PLANNERS have been forced to defend how a plan to build 267 homes on green fields got the go-ahead.

Locals fought a spirited campaign against the development near the Leeds-Liverpool canal at Simpson's Green, Apperley Road, Apperley Bridge.

But they lost their fight earlier this month, when the Council's Regulatory and Appeals Committee granted permission for the Miller Homes development.

Now angry campaigners have sent an official complaint letter to Bradford Council's chief executive Tony Reeves, making a series of allegations about the way the application was dealt with.

The letter, sent by resident Eileen Payne, complains about faults in the Council's planning website and alleges that "political bias was evident" at the meeting.

It also points out that the committee took part in "three hours of detailed questioning" over a plan to develop at nearby Cote Farm - which was eventually refused - but the Simpson's Green decision was taken in just 45 minutes.

Ward councillor Jeanette Sunderland (Lib Dem, Idle and Thackley), who is supporting the campaigners, said: "Local residents have raised some really serious issues with me and I have supported them to make a formal complaint to the Council so that they can get a formal response.

"The Council should delay issuing the decision notice for the application until the complaint has been dealt with."

But Julian Jackson, Bradford Council's assistant director for planning, defended the decision-making process.

He said a "detailed presentation" had been given by officers at the meeting before the decision was made.

He added: "At the start of the Regulatory and Appeals committee, the chairman of that committee issued his usual statement reminding the committee that there is no place for party policies in the decision-making process when considering planning applications."

And Mr Jackson also refuted the claim that the planning website had been faulty.

He said: "A significant number of representations were received to the scheme with the majority of these received via the planning website, which was operating during the consideration of the application."

Councillor Val Slater (Lab), executive member for planning, added: "Although the decision was obviously a disappointment to the objectors, I am confident that the planning committee followed all the required processes when coming to their decision and people had plenty of opportunity to give their views in advance of the Regulatory and Appeals committee meeting."