Planning commission recommends City Council approve West Creek Village final plat despite resident lawsuit

The Victoria Planning Commission on a voice vote recommended that the City Council approve the final plat and PUD rezoning for West Creek Village First Edition, the first phase of an 89‑acre development planned north of County Road 10.

City planner Brian McCann told commissioners the first edition includes 56 townhomes and 13 single‑family homes, with the remainder to come in later phases. He described existing wetlands, a portion of West Chesca Creek, an XL Energy transmission easement that bisects the site and several requested deviations from local standards including reduced patio and side‑yard setbacks for townhomes and smaller minimum lot areas for some single‑family lots. McCann also noted the applicants estimate parkland dedication and fees at roughly $185,000 and emphasized requirements for wetland buffers, CCWMO stormwater compliance and an executed easement with XL Energy as part of staff conditions.

During the public hearing, resident Molly Coleman, of 1055 Robinwood Road, said early grading work at the site "has caused ongoing and significant disruption and harm" and asserted the actions "appear to have violated both city ordinances and state environmental requirements." Coleman told the commission that an administrative record has been filed in Carver County District Court and urged the commission not to advance final approval while the matter is before state agencies and the courts, saying approving a final plat while a temporary restraining order or other injunctive relief is pending could create procedural complications.

Staff emphasized for the record that the planning commission is an advisory body and not a board of adjustment or appeals, and therefore cannot resolve pending litigation or administrative appeals. Commissioners then discussed the extent of the proposed deviations from R1 and R3 standards — including questions about lot sizes, impervious surface percentages and whether the city’s recurring use of PUD deviations is eroding standard rules. The applicant’s representative, Josh Metzer, said recent nearby developments had set similar precedents and argued the current proposal had reduced medium‑density guidance on the property compared with earlier versions of the plan.

After questions about parking, trail connections and the number of lots that would rely on the larger deviations, a commissioner moved and the body approved a recommendation that City Council adopt the final plat and PUD rezoning. The commission’s action is advisory; Council will make final decisions and may attach or modify conditions before any final action.

The planning commission closed the item after voting to forward the recommendation. The commission did not resolve the legal claims raised by the resident; those matters remain pending with courts and state agencies.