the contentious proposal to subdivide 565 Ferndale Road West but ultimately tabled the decision after a 2–2 vote.
Councilmembers expressed appreciation for the applicants’ detailed planning, lengthy engagement with city staff, and responsiveness to neighborhood feedback. “There is much about this plan that was painstakingly crafted with a great deal of sensitivity by everyone involved,” said Councilmember Alex Plechash. However, he and Councilmember Molly MacDonald both cited concerns about the visual and physical impact of the proposed 526-foot public road and cul-de-sac.
“I believe this does adversely affect the character of the neighborhood,” MacDonald said. “Our community values character over cars and roads and garages.”
Plechash concurred, referencing the city’s subdivision ordinance which states that new lots should not adversely impact the scale, pattern, or character of existing neighborhoods. “That’s in the code,” he said, “and in my opinion, this plan does just that.”
Councilmember Ken Sorensen acknowledged the proposal’s compliance with zoning and comprehensive plan requirements but questioned whether the road design could be improved. “It’s clear the applicant has a right to develop,” he said. “But is there a better way to build this road that’s less invasive?”
MayorAndrew Mullin noted that while she empathized with concerned neighbors, the plan met all objective city standards. “My job is to evaluate based on the code,” she said. “And this plan does that. It is compliant, and I support it.”
When a motion to deny was introduced and seconded, it failed in a 2–2 vote with Plechash and MacDonald voting to deny. A subsequent motion to approve the application with a condition that staff work with the applicant to explore less impactful road options also resulted in a deadlock with Mullin and Sorensen voting to approve. Councilmember Jeff Parkhill was absent.
Ultimately, the council voted unanimously to table the decision until April 15, when all five councilmembers are expected to be present. During that time, city staff will work with the applicant to assess whether any changes can be made to reduce the road’s environmental and visual impact.
“This has been one of the most engaged applications we’ve seen,” said Plechash. “We owe it to the public—and to the applicant—to get this right.”
In a sparsely attended City Council meeting on December 3, 2024, only three of the five members of the council were present to deliberate Ordinance 845, a proposed measure regulating cannabis businesses within city limits. After extensive discussion, the council lacked the required votes to advance the ordinance, resulting in the issue being tabled until the December 17 meeting, when the full council is expected to be in attendance.
The ordinance, prepared in response to Minnesota’s legalization of recreational cannabis, addresses zoning, licensing, and operational parameters for cannabis retailers. It would establish strict regulations, including a single non-municipal cannabis dispensary limit within Wayzata, buffer zones around schools and treatment facilities, and restrictive operating hours of 10 a.m. to 9 p.m.
Planning Consultant Eric Zweber presented the ordinance, noting that the state’s Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) has yet to finalize its rules. “We’ve taken a conservative approach, proposing the maximum restrictions allowed by state law,” Zweber said, highlighting buffer zones and limits on temporary cannabis events.
Discussion revealed concerns among council members. Mayor pro tem Alex Plechash criticized the state’s cannabis policy as “bad policy decisions from the state, rammed down our throats.” He advocated for larger buffer zones around treatment facilities, arguing they should match those established for schools.
Others questioned the clarity of the rules. “It feels backwards,” stated council member Molly MacDonald, expressing frustration over the two-step approval process that requires conditional use permits (CUPs) before a business can apply for a state license.
The Planning Commission previously recommended the ordinance after reviewing public input, including concerns about potential conflicts between non-municipal and municipal cannabis retail businesses. However, ambiguity around buffer zones and school bus stops prompted requests for further refinement.
The absence of MayorJohanna Mouton and council member Ken Sorensen complicated Tuesday’s proceedings. Ordinances in Wayzata require at least three affirmative votes from the five-member council to advance, regardless of attendance.
With only three members present, the council, led by Mayor Pro Tem, decided to table the vote after a 2-1 roll call. Plechash and Parkhill supported using property lines for buffer zones, while MacDonald opposed, seeming to favor building envelopes as the starting point for measurement.
Should the ordinance fail to pass before December 31, the city’s moratorium on cannabis businesses will expire, potentially leaving Wayzata without local oversight as the state continues to promulgate regulations on the fly.
The council aims to resolve the issue at its next meeting, scheduled for December 17, 2024.
The Wayzata City Council, in a 3-1 split vote, approved $165,830.98 in change orders for the PanowayLakewalk project during their November 12 meeting. The vote highlighted ongoing concerns about project oversight, contingency planning, and the transparency of financial decisions.
Change Orders and Costs
The approved change orders addressed unforeseen construction issues, including:
Pile Obstruction ($18,498.15): Removal of a boulder obstructing pile installation.
Ice Breaking ($22,228.93): Clearing ice to allow for precast beam placement during winter.
Hydrocrane Setup ($23,091.97): Required crane work to place beams near the railroad due to winter conditions.
Remaining Acceleration ($60,441.93): Costs tied to an additional barge and crane to expedite work.
Railing Stiffeners ($41,570): Reinforcements added to address structural concerns with cable rail tensioning.
These costs pushed the project beyond its contingency funds, raising questions among council members about planning and accountability.
Budget Overview
City staff reported that the Panoway project remains $55,436 under budget, aided by a $258,971 sales tax credit and reallocated resources. However, the original contingency—a modest 3.8% of the total budget—was exhausted early, necessitating council approval for subsequent expenses.
Some council members questioned the decision-making process, with Council Member Ken Sorensen stating, “If this is work that wasn’t in the contractor’s contract, and it should be very clear if it was or wasn’t, the city probably owes them that money.” Sorensen continued, “I think the issue is, why do we incur these change orders and have they been appropriately scrutinized?”
Discussion on Accountability
Concerns were raised about the transparency of decision-making, particularly regarding the responsibilities of designers and contractors.
Council Member Jeff Parkhill remarked, “I think maybe we were a little optimistic on the 4% contingency. That may have been oversight by anybody involved with this. I’m feeling the same way about not being involved in some of these decisions, and for example maybe we could have gotten rid of the step downs if we knew they were going to cost us, x amount per year, an amount that wasn’t budgeted for and an additional $63,000. I know in building there is always unforeseeable things…“
“At this point I don’t think we have a choice, I think we have to pay for this but I think my biggest request is some transparency and clarity. We are up here forced to make a decision after the fact and it’s really not fair to us, it’s not fair to the community either,” continued Parkhill. “Watching some of these budgets go through it’s like holy smokes… it’s a bureaucracy.”
City staff acknowledged that some issues stemmed from unforeseen conditions, such as DNR permitting delays and deeper-than-expected piling requirements. Bob Janssen from Kraus-Anderson added that the project’s unique nature introduced risks that were difficult to anticipate.
Council Member Molly MacDonald questioned the step down change orders and work that appears to have been stopped, “I’ve noticed some of this skeleton down there that has been started, there’s a large piece of equipment that is sitting behind a sidewalk closed sign for quite some time.” MacDonald continued, “These design changes have not been seen by this body, will that skeleton down there, will that always be there?“
Mouton stated in response, “Decisions are being made outside of the purview of the council, I think is what I am hearing from council member MacDonald, and this council will be asked to approve the cost, we haven’t seen the design revisions, we don’t know any information about it, again, seems like there is a bit of a disconnect, being asked to approve something after the fact… it’s too little too late.“
Future Implications
The council also discussed pending change orders, particularly related to step-down adjustments for seasonal removability, which are under review. Council members expressed frustration at not being consulted earlier, with Mayor Mouton stating, “I don’t think I’ve ever seen this process play out this way.” Mounton continued, “I’m not comfortable saying yes to $165,000, this is work that is already done.“
Council Vote
The motion passed 3-1, with Mayor Mouton opposing. She expressed concerns about relying on funds not yet received and criticized the piecemeal presentation of information. Council Member Parkhill supported the motion but shared dissatisfaction with the process, saying, “We’re left to approve bills for work already completed, and that’s a difficult position to be in.”
Despite the challenges, the council remains committed to completing the Panoway project within budget and delivering a high-quality public space for Wayzata residents. This decision underscores the need for improved planning and communication as the project enters its final phases.
This article has been updated to reflect broader comments by the council members.
At the October 8th meeting, the Wayzata City Council voted against enacting an emergency moratorium, opting instead for a standard zoning ordinance that will impose a 90-day moratorium on new development in the R-3A district after two readings and publication–sometime in November. This decision primarily revolves around the exploration of garage placement, particularly the trend of constructing front-load garages with short driveways versus traditional back-load garages with longer driveways.
Moratorium Area. City of Wayzata.
Council member Molly Macdonald has been a key proponent of this initiative, voicing concerns about the impact of front-load garage designs on her neighborhood and the surrounding R-3A district north of Wayzata Boulevard. She emphasized the importance of examining how these design choices affect hardcover calculations, home sizes, and the overall character of the community.
While those with pending permit applications may continue with their plans, residents should note that the average building permit review process takes approximately six weeks. Consequently, a significant influx of new applications prior to the moratorium taking effect is not expected. The city plans to utilize the upcoming 90-day period to thoroughly assess zoning regulations related to garage placement and ensure that future developments align with the desired neighborhood character.
Public Input
KC Chermak voiced concerns about the moratorium. City of Wayzata.
KC Chermak, a seasoned local homebuilder and resident of Wayzata, addressed the City Council during a recent meeting to discuss the proposed moratorium on development in the community. With nearly three decades of experience in homebuilding and having worked under four different mayors and numerous council members, Schermack brought a wealth of knowledge to the discussion.
He expressed concerns that the moratorium might be a “knee-jerk reaction,” indicating that such a significant measure should be carefully considered. “If you do decide to do some sort of a moratorium, please state that you’re being very serious about it and you’re trying to send a message to people on the other side,” he urged the council.
Chermak emphasized the thorough evaluations conducted by previous city leaders, asserting, “The system has been heavily evaluated by your predecessors… and they’ve done a wonderful job.” He stressed that the current regulatory framework has been developed with the community’s best interests in mind and that changes should be based on concrete evidence of problems rather than assumptions or complaints.
Instead of halting development, Chermak advocated for a more constructive approach to improve architectural standards in the city. “We cannot mandate good architecture…, but we have plenty of rules that help us get to a good finish line,” he explained, suggesting that incentives could be offered to encourage better design and more thoughtful construction. He argued that the focus should be on fostering community engagement to identify and solve potential issues rather than resorting to a moratorium, which he felt could be counterproductive. “If there is [a problem], let’s find it… not just the stopgap that really doesn’t… solve anything,” he stated, urging the council to explore long-term solutions that would benefit the community.
Chermak concluded by expressing his commitment to improving the city and his pride in being part of the Wayzata community. He encouraged the council to consider alternative methods that would engage the community and enhance the overall living experience in the area. “I just want you to hopefully take what I’m saying to heart… I believe there’s other ways to get an outcome that would be much more appealing and come across much more engaged with the community,” he remarked.
Council Discussion
Ken Sorensen had reservations. City of Wayzata.
Council member Ken Sorensen voiced a cautious stance during the discussion of the proposed moratorium on redevelopment in the R-3A district. After personally touring the affected neighborhood, he acknowledged the contrasting appearances between new and older homes and the importance of preserving neighborhood character. However, he expressed concerns over the severity of the proposed action. “I’m very supportive of the study that we’re doing… but it does seem reactive,” he remarked, hinting that a moratorium might be an extreme measure to address the issue.
Sorensen questioned whether an emergency moratorium was necessary, pointing out that the neighborhood’s development trends are not new. “The declaration in front of us states that there is an immediate pressing and emergency need to impose a moratorium. I’m not sure I agree with that,” he said, casting doubt on whether the issue truly warranted halting all development.
He also highlighted the potential unintended consequences of freezing development, such as financial impacts on residents and property investors. “If you made an investment to purchase one of these properties, sell one of these properties, invest in one of these properties… the monthly load on that is pretty significant,” he stated. Ultimately, he expressed reservations about supporting the moratorium, citing the possibility of broader, unintended impacts and the optics of singling out one neighborhood for such a drastic measure. “It feels a little heavy-handed to me,” Swanson concluded.
Alex Plechash supported the moratorium. City of Wayzata.
Council member Alex Plechash expressed strong support for the proposed moratorium, emphasizing the broader impact of new developments on surrounding neighbors. He pointed out that while developers may build and move on to their next project, the effects of those developments remain long-term for the neighborhood. “When a home is put there that is dramatically different than the other homes surrounding it, it changes the character of the neighborhood,” the council member stated, underscoring the ripple effect that a single development can have on the community.
Reflecting on past decisions, Plechash admitted that while zoning regulations were originally put in place with good intentions, unforeseen consequences have emerged over time, particularly in more compact areas. “I think we have made mistakes in the past, unintentional,” he acknowledged, noting that those mistakes have now played out and highlighted the need for reassessment.
Despite a general aversion to moratoriums, Plechash saw this as an opportunity to prevent further harm, explaining, “As much as I hate moratoriums, in this case, I would be in favor of it because I think we could stop a wrong before it happens.” He recommended the moratorium take effect immediately, while offering a small concession to a developer who had a pending permit, suggesting the moratorium begin at the close of business the following day to give the developer a chance to finalize their paperwork. In their view, 90 days was a reasonable period to sort out the issues, particularly with winter approaching, which would naturally slow development activities. He concluded by expressing full support for the moratorium as a necessary step to protect the character of the neighborhood while the city reconsiders its zoning regulations.
Molly MacDonald supported the moratorium. City of Wayzata.
Council member Molly MacDonald emphasized that the push for the moratorium is rooted in real concerns, stating, “This issue and these ideas haven’t come from nowhere.” MacDonald highlighted the significant changes in their neighborhood, noting that 17 homes have been torn down in the last five years, prompting a deeper examination of community impacts. She acknowledged the need to balance the rights of property owners with the experiences of current residents who are witnessing substantial alterations to their surroundings.
MacDonald expressed a desire to look at the building code more holistically, suggesting it might be too restrictive and could encourage less desirable types of construction. “I want to look at it and say, okay, we made these determinations in ’08… so that’s not that recent,” she stated, advocating for a review of zoning regulations that could foster better architectural outcomes. She concluded by expressing optimism that the 90-day moratorium would serve as a catalyst for discussions on improving the building code to benefit both developers and the community.
Mayor Johana Mouton supported the moratorium. City of Wayzata.
MayorJohanna Mouton reflected on her long-term experience in the neighborhood, stating, “I too have seen just a staggering amount of change.” She noted that while lot sizes remain the same, the desires of homeowners have evolved significantly over the years, leading to a need for a reassessment of zoning regulations.
Expressing support for the moratorium, they acknowledged the financial implications for homeowners looking to build new homes, saying, “I’m very sympathetic to that.” Mayor Mouton emphasized that the goal of the moratorium is not merely to impose restrictions but to explore various solutions, including potential accommodations like water credits and permeable pavers, while striking a balance between being restrictive in some areas and less so in others. She concluded by noting that the 90-day period would allow the council to assess whether they are moving in the right direction.
The proposed moratorium is in the central part of the City of Wayzata. Image courtesy City of Wayzata.
The Wayzata City Council is set to vote on a proposed ordinance that would impose a 90-day moratorium on new development in a portion of the city’s R-3A zoning district. The temporary ban, outlined in Ordinance 842, would pause all building, demolition, and additions within the district to allow the city time to study potential amendments to its zoning regulations.
The moratorium, which will be voted on at the City Council meeting on October 8, affects an area north of Wayzata Boulevard, east of Barry Avenue, south of Highway 12, and west of Gleason Creek. According to city planners, the district has seen an increase in single-family home tear-downs and rebuilds, which make up 31% of such projects in Wayzata since 2019. The concern is that new developments in this area are altering the neighborhood’s character, with larger homes being built on smaller lots and shorter setbacks, creating an incongruous look that some residents find disruptive.
“The moratorium is intended to give staff the ability to study methods to address concerns around neighborhood character, without additional pressure from a rapid rate of single-family home tear-downs during this time,” stated Assistant Planner Valerie Quarles in an agenda report.
If passed, the ordinance will take effect immediately with a supermajority vote (four out of five council members). A simple majority would delay the moratorium’s start until the next council meeting.
The council’s decision to consider the moratorium follows a workshop held in September, where concerns about the neighborhood’s changing character were raised. During the moratorium, city staff will prioritize possible amendments to zoning rules and work with the Planning Commission to explore solutions.
The temporary ban is not without financial implications. A decrease in building permit revenue is expected as the moratorium halts development activities, but city officials emphasize that preserving neighborhood character is a priority.
The public will be notified of any future zoning amendments, with a public hearing to be scheduled before any permanent changes are enacted.
Former Council Member Cathy Iverson Opposes Moratorium at Council Meeting in Public Forum
Former Council Member Cathy Iverson speaks during the public forum. Image courtesy City of Wayzata.
September 17th Workshop Discussed Moratorium
At the September 17th council workshop, the Wayzata City Council directed City staff to explore and prepare a construction moratorium in the Central Core Zoning District (R-3A), for discussion at an upcoming council meeting.
The workshop topic was the result of a previous request by Council Member Molly MacDonald at the August 20th Council Meeting.
MacDonald Proposed Zoning Review at August 20th Council Meeting
According to the approved August 20th council meeting minutes, Council Member Molly MacDonald requested the review of the City’s zoning standards for core neighborhoods. This request was part of the 2024-2026 Strategic Plan Progress Report #1. She asked the Council to consider prioritizing the review under the Community Character and Resident Pride of Place section. MacDonald noted that in smaller, older neighborhoods like hers, the demolition of homes on small lots has significantly changed the area’s character.
She shared that she had received considerable community feedback on this issue and suggested that zoning changes and studies could help preserve the unique qualities of these neighborhoods as they develop.
MayorJohanna Mouton raised concerns about the potential delay in addressing zoning issues affecting core neighborhoods. She worried that waiting for a workshop discussion in a few months could result in additional homes being torn down, as government processes tend to be slow. Mouton highlighted that residents are already experiencing negative impacts and suggested that the issue might require more immediate attention.
Council Member MacDonald agreed, emphasizing the urgency of the situation. Council Member Jeff Parkhill proposed discussing the matter at the next workshop meeting, while Alex Plechash and Ken Sorensen also supported addressing it sooner rather than later. Mouton recommended that MacDonald provide staff with key resident concerns to guide the discussion. MacDonald agreed to do so and planned to meet with staff to outline priorities and expectations.
Garages in the Front or Back? And what about the length and location of the driveway?
The main issue is whether garages in Wayzata should be placed in front or back yards and how this affects hardcover, driveway length, location, and home size. You can find more details in our report from last week:
The Central Core, which includes the area bounded by Barry Avenue to the west, Wayzata Boulevard to the south, Chicago Avenue to the east, and Highway 12 to the north, has seen significant redevelopment activity over the past five years. From 2019 to 2024, this area accounted for 17 tear-downs and rebuilds—31% of all single-family redevelopments in Wayzata. Many of these new homes have been built to maximize lot sizes, featuring shorter setbacks and large, garage-dominated facades that some believe detract from the neighborhood’s historic character.
Former Council Member Cathy Iverson Addresses In Public Forum
Returning to the public forum at the September 17th council meeting, former Council Member Cathy Iverson voiced concerns about a possible moratorium on new residential construction. “I did not plan on speaking at all, but I sat through a workshop and I’m very taken aback,” Iverson said. She emphasized the irreversible changes to neighborhood character over the years, noting that many residents had previously voiced concerns about development to no avail. “My neighborhood is a neighborhood I don’t even recognize anymore,” she remarked, adding that while she supports studying the issue, she opposes a moratorium.
If the moratorium is prioritized, it could impact other city projects, including the Metro Transit Park and Ride redevelopment and the Wayzata Boulevard Corridor Study. However, officials stressed that community input will play a critical role in shaping any future zoning amendments.
This is a developing story, stay tuned to Wayzata.com. This story has been updated numerous times.
You must be logged in to post a comment.