I ASK Andrew Cossin, would he like 240 apartments overlooking his hotel and houses in Fulford ("Barbican will be better" pledge, April 28)? I think not.

We who oppose the hotel, and yet more apartments, care more about our city and how it looks. We are not just out to make money.

The developers don't give a jot about the residents so why pretend they do? They are spoiling my city, and must be stopped.

Katherine Diver,

Glen Close,

Fulford,

York.

...I AGREE wholeheartedly with the views of M Warters (Letters, April 30).

Coun Galloway, the leader of City of York Council, had the gall to slam the Barbican protesters, calling them mischief makers.

Anybody has the right to protest at what they consider to be unfair or wrong. It is called democracy, a word Coun Galloway has obviously chosen to ignore, which is perhaps surprising as he represents the Liberal "Democrats".

I would also agree that as the council do not appear to be representing the residents of York, the residents should in turn be entitled to ignore their council tax demands.

I hope the council will take note of the opposition to the proposed "Derwenthorpe" development, which none of the local residents want.

This was made even more apparent at a recent public meeting when more than 150 residents voted for a public enquiry.

I do believe that the only people in favour of this disaster are Joseph Rowntree Trust and York council.

And to think I once supported the Lib Dems.

R Peel,

Temple Avenue,

York.

...M. WARTERS raises a number of issues (Letters, April 30) and I should like to clarify and correct several points.

The planning committee took seriously the petition signed by 6,000 people. The petition did, however, raise three specific problems.

First, its preamble dealt with far more than purely aspects of planning. Secondly, on looking at only a couple of sheets, it was clear a number of people

outside of York - and as far away as the Isle of Wight - had signed it; and, thirdly, we realised a number of people had signed it because they had been told it was to save the Barbican from being demolished which, clearly, was not the case.

Planning authorities have limited powers; they do not have unfettered discretion.

The planning application for the Barbican came to the planning committee supported by the council's planning officers. The advice of officers was that it should be approved.

In those circumstances, I believe it would have been far more arrogant to dismiss the advice of professionals than to participate in reasoned debate and come to an appropriate conclusion.

The sites at Osbaldwick and Fulford have yet to be determined.

The land in question was released for housing many years ago and it has only been a matter of time before detailed applications have come forward for these sites.

The principle of development at Barbican, Osbaldwick and Fulford has not been a party political issue nor should it be so.

Coun Richard Watson,

Chairman,

Planning Committee

Guildhall,

York.

Updated: 11:34 Tuesday, May 04, 2004