Proposals to redevelop villages because of their good transport links came 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 (Burley) 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 that it 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 at Victoria Hall, Saltaire, into Bradford Council's proposed replacement Unitary Development Plan (UDP).

If the blueprint 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 land. The Council 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 on it.

Other people sitting at the table included representatives of 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 took 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 publishing the closing date as August 29 instead of August 19, though objections were accepted up to the later date

a page of Bradford South proposals being omitted from some documents. Although all objectors were told, there was a revised advertisement and the consultation period was extended.

The Council's executive member for the environment Anne Hawkesworth said there was 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 team of four Government inspectors is not expected to publish its findings until the beginning of next year.

The inquiry continues.

In depth: The battle for Bradford's green belt