Proposals to redevelop villages because of their good transport links were under fire at the first day of a major public inquiry yesterday.
John Gundry, of Burley Community Council, said villages earmarked for development because they had good transport links would not be able to cope with further building.
Burley-in-Wharfedale, Steeton with Eastburn, Menston and Thornton have been highlighted as places that could be developed further.
But Mr Gundry told the inquiry: "The village is not really capable of taking any more houses in its present state.
"There's also no room for more trains on the track and there is certainly no more space for cars in the railway car park and no space to extend the car park."
But Andy Haigh, representing the Council, said villages such as Burley-in-Wharfedale were suitable for development and would encourage people to use public transport to commute to work.
Mr Gundry was speaking at a round-table session at a £1 million public inquiry in Victoria Hall, Saltaire, into Bradford Council's proposed replacement Unitary Development Plan.
If it is accepted it will be the yardstick for planning applications across the district until 2019.
The inquiry will deal with almost 7,000 objectors covering some 700 issues, the majority dealing with the use of green fields for housing.
The proposed UDP retains all existing green belt and the authority believes former industrial sites can be built on to meet all future housing needs.
But the green space is under an unprecedented challenge from developers who are objecting to its preservation and want to build homes.
Other people sitting at the round table included representatives for Asda, Skipton Properties, the House Builders Federation, Redrow Homes, and David Wilson Homes.
The Council's barrister Martin Carter revealed at the hearing, which is expected to last until the end of June, that a series of errors had taken place in the preparation of the plan.
They included:
failing to place a second advertisement about the plan in a required timescale;
The London Gazette incorrectly published the closing date as August 29 instead of August 19. But objections were accepted at the later date;
a page of Bradford South proposals being omitted from some documents; although all objectors were
told, there was a revised advert and the
consultation period was extended.
The Council's executive member for the environment Councillor Anne Hawkesworth said there had been extensive public consultation throughout the plan's preparation and the Council would not be required to have a second inquiry as a result of the
errors.
The inquiry continues but the team of four Government inspectors is not expected to publish its findings until the beginning of next year.
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