I refer to the call for a geological survey for the Fort Cambridge Area, as reported in The Times (July 3). I would like to point out that the permit to excavate the site was issued in March 2007 and excavation was completed by September 2007. The call for a geological survey was therefore more than one year late. No caves of potential geological or archaeological interest, or other shallow caves, were uncovered. Reference was made to the use of piles in the foundations, where vertical fractures were encountered. It is not clear why the spokesmen were concerned about this engineering solution.

Reference is also made to the article Selling Off The Citizen (July 3) that, coincidentally, appeared on the same day, in order to correct a howler in the third paragraph from the end. The Fort Cambridge site is not public land but "sacrosanct private land", as per the deed signed in April 2007.

Among the many policies quoted (not necessarily in the context they are meant to be quoted), the article quotes "London's dynamic deputy mayor" (London is not the world's leading example in low-rise low-density development, is it?) on the first three aspects for approving new projects - density, public transport and infrastructural capacity - three good reasons, therefore, why the Fort Cambridge Project was correctly approved in March 2007.

From the article in question, one can observe that the same people who decry political interference in the planning process have no problem calling for it when it is perceived to suit their aspirations. Can we decide once and for all whether we, as a society, want politicians to have or not to have a role in planning, instead of maintaining this holier-than-thou attitude when it suits?

Finally, reference is made to the report of the proceedings in The Times (July 4). With reference to the letter from the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage, it is worth noting that no observations were received from this office within the statutory consultation period, not even for works on the heritage site of Fort Cambridge itself (approved immediately following the application), that the communication from this office was made via fax at 10.18 a.m. - the session was meant to start at 10 a.m. - and, what is more, one of the objectors knew about it before the chairman to whom it was addressed!