There has been a large amount of discussion on a development of 64 homes, just along the B999 from Potterton, at Pitmedden. This development has gone through various committees and planning appeals. Objections included Udny Community Council objecting on behalf of Pitmedden residents.
“There have been 25 objections made against the scheme with worries over increased traffic, concerns over parking, fears over the impact on school capacity and the effect on character of the village.” (Press & Journal https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/monday-filler-council-planners-earmark-north-east-housing-plans-for-rejection/)
All these concerns are valid here in Potterton for the sites of OP1 and OP2, and on a much larger scale. Both regarding the volume of objections from residents and that OP1 and OP2 are accounting for almost four times as many homes as the Pitmedden site.
Council planners recommended these proposals at Pitmedden were rejected, with road safety concerns and increase in traffic considered in representations. (“Impact of amenity on current residents” related to roads and traffic concerns. This was discussed at Formartine Area Committee on 30th June and application refused. https://youtu.be/KeWQX3oC48Y)
Pitmedden’s development had one access road on to a B999 junction, which was a crucial road access policy constraint for planning. Both of Potterton’s OP1/OP2 access points are onto rural C classification roads. Both C roads are narrow and single track at various points.As shown by footage taken last weekend, these C class roads are used for large agricultural vehicles to support farming and agriculture in our area and are not suitable for additional traffic and construction vehicles to be sent through the villages of Potterton and Belhelvie. OP1 and OP2 at Potterton should not be included in the Local Development Plan at all.