GREEN belt land needs to be developed if Bradford’s economy is to grow and compete with its neighbours, a local property network has warned.

The Bradford Property Forum, a networking and lobbying group run by the district’s Chamber of Commerce, said the council now needed to “bite the bullet” to tackle a shortage of land for homes and industry, warning that failure to act would only push Bradford further down the league table of successful cities.

The forum made the controversial comments after green space campaigners reacted with anger at a decision which would allow 11,000 homes to be built on the green belt by 2030.

Earlier this month, a Government planning inspector backed a key part of the Council’s under-development Local Plan, which includes the release of large swathes of the green belt.

The forum’s chairman Stephen McManus, of Chartback Developments, said they supported the inspector’s decision, but that the “argument is not being led by developers – it is in the interests of the district’s people and the general prosperity of Bradford that more land is made available”.

He said: “We appreciate that this is a sensitive issue and we’re not going to win over everyone’s support, but it is widely accepted that there is a shortage of land for residential and commercial development and, if it’s not tackled soon, the situation will get worse.”

The forum’s vice-chairman Allan Booth, a director of architects Rance Booth Smith, added: “We have a growing population that needs to be housed locally to continue to support the local economy and find jobs within the district. That won’t happen if we don’t face up to the tough challenges here.

“So, something has to give: we either bite the bullet on making previously unused land available, or we accept that Bradford will not be able to compete with our neighbours in terms of catering for its citizens, attracting new investment and supporting job growth and economic development.”

The pair acknowledged there were still questions to be answered about infrastructure and facilities like schools, and that more could be done to encourage development of brownfield sites, but said it was not an “either-or” situation.

But one green space campaigner, Dr Steve Ellams of the Menston Action Group, said building on the green belt in places like the Wharfe Valley would be of no use to Bradford’s “explosion of the population”.

He said: “The developers have conned everybody, including the Government, into believing they can build their way out of an economic situation by building houses and this is a nonsense.”

Another green space campaigner, the Rev Canon Gordon Dey, of the Tong and Fulneck Valley Association, said the value of “our beautiful countryside” to the district’s citizens should not be forgotten.

He said: “If we get rid of it, we have lost it for good.”

Councillor Alex Ross-Shaw, who leads on planning at the Labour-run council, said new homes were needed so more young people could get onto the housing ladder, but the council’s Local Plan had addressed concerns about green belt loss “as far as we are able”.

He said: “We believe we have the right strategy in place and like the Property Forum, we believe we have to now move forward for the sake of the prosperity of the district.”

Councillor Martin Smith, the opposition Conservative group's spokesman for planning, said: “Building expensive houses on green fields in Ilkley and Craven for people who work in Leeds doesn’t do much to boost Bradford’s economy and does nothing at all to meet the housing needs of Bradfordians.

"All it does is delay further the regeneration of the City and the delivery of high quality affordable housing for Bradford’s growing population."