I WAS intrigued to read the comments of the director of the environment and development services, Roy Templeman, dismissing as naive Adam Sinclair's suggestions regarding the development of Coppergate II (Evening Press, October 27).

Lottery funding, by his own admission, could fund the enhancement of the open space around Clifford's Tower, but would not meet the costs of the loss of the car park to the council.

Mr Templeman must surely have forgotten about the extra car parking that is to be provided for on the much-less sensitive area of Piccadilly.

Land Securities is best known for its shed developments on the peripheries of towns, providing large, characterless, shopping environments.

Does Mr Templeman seriously think that to create more of the same, but this time on such an environmentally-sensitive site as this, is for the long term good of our economic well-being?

The outskirts of York have been reduced to a sprawling, Milton-Keynesian landscape that does nothing to even hint at the delights of our medieval city.

These out-of-town sites are soulless and can be seen all over the country. And yet Mr Templeman feels that more of the same, but this time in the centre of the city, will be to York's economic and cultural salvation.

I feel the time has come to take seriously Mr Sinclair's proposal, or indeed any other amendments that other parties may have that look towards the long term aesthetic of the city.

The enduring appeal of York is its almost unique medieval identity, this is what will sustain the city.

Shed developments will come and go, York deserves better.

K J Scott,

Stonegate,

York.