WAYZATA — A proposed subdivision at 190 Gleason Lake Road and 121 Gleahaven Road will return to the Wayzata City Council next month after the developer requested additional time to work with nearby residents and address concerns raised during the review process.
During a recent council meeting, city officials noted that the applicant’s attorney had requested the item be tabled until April 21, 2026, postponing consideration of Resolution 14-2026, which would formally deny the preliminary plat. The council amended its agenda to reflect the request.
Lake West Development has proposed a 4 lots subdivision off of Gleason Lake Road.
The proposal, submitted by Lake West Development, seeks to subdivide two existing residential parcels near the entrance to Gleahaven Road into four single-family home sites. According to the developer’s attorney, the proposal complies with the dimensional standards of Wayzata’s R-3 zoning district, including requirements for lot size, width, density, and impervious surface coverage.
In a letter to the city, attorney Megan C. Rogers of Larkin Hoffman, representing the applicant, wrote that the proposed subdivision satisfies the objective requirements of the zoning code and aligns with the density framework outlined in Wayzata’s Comprehensive Plan.
The four proposed parcels would average approximately 15,363 square feet, which the applicant argues falls within the range of existing lot sizes in the surrounding neighborhood.
Despite those arguments, the Wayzata Planning Commission has recommended denial of the preliminary plat, citing concerns tied to the city’s subdivision ordinance. Those concerns include the project’s relationship to the character of the surrounding neighborhood, as well as questions related to grading, topography, and preservation of natural features on the site.
Developer Seeks Time for Dialogue
The request to delay the council vote was made through the applicant’s attorney and provides time for the developer to continue discussions with neighbors and consider whether modifications could address concerns raised during the public review process.
Subdivision proposals in established neighborhoods often involve multiple layers of review, including both the measurable standards contained in the zoning code and broader planning considerations outlined in the city’s subdivision ordinance.
Neighborhood Residents Voice Opposition
Several residents of Gleahaven Road submitted written comments and a petition asking the city to deny the proposal.
The petition argues that replacing two existing homes with four new residences could significantly change the character of the small cul-de-sac neighborhood and require the removal of mature trees. Petitioners also raised concerns about drainage, grading, and the overall scale of the development compared with surrounding properties.
In a letter to the city, Ryan Schultz of 108 Gleahaven Road wrote that his family chose the neighborhood because of its quiet setting and mature tree canopy, stating that replacing two homes with four would permanently alter the feel of the street.
Other residents cited traffic and safety concerns near the intersection of Gleahaven Road and Gleason Lake Road, where sight lines are limited by the hill and curve along the roadway and where children often wait for school buses.
In a separate letter, Pete Trinh and Morgan Kaufman of 167 Gleahaven Road said the addition of four homes could increase traffic and change the established character of the cul-de-sac.
Residents Kumar and Kathy Das Gupta of 110 Gleahaven Road also expressed concerns about potential impacts to neighborhood safety and property values if the subdivision were approved.
Recent Decisions Provide Context
The debate over the Gleason Lake Road subdivision comes amid several recent land-use decisions in Wayzata where questions about zoning standards and subdivision review have drawn public attention.
Taken together, those cases illustrate the balance cities often weigh between objective zoning requirements—such as lot size and density—and broader planning considerations, including neighborhood character and natural site conditions.
Next Step
With the Gleason Lake Road proposal now tabled, the Wayzata City Council is expected to revisit the preliminary plat on April 21.
In the interim, the developer and nearby residents may continue discussions about the proposal and whether revisions could address the concerns raised during the public review process.
The council will ultimately determine whether to uphold the Planning Commission’s recommendation of denial or allow the subdivision to proceed.
New construction home at 617 Park Street East in Wayzata.
WAYZATA — Despite a Planning Commission recommendation to deny the request, the Wayzata City Council voted 4–1 on May 20 to move forward with approving a variance for a home under construction at 617 Park Street East. Councilmember Molly MacDonald cast the only vote against the measure.
The variance relates to a one-foot encroachment by roof eaves into the east side yard setback. Under city code, eaves are allowed to extend two and a half feet into a side yard; in this case, they extend three and a half feet. While the home’s walls meet the required 10-foot setback, the overhanging eaves exceed the allowed projection.
City staff acknowledged the error was missed during the permit review process. Crucially, the plans submitted by Custom One Homes, a Woodbury-based builder, were never compliant with city code. Staff said the building elevations showed the extended eaves, but those dimensions weren’t reconciled with the setback requirements shown on the survey.
“It was a miss—by both staff and the builder,” stated Development Director Alex Sharpe. “But it should have been caught. The submitted plans simply didn’t comply.”
Bob Jossart speaks to the Wayzata City Council.
Property owner Bob Jossart, who is building the home for himself, told the council the error was unintentional. “The design we approved should have been compliant,” he said. “If the house were one foot farther to the west, we wouldn’t be here. I’m sorry we’re in this position.”
Wayzata Council Moves to Approve Controversial Variance at 617 Park Street East
The Planning Commission voted 4–3 to recommend denial. While one neighbor submitted a letter of opposition, the neighbor most directly affected by the encroachment expressed reluctant support. Several councilmembers said they believed the variance request was reasonable given the narrow scope of the encroachment and the lack of strong neighborhood opposition.
“I appreciate the homeowner’s transparency,” said Councilmember Alex Plechash. “There was no intent to deceive, and there’s no easy fix at this point that wouldn’t diminish the integrity of the home.”
Councilmember MacDonald took a firmer stance. “This is the largest, flattest lot on the block,” she said. “There was every opportunity to build a compliant home. We’ve been studying this zoning district closely for compatibility and scale, and I just don’t believe this variance meets the standards.”
Neighbors Support Variance—But Criticize Builder Conduct
Mayor Andrew Mullin noted that adjacent neighbors, including Gareth Goodall as well as Sarah & Elliot Randall, urged the council to approve the variance despite serious concerns with the builder’s conduct. Mullin said both households were frustrated by what they described as Custom One Homes being “tone deaf,” inattentive to neighbor concerns, and generally unresponsive during construction—citing issues with parking, communication, and a lack of courtesy.
“They were emphatic that they want this project to move forward,” said Mullin. “But they were also clear that they’ve had a difficult experience with the builder and felt their concerns were dismissed.”
Next Steps
The council directed staff to draft findings of fact and a resolution to approve the variance, which will be brought back at the next regular meeting. If approved, the variance will legalize the existing eave overhang despite it exceeding the city’s allowable encroachment limit by 12 inches.
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.
Wayzata, MN – The Wayzata Planning Commission has voted to recommend approval of Lake West Development’s proposal to redevelop the long-vacant TCF Bank site at 200 Lake Street East, with a key condition: the building’s massing breaks must be brought into compliance with city design standards.
At a well-attended public hearing on March 18, commissioners reviewed detailed presentations from city staff and the development team, heard from nearby residents and community members, and deliberated over the plan’s merits and areas of concern.
A New Vision for a Prominent Site
Developer Curt Fretham, owner of Lake West Development, opened the presentation by acknowledging the long road to this moment. “Although this development approval process has been lengthy,” Fretham said, “we remain enthusiastic about this redevelopment.”
Landmark Wayzata. Image courtesy Lake West Development.
Kelsey Thompson, Development Director for Lake West, emphasized the project’s goal of revitalizing a blighted property with a vibrant, mixed-use design. “This building has been sitting vacant for over half a decade,” Thompson said. “It’s full of mold and beyond reasonable repair. This project transforms that blighted property into a place where people can gather, interact, and enjoy Wayzata’s charm.”
The proposed development—called Landmark Wayzata—includes 50 condominium units, first-floor commercial space, underground and surface parking, public parks, covered viewing plazas, and significant environmental remediation. It exceeds open space requirements and integrates stormwater infrastructure to protect Lake Minnetonka.
Staff Report: Project Complies—With One Exception
Planner Val Quarles outlined the city’s staff report, noting that the project complies with zoning, density, and design requirements—except for two of the five proposed massing breaks. While the design includes five ground-level openings along the building’s 760-foot length, staff determined that only three provide the clear public views from the street to Lake Minnetonka as required by city code.
“Our code asks for massing breaks to offer views from the public street,” Quarles explained. “Two of these breaks—between cores A2 and A3 and between A3 and A4—do not meet that standard, primarily due to overbuild above the openings.”
These massing breaks, Quarles noted, are intended not only for aesthetics but to provide visual and potential physical access to the lake from the downtown core.
Public Weighs In
During the public hearing, attorney Darren Knight, representing the Zitzloff Condominiums across the street at 201 East Lake Street, urged the Commission to require all five massing breaks to be open from ground to sky.
“This building spans two full city blocks,” Knight said. “We believe the city’s design standards should apply consistently. Our development across the street had to meet these same expectations.”
A proposed massing break with condos built over top. Image courtesy Lake West Development.
In contrast, Kevin Sullivan and Michelle White, representing the Sons and Daughters of the American Revolution, spoke in favor of the project. They expressed interest in collaborating with the developer and city on commemorative public art installations timed with the nation’s 250th anniversary in 2026.
“We think it would be fantastic for Wayzata to represent Minnesota in this national initiative,” Sullivan said.
Commission Deliberates and Seeks Compromise
Commissioners praised the architectural quality, walkability, and creativity of the design but agreed with staff that the two massing breaks in question must be revised. Several emphasized that ground-to-sky breaks are necessary not only for views of the lake but for maintaining Wayzata’s small-town character.
“One long facade from end to end doesn’t meet the intent of our design standards,” one commissioner noted. “Those breaks bring light, sky, and a sense of openness. They’re essential.”
After confirming that the rest of the application—including density, shoreline impact, parking, and tree preservation—met city requirements, the Commission crafted a motion.
Unanimous Vote with Key Condition
The Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning amendment, concept plan, general plan, and related permits—with the condition that the two noncompliant massing breaks be redesigned to comply fully with city code.
“This is a beautiful, thoughtful project,” said one commissioner. “It will revitalize the west end of Lake Street. But we have to get the massing breaks right.”
The recommendation will now move forward to the Wayzata City Council for review and final consideration.
A proposal from Lake West Development for the former TCF Headquarters located at 200 East Lake Street. Image courtesy Lakewest Development.
After years of debate and multiple redevelopment proposals, Lake West Development and owner Curt Fretham will present their latest vision for the Landmark Wayzata project at a public hearing before the Planning Commission on Monday, March 24, 2025, at 6:30 p.m.
The project, proposed for the former TCF headquarters at 200 Lake Street East, has taken on new urgency following recent vandalism and water damage at the vacant building. As reported by Wayzata.com on March 11, the property has been subjected to break-ins, property damage, and flooding, raising concerns about its ongoing deterioration.
Lake West Development’s fifth attempt to redevelop the site includes:
50 residential units
23,690 square feet of ground-floor commercial space
Underground parking
The application seeks several city approvals, including:
Design Review
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan and Amendment
Shoreland Residential PUD/Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Shoreland Impact Plan/CUP
A Long Road of Redevelopment Efforts
The former TCF headquarters has remained vacant since 2020, and previous redevelopment plans by Lakewest Development have struggled to gain city approval:
2020: Plan to convert the office building into 10 condominiums and add new residential buildings denied by the City Council.
2021: Two-building mixed-use project with 35 residential units withdrawn after the Planning Commission recommended denial.
2022: Two three-story buildings with 32 residential units and 42,000 square feet of commercial space denied by the City Council.
With the March 24 Planning Commission hearing approaching, Lake West Development has launched a website, www.landmarkwayzata.com, to provide details and encourage public feedback.
If approved, the project will move to the City Council for review on April 15, 2025.
As vandalism, water damage and mold continue to impact the property, the upcoming public hearing will be a critical moment in determining the site’s future.
Wayzata residents and stakeholders are encouraged to attend the March 24 hearing at City Hall to share their views on the Landmark Wayzata proposal.
The Wayzata City Council has approved the first reading of Ordinance 847, introducing amendments to the city’s design standards and zoning ordinance. The proposed updates, which follow a comprehensive rewrite in 2021, aim to clarify regulations, enhance administrative efficiency, and refine existing urban design principles.
City officials noted that after three years of implementing the standards, staff have identified areas where minor adjustments can improve clarity and streamline processes. The Planning Commission reviewed these changes in a November 18 workshop before providing a recommendation to the council.
One of the key updates addresses massing breaks in buildings located between Lake Street and Wayzata Bay. The new language ensures that these breaks serve as midblock connections, offering pedestrian views of Lake Minnetonka when possible. This amendment allows developers to demonstrate whether such views are feasible based on site conditions.
The ordinance also refines requirements for upper-story stepbacks. Previously, the regulation applied to the highest occupiable story of a building, which created inconsistencies for future developments. Under the new language, stepbacks will apply at the third story and above, ensuring uniformity across multifamily and commercial buildings.
Rooftop mechanical equipment regulations also saw changes. In the Lake Street and Bluff districts, mechanical equipment is now prohibited from extending above the roof deck, addressing concerns about the city’s scenic views. Additionally, the ordinance introduces a “notch” provision, allowing equipment to be integrated into upper-floor recesses, provided it remains screened from view. Meanwhile, in the Wayzata Boulevard district, the city relaxed restrictions on rooftop equipment for commercial buildings, aligning standards with market needs while maintaining a 25% rooftop coverage limit for such equipment.
A notable procedural change includes revisions to the design deviation process. Minor deviations, such as adjustments to bicycle parking and material selection, will continue to be administratively approved. However, deviations related to rooftop mechanical equipment will now require council approval to ensure public oversight on significant alterations.
City officials emphasized that these changes align with Wayzata’s comprehensive plan and broader urban design goals. The amendments now move to a second reading before becoming official. If adopted, the new standards will apply to future applications processed after the ordinance’s effective date.
Larissa Stockton, Chair of the Wayzata Planning Commission, has announced her resignation, effective at the end of the year. In a letter addressed to her colleagues, City Manager Jeffrey Dahl, and other city officials, Stockton reflected on her five years of service on the Commission, including two as Chair.
“It has been a privilege to collaborate with and learn from such a dedicated team of community members and professionals in shaping our community’s future,” Stockton wrote.
In addition to her role on the Planning Commission, Stockton served on the Zoning Study Task Force, the Design Study Task Force, and the Corridor Study Committee, where she contributed to shaping the vision and standards for Wayzata’s growth and development.
Stockton’s professional background reflects a breadth of experience in design and strategy. She ran her own design practice and custom kitchen retail store in London, worked in residential renovation design and development, and provided business strategy and design consultation services both locally and internationally. Earlier in her career, Stockton worked with Andersen Consulting in New York City and London as a Change Management Strategy Consultant. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Business Management and Marketing and a Master’s degree in Architectural Interior Design.
Stockton’s dedication to Wayzata extended beyond her work on the Planning Commission. In 2022, she ran for a seat on the City Council, articulating a vision rooted in maintaining Wayzata’s charm and ensuring the community thrives for future generations.
“As a mom of three teenagers, I am focused on keeping Wayzata safe and enjoyable for generations to come,” Stockton said during her campaign. “We love Wayzata because it is a safe and friendly lakeside community where everyone knows your name.”
She identified safety, budgeting transparency, enhanced walkability, affordable housing, and sustainable development as her top priorities during her campaign.
As Chair, Stockton led the Planning Commission through a period of significant growth and change, overseeing key development projects while prioritizing the needs of Wayzata residents. Her resignation marks the conclusion of a notable chapter in the city’s planning efforts.
In her resignation letter, Stockton expressed confidence in the Commission’s ability to continue its work successfully. “Thank you once again for the opportunity to be part of such an excellent Commission, which holds the talent and experience for continued success,” she wrote.
Stockton concluded her letter by expressing gratitude for her time in Wayzata and optimism for the city’s future. “I look forward to seeing you around town,” she wrote. Residents may spot her during her regular walks with her dog, a familiar presence in the community.
The Wayzata City Council voted 4-1 to instruct staff to draft a resolution for the denial of an application submitted by Presbyterian Homes on Tuesday, January 9th.
The proposal sought to convert the former Lunds & Byerly’s retail space at the Promenade’s Superior Block into loft-style condominiums.
City Staff is expected to present findings of fact and a final resolution for denial in the future.
Despite a 4-3 recommendation for approval by the Planning Commission on November 6, the proposal faced opposition during the City Council vote.
Mill Street in Wayzata.
Presbyterian Homes and Services, the property owner, aimed to breathe new life into the 35,374 square feet of vacant retail space, formerly Lunds & Byerly’s Kitchen, with plans for 12 loft-style residential condo units.
The retail space has been dormant for approximately 6.5 years.
A report by City Staff highlighted challenges within the retail portion of the Promenade project, revealing a 38% vacancy rate, with 8,700 square feet along Lake Street remaining vacant since construction.
The Promenade Loft Condos concept by Chris Palkowitsch – BKV Architects.
Economic hardship affecting the applicant due to operating costs traditionally borne by tenants, was cited at the meeting.
Originally approved in 2007 as part of the Wayzata Bay Center redevelopment, the Promenade’s Planned Unit Development (PUD) has undergone changes reflecting shifts in retail dynamics over the past fifteen years.
Presbyterian Homes emphasized the impact of online shopping and pandemic-related strains on retailers, prompting a reevaluation of the use of brick-and-mortar spaces.
Challenges in leasing existing retail spaces were attributed to the evolving nature of retail, along with visibility, foot traffic, and elevation concerns.
During the City Council meeting, Mayor Johanna Mouton voiced concerns about the persistent vacancy, urging collaboration with Presbyterian Homes.
The mayor expressed disappointment in the perceived lack of engagement, calling for a solution and suggesting a more active dialogue, “We have been concerned about the vacancy. To say there were tens of thousands of hours spent on this (redevelopment) project at a City level, a community level, and by Presbyterian Homes is an understatement. For years we have received feedback, asking what is going on over at Folkestone? It’s vacant, it’s constantly vacant.”
Mouton continued, “We were so concerned… (that we asked) what is going on, how can we work with Presbyterian Homes to fill this space, Staff please reach out to them… let’s come to the table, lets figure out a solution, what does that look like… crickets, crickets… it’s a bit of a poke in the eye and it doesn’t make us look good.”
Former Lunds & Byerlys Kitchen space has sat empty for 6.5 years.
Mouton also indicated how positive the relationship with Presbyterian Homes representatives had been during the initial development, “…John Merhkens… he was a wonderful advocate throughout the construction process, when issues would arise he came to the table always, communicative, responsive.”
Lisa Albain of Presbyterian Homes stated in response, “First of all, I’m not passing the buck, I apologize for the experience you all have had, I was not a part of the conceptual development of Folkestone, nor was I a part of the leasing efforts for the retail space up until about nine months ago. The people who were a part of Presbyterian Homes, and Folkestone that you had relationships with have retired and are no longer with the company any more. We are doing our very best to locate files, to understand history, to really right the ship and I think we have done a very good job in the last year, it’s changing.”
One of the retailers the Council and Presbyterian Homes celebrated together in the meeting was the placement of Red Cow Gourmet Burgers near the Hotel Landing.
However, questions were raised about the information presented to the Planning Commission by Council Member Molly MacDonald, “I’ve been disappointed with what you guys have shown up with in terms of data to the planning commission meeting, there was a little bit more context in this packet, but to say we have contacted everyone, we have reached out to all these people, you said you have been engaged, like what restauranteurs did you engage with? I feel like there isn’t any hard data showing what you have actually done, and I have this being juxtaposed with a developer at 50th & France who had been courting my retail business in Wayzata at the same time I was trying to get ahold of you guys, and I kept thinking, why can’t they hire this guy who calls me once every six months, offers deals, and now that space is vibrant, active, and fully leased to my knowledge.”
Presbyterian Homes highlighted unique challenges posed by the deep and extensive retail space, making it difficult to attract boutique retailers.
The site’s depth and access issues were emphasized, with concerns about visibility, walkability, and the absence of credit-worthy tenants willing to lease the space.
Presbyterian Homes attorney Christine Eid stated, “There are objective challenges with this space that won’t be resolved, and at this point in time it’s costing the owner over $300,000 in operating expense losses, and requiring this to be commercial and not allowing some flexibility, it removes the ability of the owner to actually make it economically viable.”
The east end of Mill street is the only place where the retail is flush with the street, around the rest of the perimeter one has to walk up many stairs, and a loading dock on the northwest side of the property also creates access issues.
The Promenade mixed use project has approximately 111,000 feet of retail and commercial space in all the blocks, and the conversion to residential condos would be an impact of approximately 24% of that commercial space; and 2% of the overall Promenade project which exceeds over one million feet including condos, retail, the hotel, senior living etc.
The potential denial of the proposal underscores ongoing challenges in leasing efforts at the Promenade, stay tuned for more coverage.
Parking & density issues top Council concerns, redevelopment approval seems imminent
Lakewest Developmentowner Curt Fretham has been seeking to redevelop the former TCF headquarters lot for the past several years.
Each time the developer has been in front of the Wayzata Planning Commission & City Council, his proposals have been denied for various reasons.
Image courtesy Lakewest Development
Opposition in 2021 to the removal of the existing building was fierce with over 2,000 persons signing a petition supporting denial of any re- development in order to preserve the building.
Fretham’s latest plan was before the Wayzata City Council in late June and was again denied unanimously. The plan included 6 requests from the City including a rezoning to commercial use from the existing CUP.
The rationale behind the denial this time was related primarily to a plan to share parking stalls among condo owners and retail and office or daytime users.
However, the comments from the Council and community members seems to be shifting to- wards approval of a redevelopment of the site.
Becky Pierson, the President of the Wayzata Area Chamber of Commerce, indicated in public remarks that in reviewing the informa- tion in the application with the Chamber Board that, “…this is a large section of the west end that has been vacant for approximately 8 years 200 Lake Plan Denied, Again and probably 10 years by the time we get some approvals. We have had several developers that have tried to develop this very difficult lot, failed, and given up and it feels like this pro- posal has evolved to something that is accept- able…” Pierson continued, “I’m looking at this not at a detail level but from a very large corri- dor perspective, and the [Chamber] Board felt that… …[the City] should bring this applica- tion to approval and completion however you can do that.”
Council member Jeff Parkhill weighed in on the application, “I think you guys have nailed it on the look and feel, the design… …I think the scale of the property drives the parking needs, if it were smaller there would be less demand, so it’s kind of a self imposed problem for you guys.”
Council member Cathy Iverson stated, “Thank you for your resilience, because you have been after this for a while. I see you are not a quitter, and each time I think the appli- cation has gotten better. Thank you for that… …but I think the density is driving the parking issue.”
Council member Alex Plecash remarked, “Lots of pros to talk about tonight, but let me start with this: rezoning this makes sense to me. It absolutely should be rezoned in my opinion. Redevelopment is also very necessary for everyone involved. The big [issue] for me among all the parking issues is that residents Curt Fretham addresses the Wayzata City Council. Parking & density issues top Council concerns, redevelopment approval seems imminent would not have dedicated parking. If I was go- ing to buy a place that costs whatever it costs to live there, I would want to know that I had dedicated parking. There may be creative ways to fix that.”
Fretham responded, “I appreciate all the hard work and deliberation of the staff and the council and the outside third parties. The comp plan says to used a CUP for parking wherever possible, so we did that.”
Fretham will likely be back in front of the City with another application in the coming months.
Stay tuned to Wayzata.com for more information on this and other City business.
Neighborhood meeting scheduled for Monday, April 24th from 5:15 – 6:30pm at Wayzata City Hall
Lake West Development is proposing redevelopment at 200 East Lake Street. Courtesy Hobbs + Black Architecture.
Developer Curt Fretham and his company Lake West Development have submitted another application to redevelop the former TCF headquarters site located at 200 East Lake Street in Wayzata.
The public has been invited to a neighborhood meeting on Monday April 24th, from 5:15 – 6:30pm at City Hall.
Other anticipated dates include: Monday, May 1, 6:30pm – Planning Commission public hearing Monday, May 15, 6:30pm – Planning Commission consent agenda Tuesday, June 6, 7:00pm – City Council
Lake West Development is proposing redevelopment at 200 East Lake Street. Courtesy Hobbs + Black Architecture.Lake West Development is proposing redevelopment at 200 East Lake Street. Courtesy Hobbs + Black Architecture.Lake West Development is proposing redevelopment at 200 East Lake Street. Courtesy Hobbs + Black Architecture.
More information can be found on the City of Wayzata’s website including a full copy of the application.
Stay tuned to Wayzata.com for more real estate news.
You must be logged in to post a comment.