A walk through a building site could become part of a bus journey to and from Bradford.
Bosses at bus regulators Metro are considering a plan to run buses to either side of a closed road bridge, with passengers getting off to swap vehicles.
The move, suggested to maintain a bus service when Railtrack closes the bridge at Raw Nook, Oakenshaw, next month, would be the first time the method has been attempted in Bradford.
And Metro says the only other option is to divert the 268 and 269 services onto the M606 and take Oakenshaw and Low Moor travellers by mini-bus to meet the diverted buses.
A Metro spokesman said: "We're in a no-win situation, whichever option we pick it will inconvenience people.
"Running buses to either side of a closure has not been done in Bradford before. We've only had a few days to come up with this and now it's up to the bus operators."
At a public meeting to discuss the bridge closure a Metro official revealed Bradford Council, Railtrack and contractors May Gurney had only notified the bus regulator of the closure this week - despite planning it for a year.
If Bradford Council Highways Department provides a closure order the bridge will be shut for 17 days from April 8 and four subsequent weekends.
The £1 million repairs involve the replacement of the centre section of the corroded bridge so it can carry 40-ton lorries.
But some passengers have been stunned by the idea - and claim the "unreliable" bus service stands no chance of getting buses at either end of the bridge together.
Oakenshaw resident John Batterton, who has formed a committee to oppose the bridge closure, said: "It's a crazy idea, we must have the most unreliable bus service in Bradford."
Railtrack project head John Meacock said with hindsight the public and bus regulators should have been notified earlier.
Meanwhile, a second Neighbourhood Forum meeting about the bridge closure will be held at the Low Moor and Oakenshaw Community Centre in Terry Road at 7.30pm on Thursday. Railtrack, Metro and Bradford Council officials will report progress on queries raised at a meeting held on Wednesday.
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article