Exit 17 Grocery Store Proposal Shelved

Interchange Development, LLC, the company proposing to develop a multi-acre parcel the intersection of Whitney and Hoit Road off Route 4 near Exit 17 on I-93, is withdrawing its request to have removed from the parcel that would have allowed a full-service grocery store to be built at the site.

The development covenants were placed on the parcel in order to limit the size of structures on the parcel in an agreement to have the site rezoned from industrial to commercial. The restrictions were placed on the parcel in order to not compete with a potential development project on the , with some officials hoping that a grocery store would be developed there. However, after years with no movement on the tannery site and city officials suggesting that mixed used might be a better option for the tannery site, David and Laurie Rauseo, the owners of Interchange Development, sought the removal of the restrictions in order to construct a grocery store on their parcel, instead of their original plan for a cluster of small retail stores which might compete with downtown Penacook retailers.

The proposal for a grocery store at Exit 17 had both support and detractors in the community. Some residents of Penacook and neighboring communities supported the grocery store at Exit 17; other Penacook residents wanted the tannery project options exhausted first. Others promoted the aspect of having a walkable Penacook with accessible public transportation even though few people ever walk to do their weekly grocery shopping and the current CAT system is underutilized now. The Rauseos created a Facebook page with more than 1,500 "likes" to gauge support and listen to feedback on both sides of the issue.

In August, the Economic Development Advisory Council voted overwhelmingly to advise the city council to remove the covenants; but the Planning Board on Nov. 16, unanimously voted against the recommendation, after many hours of testimony and one member, former Concord Mayor , insinuating that the board had been “had” by the Rauseos, who made no mention of a grocery store years ago when they asked to have the parcel rezoned.

The interaction with Gross at the meeting prompted the Rauseos’ attorney, , of , a fixture at Planning Board meetings, to counter the insinuation both at the meeting and later, in the Rauseos’ withdrawal letter.

“Some have claimed that the Rauseos sought the 2008 rezoning, all while secretly harboring the intention to seek expanded development rights once the Site was commercially rezoned,” he wrote. “This claim is categorically false.”

Uchida wrote that the Rauseos “volunteered the development restriction covenants” because city officials believed that a grocery store would be built at the tannery site. He noted that in the last two years, the Rauseos heard from many residents in the community who were frustrated that the tannery project was not going to have a grocery store. City staffers reportedly told the Rauseos earlier this year that “such a development would not proceed and the development direction for the Tannery site began to change to mixed use.” Uchida said, at this point, the Rauseos changed their focus too.

Rumors had also begun to circulate before the Planning Board hearing that there was going to be some movement in the tannery’s future. However, according to officials, the rumors are false. In an email on Nov. 23, Matt Walsh, the assistant for special projects for the city of Concord, stated that there was “nothing new to report at the Tannery site,” meaning that the Rauseos backing away from the proposal could mean that Penacook residents, and residents in surrounding communities, will be without a full-service and easily accessible grocery story for many more years to come.

According to emails from the Rauseos, while they are disappointed, they don’t feel as if the city or officials misled them in any way, despite saying that a grocery store was not in the works for the tannery site.

“We don’t feel tricked but mixed signals is a good description,” they wrote. “Obviously, our timing was wrong.”

The Rauseos say the lack of consensus by Penacook residents was the prime motivator for backing away from the plan, with the couple stating that when they spoke to community members, including a meeting with the in April, they would only seek a supermarket for the site if the community wanted one at Exit 17. The Rauseos will be continuing to proceed with the development group’s plan for a gas/diesel and convenience store portion of the project.

“We are in negotiations with several operators and hope to have a spring 2012 build,” they wrote. “We will be pursuing other options for the remainder such as restaurants but there is no timeline right now.”

Despite the rumors, miscommunications, and visionary dreams by planners and officials thata may never come true, the Rauseos have decided there is no turning back on the grocery store plan.

“We will focus on providing the services that the industrial and office users on Whitney Road have requested and what we believe will be a good fit for the property and location,” they wrote.