Developers have lodged an appeal against refusal by Bradford council to allow a new footbridge - described as resembling a meccano set - across the Leeds-Liverpool canal.
The appeal by Taywood Homes for the new bridge near the historic Swine Lane bridge at Riddlesden is to be held at Keighley town hall on Wednesday, April 28.
The bridge was designed as a new pedestrian access to a site for 400 homes off Swine Lane, Riddlesden. Planners threw out the proposal for the bridge because it was out-of-keeping with the old stone-built canal bridge nearby.
At the time Keighley councillor Barry Thorne said it looked like a meccano set and councillors told Taywood to change the design.
Cllr John Cope, who represents the Worth Valley and is chairman of the planning sub-committee, says: "An officer is working with Taywood Homes on coming up with a design which is more in keeping with the area. But the planning rules allow a developer to appeal against a decision."
The housing development is planned to take place in four phases. Taywood has submitted detailed plans for the first 136 homes.
But - as revealed in the Keighley News last week - angry conservationists campaigning against the development claim Taywood has been premature in submitting the application without first resolving the controversial issue of the footbridge.
Penny Ward, of the Aire Valley Conservation Society, says: "I am very angry that they have submitted this plan without coming up with an alternative plan for the bridge. The present plan is unsuitable in the canal conservation area and close to the listed bridge.
"I feel this is undue pressure being put on the planning committee to concede the bridge plan and allow the development to go ahead."
Keighley MP Ann Cryer is backing the opponents and is to write to government minister Rick Raynsford at the environment, transport and regions department.
Mrs Cryer is opposed to development on the green-field site and is urging the government to keep to its pledge that brown-field sites should be considered first.
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 The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.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