I WISH Richard Akers, spokesman for Land Securities, would stop treating York citizens with such contempt (November 10, 2001). He knows full well that the hard sell exhibition promoting his Coppergate Riverside scheme could hardly be considered "impartial".

I don't recall any alternative points of view on offer to which the public were invited to respond.

All credit to the Castle Campaign Group for presenting all the current alternative options for public comment, something which neither Land Securities nor the council was ever prepared to do. I remind readers who may wish to speak at the inquiry in January that the pre-inquiry is being held at Guildhall tomorrow, Wednesday, November 14 starting at 10am when people may register to speak up later.

Philip Crowe,

Chair, York Tomorrow,

Stonegate,

York.

...Is Richard Akers's composure slipping? After reminding us that opinion polls should be conducted independently ('Poll: public says no to Coppergate', November 10), he admits that he would - of course - rather rely on the results of the opinion poll conducted at their own presentation.

He also overlooks the fact that the two were asking completely different questions: in their survey it was shopping centre or nothing, in this new one people were presented with a far greater range of options.

Sure enough, neither of the two options the early survey offered were popular.

He also suggests we should consider the council 'impartial', which isn't going to hold much water after Roy Templeman's riposte to the Chamber of Trade ("Last-ditch call for rethink," November 6), in which he also admits to a fear of more out-of-town shopping centres if Riverside isn't built.

I assure Mr. Templeman of whole-hearted help from the Local Environmental Action Forum (LEAF) in fighting unwanted, and unwarranted, developments should this happen.

Richard Lane.

York LEAF,

Daw Suu Centre,

University of York.

...THE overweening desire by the joint parties of Land Securities and City of York Council to forge ahead with the proposed Coppergate expansion plans in the face of mounting opposition gives us its latest display in the form of a 'public transport interchange' - bus station to you and me - reportedly being considered for Piccadilly. (Evening Press November 6).

This is an attempt to beg the question on the entire scheme by assuming the need for an enlarged transport structure in this location before the viability of an expanded shopping centre, expected to be served by such a facility, has even been argued.

It will be seen by many as a bid to steal a march on objectors to the Coppergate planning proposals and pre-empt the outcome of the public inquiry next January.

The situation is not helped by the peculiar brand of fuzzy logic which director Richard Akers brings to the subject of his company's intended creation of more shop units.

How can he justify the need for future retail development of Coppergate, particularly in view of the existing shops being vacated and left empty?

Dr K Davis,

Mason's Court,

Cockermouth, Cumbria.

Updated: 11:06 Tuesday, November 13, 2001