I WOULD like to respond to the comments by York director of environment and development Roy Templeman in the story 'Property blighted for more than 20 years' (November 17).

The Draft Local Plan was published in May 1998, at a time when the council had already discussed financial and planning arrangements with Land Securities, and the Draft Plan contains a description taken directly from the scheme as it stood at that time.

It seems self evidently the case that the authors of the plan did not consider any other possibility except the implementation of the Land Securities scheme.

In a Proof of Evidence submitted to the Local Plan Inquiry earlier this year, a member of Mr Templeman's department stated that 'the council acknowledge that the scheme outline in the local plan is a close reflection of the Land Securities scheme'. (Document C228/1/1).

The second remark is that the Land Securities scheme 'just happened to be the only scheme to come forward'. In actual fact, Allied London Properties Limited had a meeting with Mr Templeman's predecessor, John Rigby, on March 21, 1997 and after this they wrote to me saying "When we met with the city council they were very adamant regarding their desire to see the Land Securities scheme come to fruition and they were not willing to look at an alternative proposal'.

The planning department has also in recent years told a company interested in refurbishing 34 Piccadilly that the building will soon be demolished. It would therefore be more accurate to say that the Land Securities scheme is the only one which has been allowed to come forward.

Andrew Eccles,

Chartered Surveyor,

Piccadilly, York.