The developers behind Coppergate Riverside have launched a stinging attack on York Civic Trust, accusing it of making an about-turn which could damage inner city regeneration.

Architect Richard Akers was responding to calls by the Archbishop of York - who is president of the trust - for a public inquiry into the £60 million project to extend the Coppergate Centre.

Dr David Hope wrote in a letter to Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott of his "grave concern" at the plans for a large complex of shops on land near Clifford's Tower.

But Mr Akers claimed that less than two years ago, the trust had supported the principle of developing the Castle car park site.

Writing in the letters section of thisisyork, he said that in January 1999, after the company's first planning application had been turned down, the Trust had listed what must be done to make a re-development scheme acceptable.

He said the latest scheme had addressed these points, but the trust had changed its stance to one of rejecting out-of-hand any prospects of building in the Castle area. He said there was a "worrying aspect" to this.

He said: "Land Securities have been encouraged to come forward with a planning application and have consulted widely prior to even evolving a concept.

"We have spent many hundreds of thousands of pounds investigating the site, the urban design, architecture, environmental aspect, transport issues and archaeology.

"For consultees to do an about-turn is not just disappointing - it is fundamentally damaging to investors' perceptions of the city."

Civic Trust chairman John Shannon was today preparing to respond to the attack.

Mr Akers also strongly criticised Philip Crowe, of the campaign group York Tomorrow, claiming that at one stage Mr Crowe, as part of a previous campaign group called York Alliance, had provided Land Securities with a "vision" for the site which included buildings on the car park. "His position has also changed considerably."

Mr Crowe said that when he had put forward the Alliance's views, they had not been his personal viewpoint. "I was simply representing the views of the group as a whole. Mr Akers is well aware of this."

He said York Tomorrow was a quite different group, whose views he entirely supported. He added that a public inquiry was needed to address all the issues under debate.

Updated: 10:28 Tuesday, January 30, 2001