THE fate of the Castle-Piccadilly area of York should be sealed during the next three weeks. That is how long it will take for the planning inquiry to hear the evidence surrounding a proposal to build a large complex of shops, restaurants, offices and homes on the site.

Given that the first redevelopment proposal was tabled back in the 1990s - prompting a controversy that has raged ever since - planning inspector Anthony Bingham is set to have a busy three weeks.

We should be delighted that Coppergate II provokes such passion. York is an exceptional city. Residents rightly see themselves as the temporary custodians of a heritage that has been preserved and passed on through two millennia. Many have felt a moral duty to speak their minds over the biggest planning issue to face York in a generation.

Right up to the opening of the inquiry today, the debate was raging. A new group, Friends Of Riverside, was launched to lend support to Coppergate II, sparking further protests from the anti lobby.

This is how it has been from the beginning. The plans have split the city.

Few argue with the need to improve the shabby eyesore which blights much of Piccadilly. At the eye of the storm is the Eye of York: the setting of Clifford's Tower.

The 13th century tower sits unhappily above a moat of cars. But would its environment be most improved by Land Securities' buildings - or by landscaping?

Then there are the economic arguments. Shopping is crucial to tourism and tourism is crucial to York. Many believe Coppergate Riverside essential to safeguard York's prosperity. Is that really the case?

These questions have been discussed relentlessly in recent years. Now it is time for a decision.

The public inquiry, open minded and independent of every vested interest, is the right body to make that decision.

Its verdict will anger some and delight others. But no one should be left feeling they did not have their say.

Updated: 10:16 Tuesday, January 15, 2002