Loading...
4 Variance 6791 Briarwood Court 1.00;~ ~; I. ],o0 '~epuolAI 009 . 00~ 00~ I I L S~Ol ],..~noo poo~.~e].~8 1.6/_9 L'I..~e.~oldx:~o.~f IHS::] Eggers Variance November 6, 2001 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGUATIONS In general, the City does not grant "use" variances, except in one instance. Minnesota State Law (MN Statute 2000, 462.367, subd. 6(2)) states that '°I'he governing body may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling, and may impose conditions to insure compliance." Chanhassen's Ordinance provides for this in Section 20-59, which allows a variance for the temporary use of a single family dwelling as a two family dwelling if the following conditions are met: o ° There is a demonstrated need based upon disability, age or financial hardship. The dwelling has the exterior appearance of a single family dwelling, including the maintenance of one (1) driveway and one (1) main entry. Separate utility services are not established (e.g. gas, water, sewer, etc.). The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the city or the neighborhood where the property is situated and will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. ANALYSIS The applicants are requesting a variance to finish the lower level of their home, thus Creating.a living space for Mrs. Eggers' parents in their single family home. The applicants are proposing to add facilities that would allow Mrs. Eggers' parents to live "mostly independently". This includes a separate bathroom, kitchen, bedroom, and living area. The home will keep the same main entrance, driveway and Utilities and will remain as a single family residence in appearance. No additional parking or garage space would be added. Mr. and Mrs. Eggers have a baby and toddler. Mrs. Eggers parents are both in their seventies. The intent of the lower level remodeling project is to provide a separate living area that is better suited to seniors and their dietary needs. Staff does recognize that the issue of a two family unit in a single-family residential district is-a controversial area. Upon reviewing the ordinance, it appears that the treatment of "mother-in-law" apartments, such as the applicant's proposal, is based on the assumption that they are temporary in nature. In reality, once they are built, (e.g. once a second kitchen is installed) they are rarely removed. It is difficult for staff to insure the temporary nature of the use through enforcement. Staff is not opposed to the creation of these types of "mother-in-law" apartments nor do we question the current request. In fact, we support their use. We wish to point out the true intent of the current ordinance is somewhat questionable, as is staff's ability to administer it. Over the next 20 years the "baby boomers" reaching the age of 65 years and older will be at its peak. There may be a move to search for alternatives in senior housing, particularly for affordable and independent senior housing. This could be the beginning of a pattern that the City may face in the near future. The fastest growing population in our nation is among the elderly. Because of concerns for health care options senior citizens and their families face difficult decisions about living arrangements. Eggers Variance November 6, 2001 Page 3 There has been one request, in 1990, for the temporary use of a single family dwelling as a two family dwelling. After checking our records, it appears as if the house is still under the ownership of the same daughter and mother. The Chanhassen City Code provides the option of seniors living in the home of their adult children provided certain conditions have been met. In this instance, the applicant's have met the four requirements for use of a single family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The applicant's are providing an alternative living arrangement for their parents without changing the exterior appearance of the home in any way. Staff recommends approval of the variance request. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission approves the request for a temporary use of a single family dwelling as a two family dwelling located at 6791 Briarwood Court, subject to the following conditions: 1. The dwelling has an appearance of a single family dwelling including the maintenance of one driveway and main entry. 2. Separate utility services will not be established. 3. The variance will be recorded with Carver County specifically stating that the dwelling is permitted as a two family dwelling. 4. Permits for alterations must be obtained from the Inspections Division before beginning any work. o By definition, a two-family dwelling unit is classifieds as an R-3 occupancy, therefore a one-hour separation between the units is not required. Side note: Since it's proposed that members of the same family occupy the dwelling units, it can be classified as a one-family dwelling as defined by the building code. Attachments , 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Application and letter MN Statute 2000, 462.357 Subd. 6(2) Section 20-59, Conditions for use of single-family dwelling as two-family dwelling Architectural design and site plan Memo from Steve Torrell, dated October 19, 2001 Public hearing notice and property owners g:\plan\j h\proj ects\variance\eggers 1-8.doc Minnesota Statutes 2000, 462.357 Page 3 of 5 have elapsed from the date of reference of the amendment without a report by the planning agency. Subd. 5. Amendment; certain cities of the first class. The provisions of this subdivision apply to cities of the first class, except a city of the first class in which a different process is provided through the operation of the city's home rule charter. In a city to which this subdivision applies, amendments to a zoning ordinance shall be made in conformance with this section but only after there shall have been filed in the office of the city clerk a written consent of the owners of two-thirds of the several descriptions of real estate situate within 100 feet of the total contiguous descriptions of real estate held by the same owner or any party purchasing any such contiguous property within one year preceding the request, and after the affirmative vote in favor thereof by a majority of the members of the governing body of any such city. The governing body of such city may, by a two-thirds vote of its members, after hearing, adopt a new zoning ordinance without such written consent whenever the planning commission or planning board of such city shall have made a survey of the whole area of the city or of an area of not less than 40 acres, within which the new ordinance or the amendments or alterations of the existing ordinance would take effect when adopted, and shall have considered whether the number of descriptions of real estate affected by such changes and alterations renders the obtaining of such written consent impractical, and such planning commission or planning board shall report in writing as to whether in its opinion the proposals of the governing body in any case are reasonably related to the overall needs of the community, to existing land use, or to a plan for future land use, and shall have conducted a public hearing on such proposed ordinance, changes or alterations, of which hearing published notice shall haVe been given in a daily newspaper of general circulation at least once each week for three successive weeks prior to such hearing, which notice shall state the time, place and purpose of such hearing, and shall have reported to the governing body of the city its findings and recommendations in writing. ~ Subd. 6. > Appeals and adjustments. Appeals to the board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected person upon compliance with any reasonable conditions imposed by the zoning ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments has the following powers with respect to the zoning ordinance: (1) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 2, when in harmony with the ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or governing body as the case may be, may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect adjacent properties. Subd. 6a. Normal residential surroundings for handicapped. It is the policy of this state that handicapped persons and children should not be excluded by municipal zoning ordinances or other land use regulations from the benefits of normal residential surroundings. For purposes of subdivisions 6a through 9, "person" has the meaning given in section 245A.02, subdivision 11. Subd. 7. Permitted single family use. A state licensed residential facility or a housing with services establishment registered under chapter 144D serving six or fewer persons, a licensed day care facility serving 12 or fewer persons, and a group family day care facility licensed under Minnesota Rules, parts 9502.0315 to 9502.0445 to serve 14 or fewer children shall be considered a permitted single family residential use of property for the purposes of zoning, except that a residential facility whose primary purpose is to treat juveniles who have violated criminal statutes relating to sex offenses or have been adjudicated delinquent on the basis of conduct in violation of criminal statutes relating to sex offenses shall not be considered a permitted use. Subd. 8. Permitted multifamily use. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 7 or in any town, municipal or county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a state licensed residential facility serving from 7 through 16 Persons or a licensed day care facility serving from 13 through 16 persons shall be considered a permitted multifamily residential use of property for purposes of zoning. A township, municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional use or special use permit in order to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility, provided that no conditions shall be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones, unless the additional conditions are necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the residential facility. Nothing herein shall be construed to exclude or prohibit residential or day care facilities from single family zones if otherwise permitted by a local zoning regulation. HIST: 1965 c 670 s 7; 1969 c 259 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 379 s 4; 1973 c 539 s 1; 1973 c 559 s 1,2; 1975 c 60 s 2; 1978 c 786 s 14,15; Ex1979 c 2 s 42,43; 1981 c 356 s 248; 1982 c 490 s 2; 1982 c 507 s 22; 1984 c 617 s 6-8; 1985 c 62 s 3; 1985 c 194 s 23; 1986 c 444; 1987 c 333 s 22; 1989 c 82 s 2; 1990 c 391 art 8 s 47; 1990 c 568 art 2 s 66,67; 1994 c 473 s 3; 1995 c 224 s 95; 1997 c 113 s 20; 1997 c 200 art 4 s 5; 1997 c 202 art ZONING § 20-59 Sec. 20-58. General conditions for granting. A variance may be granted by the board of adjustments and appeals or city council only if all of the following criteria are met: (1) That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship. "Undue hardship" means the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within five hundred (500) feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that in developed neighborhoods pre-existing standards exist. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. (2) That the conditions upon which a petit/on for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. (3) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. (4) That the alleged difficulty or hardsh/p is not a self-created hardship. (5) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the pub]/c welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. (6) That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supPly of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increases the danger of fire, Or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. (Ord. No. 80, Art. III, § 1(3-1-3(2)), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 131, § 3, 7-9-90) Sec. 20-59. Conditions for use of single-family dwelling as two-family dwelling. A variance for the temporary use of a single-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling may only be allowed under the following circumstances: (1) There is a demonstrated need based upon disability, age or financial hardship. (2) The dwelling has the exterior appearance of a single-family dwelling, including the maintenance of one (1) driveway and one (1) main entry. (3) Separate utility services are not established (e.g. gas, water, sewer, etc.). (4) The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the city or the neighborhood where the property is situated and will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. (Ord. NO. 80, Art. III, § 1(3-1-3(2)), 12-15-86) · Supp. No. 4 1163 09/25/01 12:25 FAX 612 937 5739 CITY OF CHANHASSEN ~u~o CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION TELEPHONE (Day time)_ "[ ~ 5 - 3"'~ "5 .-.0 3 ~ 'Z. ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: .. . Comprehensive Plan Amendment ,. Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit __ Non-conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development' Wetland Alteration Permit Zoning Appeal , ~ Rezoning Sign Permits Sign P~n Review Site Plan Review* Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost*' ($50 CUPISPR/VACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) ' SubclivLsion* TOTAL FEE $ ,~ list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. ' ~uilding material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. 'Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8V2" X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. "* Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NDTE- When muttTple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. 09/25/01 12:25 FAX 612 937 5739 CITY OF CHANHASSEN ~004 PROJECT NAME LIDCA'Z3ON L.EGAL DESCRIPTION "J'OTAL ACREAGE WE33._ANDS PRESENT PRESENT Z. ONING REQI~STED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION RF_CIUF_STED LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THIS REQUEST. YES NO 'Th~s application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Depar~'nent ~ determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A Wr.itten z~3tice of applicatJon deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. 'Thi~ ~s to cert~y that ! am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with 'all City requirements with regard to this request. This applicat, ion should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of-Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make :this applica~on and the fee owner has also signed this application. I Wi'il keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application.- I further ~mderstand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of ~y ~,-~wled..q e. , The c~y hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review exlansierts are approved by the applicant. . _ si tu r: f owr App~i_r'~t~on Received on Date J O/'-:-'/D/ate~ Fee Paid Receipt No, "The appTicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not cox~tacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. September 17, 1996 City of Chanhassen Petition for variance Re: EGGERS Residence 6791 Briarwood Court ~) E S I 6 N E R S & B U I L D E, R S To whom it may concern, The above residential property is on a cul-de-sac street in the city of Chanhassen. The owners would like to finish the lower level of the home to allow their p'arents to live with them in their elderly years. The existing home is currently a single family r. esidence and the owners would like to add facilities so that their parents can live mostly indepen, dently in dally activities. As such we have designed separate bathroom and kitchen amenitites to the lower level. We have been informed this is a.zoning issue and we need to apply for a variance. The following justifications are offered for review: a.) Reasonable Use & Undue hardship -lower level of homes are being remodeled through-out many communities with; family rooms, wet bars and kid hang outs with many of the same features we have designed. We believe the features offer reasonable use of the clients lower level. b.) The variance request is base on the need to have elderly parents near for possible care. c.) Purpose of variance - Though the remodeling will add value to the property the purpose was not based on this fact. The valuation should increase similarly to neighboring residences adding family rooms, wet bars or kids hang-outs ... etc. d,) Self created hardship - the hardship we believe is in the zoning definitions catching up to a cultural shift that we have been.seeing for a couple years,. ,. e.) Public welfare - We can not envision how this remodeling could be detrimental to the welfare of the general public, but the owners do not intend to add addtionai parking or garage space. They do not intend to have separate entrance to the lower level, nor do they intend to have separate utilites intalled. The homeowners intend to maintain the home as a Single Family Residence. Thank you for consideration in this matter. Sincerely, ~.~Sawhorse, de~er. . 4740 42nd Avenue North · R0bbinsdale, MN 55422-1828 · Phone 763.533.0352 · Fax 763.533.2668 www. sawh0rseusa.oom 10/10/01 WED 18:36 FAX 8125332668 SAWiIORSE ~oo2 October 10, 2001 City of Chanhassen Petition for variance Re: EGGERS Residence 6791 Briarwood Court To whom it may concern, Sec. 20-59 Conditions for use of a single family dwelling as a two family dwelling: 1) Need based on Age -the remodeling is for parents so that they can live mostly independently. As such we have designed separate bathroom and kitchen amenlitites to the lower level. 2.) Exterior appearance -The owners do not intend to add addtional parking or garage space. They do not intend to have separate entrance to the lower level. 3.) UTILITIES - do they intend to have separate utilities installed for lower level, 4.) Public welfare - We can not envision how this remodeling .could be detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the residents. The homeowners intend to maintain the home as a Single Family Residence, Thank you for consideration in this matter. Sincerely, John Zuber Sawhorse, designer --~'~1 I I . ~ I II I I SURVEY FOR: Centex Homes, Inc. DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Block 1, WOODRIDGE HEIGHTS 3RD ADDITION, City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. I I o Denotes Iron Monuments x Denotes Spikes set for Bldg. Gontrol TBM Denotes Temporary Bench Marks xxx.x Denotes Existing Ground Elevations AND LA*ND O'~'VELO4:~IrNT COe, ISULTAN"r5 C(51 :::') 4~1 1~21 VINo'WOOD LANE: DAYTON. MN 55927 i i ii I I i PROPOSED TOP FOUNDATION ELEV. PROPOSED GARAGE FLOOR ELEV. ' /~?~;/,/_ PR0~OSED LoWE~.' FLOOR ELEV. (xx x) Denotes Proposed Final Grades - ' ;::' ,~~,.~ !- NOSE: Verifyl. all' proposed grades and dimensions with APPROVED ~..,~ ..." ~' all actual final plans. RECEIVED _ CITYOF CHAH EN dgO CiO, Ceme;' ~rh,e PO Box Cha;#~aze;l, i¥[J'/l;lesot~t 55317 Pho,e 952.93Z 1900 Genera/Fax 952.93Z~739 E,gi, eeri,g Depa~'tm e, t Fax 952.93Z9152 B,ildi,g Departme, t Fax ~52.934.2524 lt3b Site MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Julie Grove, Planner I Steven Torell, Building Official ~-----~T~' ./ October 19, 2001 SUB J: Review of variance request to convert a single-family dwelling to a two-family dwelling, 6791 Briarwood Court Planning Case' 2001-8 VAR I have reviewed the above request for a variance. The following conditions would be required: 1. By definition, a two-family dwelling unit is classified as an R-3 occupancy; therefore a one-hour separation between the units is not required. Side note: Since it's proposed that members of tlie same family occupy the dwelling units, it can be classified as a one-family dwelling as defined by the building code. 2. Permits for the alterations must be obtained from the Inspections Division before beginning any work. G/safeD'/st. memos/plarff6791BriarwoodCourtVariance The Otv o£ Cha,hasse,. :i ~. ;'owi,¢ co,,,,,in' wid; c/ea;~ /(~kes. o,a/ia' sc/;ools. ,7 cha;mi,¢ dow,row,, th;'ivi, g b,si, esses, a,d bern:tiEd/;arks. A e;'eat olace to live. work. a,d ola~: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2001 AT 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 690 CITY CENTER DRIVE PROPOSAL: Variance for Temporary Use as a Two Family Dwelling APPLICANT: Sawhorse Designers/Builders LOCATION: 6791 Briarwood Drive NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, Sawhorse Designers/ Builders, is requesting a variance for temporary use of a ~single family dwelling as a two family dWelling on property zoned RSF, Residential Single Family and located at 6791 Briarwood Court. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Julie 937-1900 ext. 117. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 25, 2001. Lak, Roi Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® BRADLEY D HIMLE 6681 GALPIN BLVD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 JEFFREY A JORGENSEN & HELENA B STAFKO 2028 HIGHGATE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DOUGLAS A & LINDA R BEUTEL 6786 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RICHARD J & PEGGY M STITZINGER 6691 GALPIN BLVD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 ROGER D & PATRICIA WISCHNEWSKI 2040 HIGHGATE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHARLES Z & SUSAN X DENG 6804 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN F & MARIELLEN WALDRON 1900 LAKE LUCY RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 VINCENT G & DONNA CIGNARELLA 2058 HIGHGATE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 GERALD L & CONNIE J BYRNES 6820 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DANIEL D & DENISE A OLSON 6776 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 GREGORY M & LAURA J ELDER 2076 HIGHGATE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRIAN & CHRISTINE KLINE 6836 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ANTHONY D & GRETCHEN A ROEPKE 6788 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DAVID M KRAUSE 6857 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 LANCE E & MARY P HOGLE 6852 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DOUGLAS T KANS 6800 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 KURT R & KATHLEEN M LEISMAN 6849 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BOGUSLAW D & EWA K JEDRUSZCZAI~ 6724 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DAVID M & JULIE A FUECKER 6751 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN MARK & CARl E PIATKOWSKI 6833 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN MARK & JANICE RAE MOBERG 6738 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 WILLIAM F & JEANNE A KRAKE 6739 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 WAYNE C & NOREENE C ZILL 6817 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TROY L & CAROLYN H EGGERS 6791 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL A & CHERIE M WITYNSKI 2051 HIGHGATE C1R CHANHASSEN MN 55317 THOMAS S & JUDITH E STRETAR 6801 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TIMOTHY A & TERESA M VOEHL 6811 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 KATHLEEN M VANKREVELEN 202! HIGHGATE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRUCE J & SARAH S KOEHLER 6787 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DAVID A SENNER & SUSAN M HARTWIG 6829 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN C & BRIDGET W DOW 6837 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DAVID S & LINDA S PETERS 6845 BRIARWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 slaqe'! ssaJpp¥