Santa Rosa commission rejects Lowe's proposal

<p>The Santa Rosa Planning Commission on Thursday rejected a proposal by Lowe’s to build a home improvement store on Santa Rosa Avenue, but not before sparks flew over whether two commissioners should have recused themselves from the vote.</p><p>The 5-1 rejection of the 155,000-square-foot store at the corner of Santa Rosa and Yolanda avenues came at the end of more than three hours of debate and sets up a likely appeal to the City Council.</p><p>“I don’t mind having Lowe’s somewhere in the city on a site that works; this site just doesn’t work,” said commissioner David Poulsen. “My big bugaboo has been the traffic.”</p><p>A cadre of Lowe’s officials on hand Thursday night would not comment on the final vote, forwarding inquiries to a corporate spokeswoman who did not immediately return calls.</p><p>Lowe’s officials and a small contingent of supporters accused commissioners Michael Allen and Nick Caston of not giving the proposal a fair shake in either Thursday’s hearing or the commission’s previous consideration of the environmental impact report. </p><p>Both Allen and Caston are executive committee members of the Accountable Development Coalition, a group that has generated opposition to the Lowe’s project.</p><p>“We are concerned whether we are getting a fair hearing here,” Lowe’s attorney Judy Davidoff said. “We want to raise that for the record.”</p><p>Commissioner Scott Bartley, who cast the lone supporting vote, said that to deny the project will “send a chill to anyone else who is considering coming to Santa Rosa.”</p><p>Bartley also questioned Allen and Caston’s votes, calling their participation “entirely legal, but it doesn’t pass the smell test.”</p><p>Both Allen and Caston fired back.</p><p>“I have turned the other cheek three or four times,” Allen said, telling the audience that he has had no part in the coalition’s deliberations on Lowe’s so that he could maintain his vote when the issue came before the commission.</p><p>“I plead guilty to being a big fan of new urbanism,” he said. “I will not be intimidated in expressing my views.” </p><p>Caston said the accusations of an unfair bias were unfounded.</p><p>“I am disturbed by the loss in statesmanship,” he said, before arguing that Lowe’s had not presented enough evidence that the project merited a change in the city’s general plan to accommodate the store.</p><p>Assistant City Attorney Molly Dillon said Allen had discussed both his and Caston’s role with the coalition and any potential conflict with their commission duties. </p><p>As long as neither are paid for their participation in the coalition and are able to give applicants a fair hearing on the commission, they are within the law, Dillon said.</p><p>The legal standard holds “that they have to be able to make independent and objective decisions based on the merits of the project,” Dillon said.</p><p>Commissioner Patti Cisco stepped down from the dais and abstained from voting because she owns shares in Lowe’s, Dillon said.</p><p><i>Staff Writer Kerry Benefield writes an education blog at extracredit.blogs.pressdemocrat.com. She can be reached at 526-8671 or kerry.benefield@pressdemocrat.com</i></p>