Councillors are red faced after a decision to reject a plan for a multi-million city centre office complex was overturned by the Government.

Members of Bradford Council's area planning panel voted six to one against the block being built next to the Bradford Interchange, describing it as 'dreadful' and like 'a tin shack'.

But developer Richard Morton, director of Leeds-based Landmark Development Projects, appealed to the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions about his scheme for the six-story city centre development to create 500 jobs.

Today, its Planning Inspectorate backed his plans, saying: "... it would not have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area."

Panel member, Councillor Syd Collard (Lab, Great Horton), one of the councillors who voted against the block, said: "If the Planning Inspectorate has made a decision, it's made a decision and I expect we'll go along with it. That's all I want to say really. There is no way we'd take it on appeal to the High Court."

Panel chairman, Councillor Clive Richardson, was the only councillor who voted in favour of the plan.

Councillors Sher Khan (Lab, Little Horton), Gordon Mitchell (Lab, Clayton), John Buffham (Con, Thornton), Andrew Smith (Con, Queensbury) and Allan Hillary (Lib-Dem, Bolton) all voted against.

According to Landmark, the building - called No1 The Interchange - will be white coloured aluminium on top of a Yorkshire stone plinth at street level.

Mr Morton said: "The Council panel can not only look back to the heritage of the past, it has to look forward to what the city has to offer in the future. Part of the future is modern design, innovation and specification for modern operators. You cannot provide it in old buildings and they must accept that.

"Unless the councillors listen to their officers, they're going to have more appeals against them, more costs to the Council and more delays in the process of regenerating the city centre - that is a concern to the city itself."

And while victorious, as it was a written appeal, Mr Morton can not claim for costs, which could run into thousands.