THE York Civic Trust has made its detailed views known on the Coppergate Riverside scheme to the City of York Council, and has expressed its very strong opposition to what is proposed.

The main issues which convince us that this scheme would be seriously harmful to the site and to the city are as follows:

u The over-development of the site;

u Its scale and massing;

u The large amount of retail floorspace and its effect on the economic viability of the historic streets;

u The small amount of residential accommodation;

u The poor quality of the architectural design of the buildings and the unsuitability of the proposed materials;

u The effect of this development on the setting of Clifford's Tower and the Castle Museum/court complex.

We have felt it necessary to remind the council that this is a site of international importance and is in the very heart of the Central Historic Core Conservation Area.

We have seen little evidence of the conservation arguments being given much weight in the council officer's assessment of the scheme, and yet this is the largest scheme to have been proposed in the past 150 years - since Parliament Street was created.

The Trust considers that while there is scope for development between the River Foss and Piccadilly, the rest of the site should be landscaped in order to provide a worthy setting for Clifford's Tower and the other nearby Grade I listed buildings.

The officer's recommendation to the planning committee that they "should be mindful to approve the scheme" is based on short term financial gains without fully appreciating the long-term damage that will result from this proposal. This scheme would be an act of architectural vandalism for which future generations would never forgive us.

It should be rejected out of hand.

Dr John Shannon CBE,

Chairman,

York Civic Trust,

Fairfax House,

Castlegate,

York.

...I MUST respond to Mick Phythian's letter (November 16), in which he makes the claim that the Coppergate Riverside development will "ruin any chance of York achieving World Heritage Site status". Rather than ruining any such attempt, we believe that Coppergate Riverside can make this aspiration more attainable by removing the eyesore of Ryedale Building, relocating car parking from the base of Clifford's Tower to Piccadilly and replacing semi-derelict properties on Piccadilly with high quality buildings.

Land Securities is committed to working in partnership with local authorities, other stakeholders and interested parties on schemes that deliver the true, long-term benefits of inner city regeneration.

As a company that has invested in York since the early 1960s we are fully aware of the city's special qualities and the need for any development to be both sensitive and sustainable.

To this end we have worked closely with, among others, English Heritage and we were pleased when English Heritage gave its support to our application, saying that it dealt satisfactorily with archaeological concerns and conservation interests.

To blindly pursue economic growth at the expense of York's heritage would clearly be wrong but the stifling of economic development and job creation would also create problems and in the end be counter productive to consideration interests.

With developments of this nature it is all a question of balance.

We believe that we have achieved this through a scheme that provides a mix of uses, combining shops, with offices, homes, restaurants and leisure, while creating a new managed open space for public enjoyment in front of Clifford's Tower and opening up access to and across the River Foss.

R J Akers,

Assistant Director,

Land Securities,

Strand,

London.

...I AM still confused about how much traffic would be generated by the Coppergate Riverside development if it were to go ahead. I seem to remember that the traffic consultants WSP were reported in the Evening Press as saying that the scheme would not cause extra traffic.

However, at a recent meeting of the Fishergate ward committee, a colleague spoke to John Hicks of WSP who pointed out that the column in the report "number of car visits" really meant "number of people visiting by car". So presumably the number of cars would not be 618,101 but about 300,000 because there would be more than one person per car.

But this still seems to me to be a great deal of extra traffic on top of a rapidly worsening situation. Can I urge the Evening Press to be honest broker on this subject and get a response from WSP that will tell us how much extra traffic there really will be?

Angie Towse,

Belle Vue Street,

York.

...I WHOLLY endorse the efforts of York Tomorrow to protect one of the most important historic sites of our city.

I have been following the arguments for and against the Coppergate Riverside Scheme through the pages of your paper.

However, I have looked in vain for the views of English Heritage (Custodians of Clifford's Tower) and York's MP, Mr Hugh Bayley. Have they nothing to say on this issue?

Dorothy McLaughan,

Horsman Avenue,

Cemetery Road,

York.