ON one thing we can all agree: Piccadilly cannot stay as it is. In our two-page examination of the proposal for Coppergate II tonight, Trevor Kidd describes the buildings as "disused and dilapidated", and no resident would challenge that.

There the consensus ends, however. Arguments over what should be done with this prime development land have raged for years, and the debate is now close to boiling point. The exhibition of Land Securities' revised plans for a £60 million extension of the Coppergate Centre prompted a large postbag to the Evening Press. Most readers expressed disquiet at the plans.

That contrasts with the response recorded at the exhibition itself, which City of York Council said was quite positive.

Broadly, there are two sides to the argument. Those who wish to see the development go ahead believe it is crucial to York's future economic prosperity. Coppergate II is a key weapon in the ongoing fight with out-of-town competition. Other businesses would benefit as more people visited the city, and it would create jobs.

Those against say a shopping centre is inappropriate for one of York's most important sites. They argue that any commercial exploitation of the area would detract from the beauty and history of Clifford's Tower and the Eye of York. Some have suggested it would be more fitting to turn the area into a park for residents and visitors to enjoy.

Land Securities responded to the outcry over its original plans by scaling down the buildings and landscaping the area around Clifford's Tower now occupied by an ugly car park. This has won them some support from English Heritage, which opposed the first proposal.

Still the question remains: is Coppergate II right for York? Whatever happens to this site, the results will be with us for many years. It is therefore essential that we make the right decision.

That is why we have given you the chance to have your say. Please take it.