A controversial ruling against the creation of Aberdeen’s first trampoline park could be overturned next week.
UK firm, Jump In, submitted their application to transform the former AC Yule building in West Tullos Industrial Estate last year.
But, despite the scheme potentially creating dozens of jobs and receiving no objections, city council planners rejected it in December.
Its out-of-town location was given as one of the reasons for the proposal being refused.
But the developer subsequently appealed the decision and it will now be considered by the authority’s local review body on Tuesday.
A petition has subsequently been launched in support of the venture, which has gained more than 2,300 signatures.
And, last month, a similar development in Inverurie was approved by Aberdeenshire Council.
Last night, the firm’s founder said he hoped the committee would listen to the public.
Vernon West, who is also the company’s executive chairman, said: “We have got close to 6,000 likes on our Facebook page for this development, that’s more than we’ve ever had at this stage of any of our parks – it’s unprecedented.
“Most of those people are residents of Aberdeen and, if they are so enthused about this proposal and it’s rejected, they are going to drive the half an hour to the park in Inverurie.
“Unfortunately, we will not be able to state our position at the meeting, apart from what we have in writing, or answer questions, but our chief executive, Gavin Lucas, will be there which is a mark of how much this means to us.”
The proposal includes interconnected trampolines, a dedicated toddler jump space and a Gladiators-style battle beam.
In their original ruling, planners stated it had not been demonstrated “no suitable premises in a more suitable location” were available.
It went on: “Equally, there is potential conflict with the existing business and industrial uses within West Tullos and particularly on Craigshaw Road, given the different users and operational characteristics, including vehicles using Craigshaw Road, of those uses and that of a commercial leisure facility focused on families.”
Planners also had concerns about the distance from the park to the nearest bus stop – stating it was above the maximum distance.
And they argued the route for southbound buses from the city centre could result in “significant potential for adverse impact on pedestrian safety”.
