Huntersville planning board recommends Pottstown preservation plan; residents press for faster protections

The Huntersville Planning Board on Oct. 14 unanimously recommended approval of the Pottstown Community Preservation Plan and urged the Town Board to form an advisory committee and adopt a short addendum identifying the community’s top immediate priorities, board members and staff said.

The recommendation comes after residents and the plan’s consultant described a multi-part approach intended to stabilize housing, protect historic resources and coordinate town, county and nonprofit funding and capacity. Opponents of the plan’s pace told the board they fear developers are buying properties and could demolish homes before protective actions take effect.

The plan, produced by consultant Neighboring Concepts, organizes work into five focus areas and four “toolkits” that pair community-led organizing with regulatory and funding actions intended to preserve homes and institutions. Consultant Eric Orozco said the plan emphasizes “not just preserve the buildings, but preserve the people of the community,” and that many actions are designed to be implemented in stages and scaled by cost and time.

During public comment, residents urged faster, concrete steps. “We don’t want parts of Pottstown saved. We want the whole town saved,” said Shanaan Mayfield. Rachel Swift urged that the town “set aside funds to actually buy some of the historic homes that may be going up for sale in the near future” to prevent demolition by developers. Brandon Nelson raised sidewalks and residential “highway” guardrails along David Street as quality-of-life concerns. Janelle Harris said some Pottstown residents feel disenfranchised and noted irregularities in voting access tied to mailbox locations.

On policy tools, the plan recommends consideration of a preservation-oriented overlay district, use of historic-designation procedures, and formation of community-based development vehicles such as a community land trust to acquire and steward housing stock. Orozco gave examples from the region where a demolition-delay procedure and land trust purchases were used to save threatened homes: “You can look at just procedural ways to actually work on that. … In the city of Charlotte, the historic landmarks mission can delay that demolition for a year,” he said.

Town planning staff and the consultant also described tangible infrastructure and program steps the town could lead or support, from traffic calming and “advisory shoulders” to stormwater analysis and enhancements around the Torrance Lytle Community Center (referred to in the presentation as the Delwood/Torrance Lytle center). Staff noted a separate 31-acre county-owned site adjacent to the study area that the county plans to develop for park and recreation uses; officials said the county’s planning for that parcel is separate from—though related to—the small-area plan.

Planning board members repeatedly noted the tension between property owners’ rights under state law and the community’s desire for prompt protections. Town staff and the board referenced North Carolina statute 160D and other state law constraints on zoning and historic protections when explaining how much and how quickly the town could legally restrict development without further legal review.

After discussion the planning board moved and seconded a recommendation that the Town Board adopt the Pottstown Community Preservation Plan as presented and requested that the Town Board (1) encourage formation of an advisory committee/coalition representing the Pottstown community and relevant partners and (2) accept an addendum highlighting the community’s top immediate priorities and recommended near-term actions. The planning board vote was recorded as unanimous; the transcript records the result as “unanimous,” and individual roll-call tallies were not provided in the recorded minutes.

The plan will be presented to the Town Board at its meeting a week after the planning board’s special meeting for possible final action. Planning board members and several speakers urged that any adoption be followed quickly by steps to establish the recommended advisory body, prioritize tools such as an overlay or demolition-delay process, pursue targeted grant funding and consider direct town purchases or partnerships to preserve at-risk homes.

The meeting combined public comment, a consultant presentation, technical clarification from staff about statutory limits and annexation processes, and the planning board’s formal recommendation. The board’s recommendation and the community’s presentations make near-term attention by the Town Board and county partners likely to determine whether the plan’s protections can be implemented quickly enough to prevent demolitions or large-scale redevelopment in the short term.