Controversial plans for a £3 million shopping centre for Haworth have been approved, despite critics claiming it would overwhelm the tourist village.
The plans for nine shops including a department-style store were approved by Bradford Council planners yesterday.
Earlier this year the council turned down a larger plan for the site because it was out of keeping with the village but the committee decided the revised plans were acceptable.
English Heritage and the Bronte Society had protested about the plans, particularly the construction of a large glass-covered walkway between two buildings on the split-level site.
Members of the sub-committee stressed the importance of ensuring disabled facilities were incorporated into the two-storey design.
Councillor Jack Womersley also called for a glass area incorporated in the design to be closed off in a move to stop people congregating in the shopping centre at night.
Councillors also agreed there should be comprehensive car parking spaces free from the threat of clamping.
Woodhall Planning and Conservation is behind the development which has been on the drawing board for the last two years.
The company believes the shopping centre will provide an essential addition to the attractions already on offer in Haworth, and ensure the village's future as a tourism centre.
English Heritage, the Bronte Society and individual objectors say the two large buildings linked by a glass canopy will be out of character with Haworth, are inappropriate in scale and that the scheme does not match Bradford council policies.
A report considered by councillors meeting at the town hall admitted the proposal did not meet its own policies or government guidelines on major retail development outside the town centre.
But it said the site was in poor condition and consequently made no positive contribution to the visual quality of the village.
Councillors agreed that the new plans would not spoil the 'Victorian' look or feel of Haworth, despite arguments from some residents who said that the design would look out of place.
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 The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.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