LETTER writers Anneliese Emmans Dean and S Horsley (April 19) have entirely missed the point of what the council is trying to do by asking for residents' opinions about what traffic management arrangements should be developed in response to the implications of the new university campus and Germany Beck housing developments.

In this country planning law is such that there is a presumption of consent. A developer does not have to prove his development will not harm something (although that is normally done) but we most definitely have to prove that it will if we wish to refuse consent.

If we cannot prove it then, irrespective of what people may feel should happen, consent has to be granted. Clearly there may be instances where the issue is not clear cut and then the law provides for the topic to be examined by an independent adjudicator via a planning appeal and inquiry.

If consent is refused then an inquiry can be used by a developer to seek to overturn the decision. But again, the onus is on the planning authority to prove that the development will cause demonstrable harm.

Unless City of York Council can prove that the developments cannot take place, they will. A prudent authority needs to ensure it gets the best arrangement possible for its residents in full recognition of this fact.

That is why we are talking to residents now so as to be ready when the applications are received.

Peter Evely,

Head of network management,

City of York Council,

St Leonard's Place, York.

...I FULLY support the city council in its endeavours to resolve the traffic problems of Heslington.

Anneliese Dean suggests the only issue is high traffic volume during peak hours, implying that nothing needs to be done.

As a resident of Heslington Lane I can assure her that, outside the gridlock of peak hours, traffic plays a constant game of "chicken" through the ridiculous chicanes, accelerating to beat oncoming vehicles through the gaps at high speed regardless of the hazard to others. A serious accident seems inevitable.

Nor is simply removing the chicanes the answer. Traffic volume and speed were highly dangerous on this residential road before the chicanes arrived and would be even worse now if they were taken away.

S Horsley suggests that stopping further development is the answer.

However, the situation is already critical and action is desperately needed, although the prospect of further development would, indeed, lead to utter chaos.

So I endorse the council's imaginative initiative and suggest that rising bollards, with access for residents of Heslington, Badger Hill and Broadway, would be a bold solution that would not pose any real threat to "local networks".

David Cowan,

Orchard House,

Heslington, York.

Updated: 10:28 Saturday, April 24, 2004