I SYMPATHISE with John Heawood's feelings of unfairness at the Coppergate II inquiry (January 17).

I went to this tribunal to see how the appeal system works because I suspect the Germany Beck development will end up with an inquiry in due course. As a newcomer to planning procedures I was also surprised how hard it is for us amateurs.

It is very difficult to get the information necessary to challenge statements made by developers in their planning application. It appears the public has no right to this supporting information nor is there a legal obligation for the developer's claims to be accurate.

Like any court case, one side can make their claims and it is up to the other side to challenge them. However, the system fails if one side holds the key information.

It is also proving very difficult to uncover the extent of deals, which I believe are referred to as "offsets", entered into between the developers and our council. If the developers are to contribute to community projects, these should form part of any balanced, public consideration.

Mr Heawood may be further alarmed to discover that Transport Secretary Stephen Byers is reviewing the planning regulations to make life harder for objectors.

I urge people to respond to the Green Paper (at www.planning.dtlr.gov.uk) because the proposals will not make it any easier to influence the developers or the planning authorities.

Charles Jones,

Main Avenue,

Heworth, York.

...HAVING experienced a public inquiry for the first time into Coppergate II, I am exasperated.

With City of York Council having chosen the least suitable venue available, a significant part of the first morning was devoted to upgrading the public address system so people could hear the proceedings. Apart from the first few rows of seats, the public's view of the proceedings was abysmal.

More time was wasted by the council's smooth-talking spokesman, all at sea with the cross-referencing coding (or was it more humbug to waste vital cross-examination time?) Opposition consternation expressed itself when a major timetable re-shuffle was asked for. A brilliant, and no doubt well-tried move, to wrong foot them?

Like most citizens, I failed to register my name to speak at the inquiry. After all there were several august pressure groups headed by highly-intelligent, skilled and eloquent advocates, who could better present the case for retaining the site for the enjoyment and refreshment of exhausted shoppers and tourists alike. I was so wrong!

The dismal performance of those first "eloquent" people caused many a jaw to drop and blood pressure to rise. Why did no one point out that this "superstore", if needed at all, could be accommodated on the Piccadilly side of the Foss, providing magnificent views of the Eye of York?

Sadly this is now the only way I can make my views known. Thank God for the Evening Press.

D R Wortley,

Turner's Croft,

Heslington, York.

...AS a weekly shopper to York, I am delighted that English Heritage has published case studies of examples of exemplary architectural approaches to historic areas. Referring to the Davygate retail scheme, this is set out as a striking example of a shopping project. Surely this must give great heart to the supporters of Coppergate II and the Friends of Riverside.

I look forward to being one of the first shoppers in this new scheme.

S E Alley,

Harpham, near Driffield.

Updated: 10:44 Wednesday, January 23, 2002