Loading...
HE Decision SM-08-22.pdfihc. 1891, CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • Edmonds, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771.0221 HEARING EXAMINER In the Matter of the Application of ) Greg Jacobsen ) For a Shoreline Substantial Development ) Permit. GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR NO. SM -2008-0022 (Jacobsen's Marine) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND DECISION SUMMARY OF DECISION The request for a shoreline substantial development permit to develop a 10,120 -square -foot boat sales and repair shop at 345 Admiral Way is GRANTED, subject to conditions. SUMMARY OF RECORD Request: Greg Jacobsen (Applicant) requested a shoreline substantial development permit (SSDP) to develop a 10,120 -square -foot boat sales and repair shop at 345 Admiral Way in Edmonds, Washington. Hearing Date: The City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner viewed the site and conducted an open record hearing on the request on July 3, 2008. Testimony: At the open record hearing, the following individuals presented testimony under oath: I . Jennifer Machuga, Planner, City of Edmonds 2. Shawn Rafferty, PKJB Architectural Group, representing the Applicant 3. Greg Percich, PKJB Architectural Group, representing the Applicant 4. Christopher Keuss, Executive Director of Port of Edmonds (property owner) 5. Greg Jacobsen, Applicant 6.° Alvin Rutledge 1-'iv�ihitc• At the open record hearing the following exhibits were admitted into the record: A. Staff Report dated June 25, 2008, with the following attachments: 1. Shoreline Permit Application received April 4, 2008 2. Zoning Map 3. Comprehensive Plan Map Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2008-0022 page 1 of 10 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister City - Hekinan, Japan 4. Project Plan Set received April 4, 2008, including Cover Sheet (SD -1), Vicinity Plan, Site Plan (SD -2), and Conceptual Storm Plan (C-1) 5. Letter from Jen Machuga to Shawn Rafferty dated.May 16, 2008 (Notice of Hearing Date/Request for Additional Information) 6. Letter -from Shawn Rafferty to Jen Machuga dated May 28, 2008 7. Revised Plans received June 18, 2008, including Cover Sheet (SD -1) and Site Plan (SD -2) 8. Building Elevations received April 28, 2008 9. Determination of Nonsignificance, with Vicinity Map and Environmental Checklist 10. Letter from Christopher Keuss to Rob Chave dated May 20, 2008 (SEPA compliance) I.I. Notice of Development Application 12. Affidavit of Posting of Notice of Development Application 13. Affidavit of Mailing of Notice of Development Application, with Adjacent Property Owners List 14. Affidavit of Publication of Notice of Development Application 15. Notice of Application and Hearing Examiner Hearing 16. Affidavit of Posting of Notice of Hearing 17. Affidavit of Mailing of Notice of Hearing 18. Affidavit of Publication of Notice of Hearing 19. ECDC 23.10.155 20. Port of Edmonds Master Plan dated June 27, 2005, with attached Exhibits 21. Comments from Public Works Department dated April 11, 2008 22. Comments from Fire Department dated April 21, 2008 23. Comments from Engineering Division dated April 11, 2008 (no comment) 24. Comments from Parks and Recreation dated April 19, 2008 (no comment) B. Letter from Christopher Keuss, Port of Edmonds, dated June 27, 2008 Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits submitted at the open record hearing, the Hearing Examiner enters the following Findings and Conclusions: FINDINGS The Applicant requested an SSDP to develop a 10,120 -square -foot boat sales and repair shop at 345 Admiral Way in Edmonds, Washington (Tax Account No. 27032300415800). Exhibit A, Attachments 1 and b. 2. The subject property is a 36,000 -square -foot (0.83 -acre) portion of a parcel that is owned by the Port of Edmonds and part of the Port's 64 -acre Master Plan.' The subject property is the Applicant's lease area, and it is currently vacant. The subject property is situated between Admiral Way to the northwest (hereafter the direction will be referred to as "west') and the Burlington Northern — Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way to the southeast (hereafter the direction will be referred to as "east"). Exhibit A, Attachments 1, 3, 4 (Vicinity Plan and Sheet C-1, depicting lease boundaries), 7, and 20. 1 The subject property is one of the mixed-use areas depicted on the Master Plan Map. Exhibit A, Attachment 20. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM --2008-0022 page 2 of 10 3. The subject property does not contain and is not adjacent to any environmentally critical areas as defined by ECDC 23.40. Exhibit A, Staff Report, page 3. 4. The subject property is zoned Commercial Waterfront (CW). Exhibit A, Attachment 2. Marine -oriented services and retail uses are primary permitted uses in the CW zone. .ECDC 16.55.010. The maximum building height in the CW zone is 30 feet, and the minimum setback from the bulkhead is 15 feet for buildings and 60 feet for parking areas. ECDC 16.55.020. Boat sales, storage, and repair are not required to be conducted within a building. ECDC 16.55.030. 5. Surrounding properties are zoned CW, General Commercial (CG), and Open Space (OS). Exhibit A, Attachment 2. 6. The proposed development would satisfy CW standards in that the building height would be 25 feet and the setbacks from the bulkhead (both for the building and the paved boat storage/parking area) would be more than 100 feet.2 The Applicant proposes outdoor boat .storage, .which would include new boats for sale and boats awaiting repair or pickup. Exhibit A, Attachments 4 (Sheet C-1), 6, 7, and 8. 7. The Comprehensive Plan designations of the subject property are Master Plan Development and Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center. Exhibit A, Staff Report, page 7. The proposed use is consistent with the Port of Edmonds Master Plan, which identifies marine retail and services as potential uses within the mixed-use area to the east of Admiral Way. Exhibit A, Attachment 20, pages 7-8. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan polices for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center, which support the Port of Edmonds Master Plan, encourage "a more active and vital setting" for new retail businesses, and provide for the gradual elimination of large and inadequately landscaped paved areas. Exhibit A, Staff Report, pages 7-8. S. A portion of the proposed development (including the western edge of the building) would be located within 200 feet of the Puget Sound shoreline. Consequently, the development is subject to the requirements of the State Shoreline Management Act and the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program. The subject property is within an "Urban Mixed Use 1" shoreline designation. The proposed use is characterized as a "water - related use" as defined in ECDC 23.10.045(B)(540) because it provides a service supportive of water -dependent uses. The economic development policies of the Shoreline Master Program support the establishment of water -related commercial uses within the shoreline. The building height and setback standards applicable to the Urban Mixed Use 1 shoreline designation are the same as those applicable to the CW zone. Exhibit A, Staff Report, pages 4, 5, and 6; Exhibit A, Attachments 4 (Sheet C-1), 7, and 19; ECDC 23,10.065(B) (9). 2 Admiral Way and another Port of Edmonds parcel are located between the subject property and the bulkhead. Exhibit A, Attachments 3, 4 (Vicinity Plan), and 20 (see Master Plan Vicinity Map and Master Plan Map). Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2008.0022 page 3 of 10 9. As required by ECDC 23.10.155 (shoreline regulations for mixed-use commercial development), the Applicant proposes to maintain a contiguous view corridor that is 30 percent of the parcel (in this case, lease area) width, and is located adjacent to either the north or south property lines. The proposed view corridor would be 50 percent of the subject property width and would be located adjacent to the south property line. There are currently no buildings between the proposed view corridor and the shoreline. Although development is proposed on the parcel to the west of the subject property, the building on that parcel would align with the building on the subject property so that the view corridor is maintained. Exhibit A, Attachment 7; Testimony of Mr. Keuss. 10. Consistent with ECDC 23.10.090(B)(1) (public access goals and policies) and ECDC 23.10.145 (public access regulations), the proposed use would not affect public access to the shoreline. The subject property is on the east side of Admiral Way, whereas Puget Sound and the marina are on the west side of Admiral Way. Exhibit A, Staff Report, pages 5-6; Exhibit A, Attachment 4 (Vicinity Plan). 11. The parking requirement for the use is one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area, or 21 parking spaces. Although the current site plan (Exhibit A, Attachment 7) depicts 21 parking spaces on site, the Applicant proposes to rely on the existing Port parking located outside of the lease area. The Port has an inventory of 852 parking spaces that are available to customers of businesses on the Port property. Historically,. the Port has relied on these spaces to satisfy the parking requirement for new development. The City has not yet'calculated whether the Port's parking areas have adequate capacity for the proposed use based on the parking demand of existing development. However, in the event that the Port parking is not adequate, the site plan provides adequate area for the required number of parking stalls. Exhibit A, Attachments 5 and 7; Exhibit B; Testimony of Mr. Rafferty; Testimony of Mr. Keuss; Testimony of Ms. Machuga. 12. The Shoreline Master Program contains policies to protect water quality (ECDC 23.10.060). The subject property is adjacent to the Port's workyard, which has been improved with an elaborate catch basin system designed to filter out particulates prior to entering the Port's storm drainage system. Runoff from the subject property would be directed to the workyard facilities. Testimony of Mr. Keuss. 13. The Port of Edmonds acted as lead agency for review of environmental impacts caused by the proposal. The Port issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on May 2, 2008. No comments were received during the 14 -day comment period ending on May 16, 2008. Exhibit A, Attachments 9 and 10. 14. Notice of the open record hearing was mailed to property owners within 3 00 feet of the site, and posted on site, at the Civic Center, and at the library on May 22, 2008, and published in The Herald on May 27, 2008 and June 3, 2008. Exhibit A, Attachments 13 (mailing list), 15, 16, 17, and 18; Exhibit A, Staff Report, page 4. CONCLUSIONS Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2008-0022 page 4 of 10 Jurisdiction: The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hear and decide applications for shoreline substantial development permits pursuant to ECDC 20.100.010. Criteria for Review: The criteria for review of an SSDP are set forth in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-27-150. In order to approve the permit, the Hearing Examiner must find that the development is consistent with: A. The. policies and procedures of the State of Washington Shoreline Management Act; B. The State of Washington shoreline regulations (WAC 173-27); and C. The City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program. The City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program contains goals, policies, and regulations that are applicable to the proposed development. Pursuant to ECDC 23.10.040, the regulations are mandatory, whereas the goals and polices "are intended to form the policy for shoreline uses, developments, and activities, as the basis of the. regulations ... and to assist the city in determining whether to grant, modify and grant, or deny each proposed use, development, or activity." ECDC 23.10.040. The applicable regulations are set forth in ECDC 23.10.155 and 23.10.140 and are reproduced below. The applicable goals and policies are set forth in ECDC 23.10.060, 23.10.065; 23.10.075, and 23.10.095. These will not be reproduced in full, but those with particular relevance are discussed in the above Findings. 23.10.155 Use regulations — Mixed-use commercial.. A. General. This section contains regulations pertinent to the development and use of mixed-use commercial facilities upland from the ordinary high water mark.. These regulations are founded on the goals and policies established in Part II of this chapter. Please see the chart contained in ECDC 23.10.120 to determine in which shoreline environments mixed-use commercial developments are permitted. B. Permitted Uses. In the urban mixed-use I and II shoreline environments, the following are permitted uses, developments and activities: 1. The principal uses permitted are mixed-use commercial activities and developments, excluding medical, dental and veterinary clinics and drive-in businesses. 2. In addition to the principal uses listed above, accessory uses, developments, and activities normally associated with mixed-use commercial development are also permitted. This chapter also contains regulations on bulkheads and other shoreline protective structures, moorage facilities, marinas, and other uses, developments and activities which may be conducted accessory to the principal use. C. Lot Size. In the urban mixed-use I and II shoreline environments there is no minimum lot size. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2008-0022 page 5 of 10 D. Required Yards. The regulations of this subsection establish the required yards for all buildings and other major structures associated with this use. No building or other major structure may be located within the following required yards: Environxnent/Setback Street OHWM1 Side2 Urban 0 feet 15 feet landward of bulkheads for 0 feet Mixed -Use I buildings. 60 feet landward of bulkheads for parking.3 Urban 0 feet 15 feet landward of bulkheads for 0 feet Mixed -Use II buildings.4 60 feet landward of bulkheads for parking. 1The yards/setbacks shown under the column "OHWM" refer to bulkheads. If a bulkhead is not present, the ordinary high water mark shall be used. 2 See subsection E of this section for view corridor requirements. 3 I the urban mixed-use I environment, the 60 -foot landward setback for parking may be reduced by a maximum of 20 feet if a public walkway or publicly accessible open space is provided waterward of the bulkhead. The setback may be reduced by one foot for every one foot of public walkway or publicly accessible open space that is provided waterward of the OHWM, to a maximum of 20 feet (i.e., the setback for parking shall be no less than 40 feet from the bulkhead). 4Existing buildings may be reconstructed within their existing footprint provided there is at least a 25 -foot walkway waterward of the OHWM. A minimum 15 -foot setback is required from lot lines adjacent to suburban residential shoreline environments (RS and RM zoning districts). This area must be fully landscaped and include a minimum six-foot high fence or hedge. E. Required View Corridors. The regulations of this subsection establish the required view corridors for all buildings and other major structures associated with this use. No building or other major structure may be located within the following required view corridors: 1. Landward of the ordinary high water mark, a view corridor must be maintained across 30 percent of the average parcel width. The view corridor must be in one continuous piece. Within the view corridor, structures, parking areas, and landscaping will be allowed; provided, that they do not obscure the view from the adjacent public right-of- way to and beyond the Puget Sound. This view corridor must be adjacent to either the north or south property line, whichever will result in the widest view corridor given development on adjacent properties. If the subject property has shoreline frontage in excess of 1,000 feet, the city may require a maximum of one-third of the required view corridor to be placed in a location between the north and south property lines, in a location which will provide for the greatest unobstructed view of the Puget Sound. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2008-0022 page 6 of 10 2. Waterward of the ordinary high water mark, view corridors which are required pursuant to this section must be maintained starting at a width equal to the adjacent upland view corridor and expanding in a conical fashion 3 0 degrees from the prolongation of the view corridor waterward of the OHWM (see ECDC 23.10.245). F. Overwater Structures Prohibited. The location of structures over water shall be prohibited except as provided below... G. Height. 1. Upland of the OHWM: a. The maximum permitted height of structures in the urban mixed-use I and 11 shoreline environments is 30 feet above average grade level, except as specified below: i. Bridges and overpasses may exceed the maximum height limit with a shoreline variance. 2. Waterward of the OHWM... 23.10.140 General regulations — Parkina. A. Off Street Parking Required. All uses must provide sufficient off-street parking spaces in order to accommodate the reasonably anticipated number of vehicles that will be coming to the subject property. Specific parking standards for uses are identified in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, as now or hereafter amended. B. Access. The city will determine the number, location, and design of all curb cuts and other points of ingress and egress between the subject property and public rights-of-way. C. Design and Layout. Parking layouts must be designed efficiently to use the minimum amount of space necessary to provide the required parking and safe and reasonable access. Whenever possible, parking should be located out of the shoreline area. Parking should not be located between the building or buildings on the subject property and the shoreline. Exterior parking areas, other than for detached dwelling units must be attractively landscaped with vegetation that will not obstruct views of the shoreline from adjacent public areas or adjacent public rights-of- way. [Ord. 3318 § 3, 2000]. Conclusions Based on Findings: 1. With conditions of approval, the application satisfies the criteria for approval of a shoreline substantial development permit. a. The development would be consistent with the Shoreline Management Act (SMA). The policy of the SMA, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, is to "provide for the management of the shorelines of the state by planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses." This policy "contemplates protecting against adverse effects to the public health, the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters of the state and their aquatic life, while protecting generally public rights of navigation and corollary rights incidental thereto." RCW 90.58.020. The proposed development is a reasonable and appropriate use for the urban mixed- use shoreline. The project includes stormwater improvements for water quality Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2008-0022 page 7 of 10 protection and a view corridor for the public. The project would not affect navigation. Findings Nos. 8, 9, 10, and 11. b. The development would be consistent with WAC 173-27. The regulations of the Department of Ecology contained in WAC 173-27 address the procedures and permitting requirements applicable to the various types of shoreline permits. This development is being reviewed under the criteria for approval for shoreline substantial development permits set forth in WAC 173-27-150. Additional regulations applicable to shoreline substantial development are as follows: WAC 173-27-140 Review criteria for all development. (1) No authorization to undertake use or development on shorelines of the state shall be granted by the local government unless upon review the use or development is determined to be consistent with the policy and provisions of the Shoreline Management Act and the master program. (2) No permit shall be issued for any new or expanded building or structure of more than thirty-five feet above average grade level on shorelines of the state that will obstruct the view of a substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines except where a master program does not prohibit the same and then only when overriding considerations of the public interest will be served. WAC 173-27-190 Permits for substantial develonment. conditional use. or variance. (1) Each permit for a substantial development, conditional use or variance, issued by local government shall contain a provision that construction pursuant to the permit shall not begin and is not authorized until twenty- one days from the date of filing as defined in RCW 90.58.140(6) and WAC 173-27-130, or until all review proceedings initiated within twenty- one days from the date of such filing have been terminated; except as provided in RCW 90.5 8.140 (5)(a) and (b). The requirement of WAC 173-27-140(1) is addressed through the SSDP review criteria. WAC 173-27-140(2) is satisfied because the proposed building would be less than 35 feet tall. The requirement of WAC 173-27-190 is addressed by ECDC 20.55.060 (no construction until 30 days after decision). This limitation is incorporated into the conditions of approval. Finding No. 6. The proposal would be consistent with the goals, policies and regulations of the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program. The use is a water -related use. The site plan provides for a view -corridor that is more than 30 percent of the property width, and sufficient parking to satisfy City standards, although parking within the lease area is not required if there is adequate parking within the existing Port parking areas. The proposed building would comply with the applicable height and setback standards of the Urban Mixed -Use 1 shoreline designation and the Commercial Waterfront zone. The property would be connected to an existing Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2.008-0022 page 8of10 storm drainage system. Public access to the shoreline would not be affected by the development. Findings 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. DECISION Based on the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the request for a shoreline substantial development permit to develop a 10,120 -square -foot boat sales and repair shop at 345 Admiral Way is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. This project is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinances and to obtain all necessary permit approvals. 2. Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant must demonstrate compliance with the parking standards of ECDC 17.50. Use of the existing Port of Edmonds parking inventory is allowed by this decision if the Applicant is able to demonstrate that it is consistent with the parking standards. 3. Pursuant to ECDC 20.55.060, "No construction authorized by an approved shoreline permit may begin until 30 days after the final city decision on the proposal." DECIDED this 18th day of July 2008, Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2008-0022 Toweill Rice Taylor LLC City of Edmonds Hearing Examiners By: f~ N LeAnna C. Toweill page 9of10 RECONSIDERATION AND APPEAL The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing requests for reconsideration and appeals. An person wishing to file or respond to a request for reconsideration or an appeal should contact the Planniny Division of the Development Services Department for further procedural information. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Section 20.100.010(G) of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) requires the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his or her decision or recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register and/or presents testimony, or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of application being reviewed. APPEALS Chapter 20.105 of the ECDC contains the appeal procedures for Hearing Examiner decisions. Pursuant to Section 20.105.040(A), persons entitled to appeal include (1) the Applicant; (2) anyone who has submitted a written document to the City of Edmonds concerning the application prior to or at the hearing; or (3) anyone testifying on the application at the hearing. Sections 20.105.020(A) requires appeals to be in writing, and state (1) the decision being appealed, the name of the project applicant, and the date of the decision; (2) the name and address of the person (or group) appealing the decision, and his or her interest in the matter; and (3) the reasons why the person appealing believes the decision to be wrong. Pursuant to Section 20.105.020(B), the appeal must be filed with the Director of the Development Services Department within 14 calendar days after the date of the decision being appealed. The appeal must be accompanied by any required appeal fee. TIME LIMITS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND APPEAL The time limits for Reconsideration and Appeal run concurrently. If a request for reconsideration is filed before the time limit for filing an appeal has expired, the time clock for filing an appeal is stopped until a decision on the reconsideration request is completed. Once the Hearing Examiner has issued his or her decision on the reconsideration request, the time clock for filing an appeal continues from the point it was stopped. For example, if a reconsideration request is filed on day five of the appeal period, an individual would have nine more days in which to file an appeal after the Hearing Examiner issues .his decision on the reconsideration request. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR The property owner may, as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner, request a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessors Office. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Jacobsen's Marine, No. SM -2008-0022 page 10 of 10 CITY OF EDMONDS GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - Edmonds, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221 HEARING EXAMINER .1?) C. 1814\3 In the Matter of the Application of } Greg Jacobsen ) For a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. } DECLARATION I, LeAnna C. Toweill, the undersigned, do hereby declare: NO. SM -2008-0022 DECLARATION OF SERVICE 1. That I am a partner in the firm of Toweill Rice Taylor LLC, which maintains a professional services agreement with the City of Edmonds, Washington for the provision of Hearing Examiner services, and make this declaration in that capacity; 2. That I am now and at all times herein mentioned have been a citizen of the United States, a resident of the State of Idaho, over the age of eighteen (18), and competent to be a witness and make service herein; 3. That on July 18, 2008,1 did serve a copy of the decision in case SM -2008-0022 upon the following individuals at the addresses stated and in the manner indicated: 1. PKJB Architectural Group Attn: Shawn Rafferty/Greg Percich 603 Stewart Street, Suite 707 Seattle, WA 98101 2. City of Edmonds Development Services Dept. Attn: Diane Cunningham 121 - 5t1' Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 3. Edmonds City Council 121 - 5th Avenue North — 1" Floor Edmonds, WA 98020 4. Port of Edmonds Attn: Christopher Keuss 336 Admiral Way Edmonds, WA 98020 5. Greg Jacobsen 2412 NW Market St Seattle, WA 98107 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister City - Hekinan, Japan r 6. Alvin Rutledge 7101 Lake Ballinger Way Edmonds, WA 98026 Service was made to each parry above by: ❑ By facsimile transmission. ❑ By electronic transmission (e-mail). ❑ By mailing to the person named at the address of service via US I" Class Mail. I hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Idaho that the foregoing. is true and correct: DATED THIS_ day of , 2008 at Boise, Idaho. 1 LeAnria C. Toweill Toweill Rice Taylor LLC Serving as Hewing Examiner for Edmonds, Washington