YOUR article about the new group formed in favour of Coppergate II (January 4) came as a breath of fresh air, particularly after reading your article from the anti lobby opposing the demolition of the Ryedale Building which towers over the Castle Museum (January 2).

The Ryedale Building is indeed an example of "Sixties' brutal architecture" but they are living in cloud cuckoo land if they think they can transform the ugly concrete monstrosity into desirable homes. It is not sensitive to the area and should go.

I accept that the Coppergate proposals are not to everyone's liking and people are entitled to their personal view. But I have come to the conclusion that this lot are so obsessed with opposition for its own sake, that they are opposing some aspects of the council's proposals and transport measures that anyone in their right mind would want to support.

Jane Overhill-Smith,

Hillcrest Avenue,

Nether Poppleton,

York.

...WITH reference to Coppergate Riverside, I may not live in the Penthouse at Piccadilly Plaza, referred to by those intent on misrepresenting the common sense views of most citizens and motivated by self interest (such as the letter from Philip Crowe, chair York Tomorrow), but I do live off Piccadilly and it is obvious to anyone with a passing knowledge of the area that it is in serious need of improvement.

York city centre will certainly get left behind as neighbouring shopping centres continue to steal away trade.

Let's get on with improving the facilities and providing access to the riverside for everyone and stop looking for fairytale solutions which will never be financially viable.

Mike Peachey,

Trafalgar House,

Piccadilly,

York.

...I AM writing in support of Friends of Riverside (FOR). We need to have the Coppergate Riverside development completed as soon as possible.

Why should we be forced to go out to Monks Cross or Clifton Moor to shop?

I enjoy shopping in York and want to continue to do so - we want a new Debenhams, an extended Fenwick store and new walkways.

Come on Evening Press, get your campaign going to support FOR!

Let the silent majority stand up and be counted and make their voice heard to help York to move forward.

Mrs Joan Phillips,

Northfield Avenue,

Appleton Roebuck,

York.

...WHEN I first heard about the Coppergate Riverside proposal I thought (or feared!) that, despite the many public objections to it, a "silent majority" might indeed be in favour of it, as Trevor Kidd states.

However, through helping to carry out public opinion surveys and information stalls in various parts of the city centre, I've become more and more convinced that most people are opposed to the scheme. After comparing artists' impressions and leaflets of the Riverside development with those of alternative proposals such as the Castle Quarter, the overwhelming majority of shoppers surveyed favoured a green space or smaller-scale mixed-use development.

There is a difference between pretending to speak for the majority and making sure its views are truly represented in the debate and public inquiry.

Catherine Elliott,

Trafalgar Street,

York.

...City of York Council has been actively promoting the Coppergate II inquiry, contrary to Dave Dee Hughes' letter (January 9).

Along with a large public notice published in the Evening Press, information has constantly been provided to local media, which has publicised the event.

Letters have been sent to everyone who has objected to the application, telling them about the inquiry and notices have been posted up around the site itself.

In publicising the inquiry, the council must consider the cost to the taxpayer, who ultimately will have to fund any further publicity.

And the council hasn't finished publishing it yet - there's still more activity over the next few days.

The inquiry will begin on Tuesday in the Guildhall and anyone wanting to take part in the inquiry must register to speak on Tuesday when the inquiry opens.

Susan Heywood,

Principal development control officer,

City of York Council,

St Leonard's Place,

York.

...RICHARD Akers states that Sir Bernard Ingham appears not to have studied the plans for the Coppergate Riverside development (Letters, January 3).

Sir Bernard has recently published a book entitled the Castles of Yorkshire and I would assume that it is the historical angle that prompted him to call Coppergate II "a remarkable example of civic vandalism".

What Richard Akers and the council seem unable to grasp is that the opponents to this proposed development are against the large buildings on the west side of the River Foss, the area which is at the present a car park.

This area is part of Clifford's Tower: the River Foss forms part of the historical moat defences of the tower/castle. To build any structure on that open space is to disassociate the two.

The tower and its surroundings need to be seen by our visitors in the open environment so they can understand the history they have come to see. An open green space would be ideal.

Mr Akers mentions that English Heritage, the custodians of Clifford's Tower are not against the development. Well they should be, the proposed buildings as we have seen in the presentation made by Land Securities, are very modern, much too big, too near the tower and totally out of keeping with the historical Law Courts, Castle Museum and Debtors' Prison.

Please Mr Akers, try to understand that Sir Bernard Ingham and others are trying to preserve an important historical site for the generations to come.

Your company owns a large tract of land in Hungate: why don't you put your large store there and use the ready-made multi storey car park that already exists?

Stuart Wilson

Castle Area Campaign Group,

Vesper Drive,

Acomb,

York.

Updated: 09:05 Saturday, January 12, 2002