Sir, - After reading your leading article, "Reviving Death Valley" in last week's edition, I came to the conclusion that if I was a resident of, or a business on, Long Street, Thirsk, I would be deeply offended by your remarks, especially the one that Long Street is at welcoming as Death Valley.

There is only one property on Long Street that has been deteriorating for years and, as everyone knows, this is the old Vale Garage together with adjoining cottages. The only people to blame for this are the owners who have allowed them to get into this run-down state.

The rest of the houses and businesses on Long Street are very tidy and well kept, as are the roadside verges. To say that this is the most depressing street in the district is simply not true.

In answer to Coun David Blades' comments about priorities for Thirsk, I would question whether the electorate would say this is a priority, but I think not.

There are many more important issues, such as the pavements around our Market Place. The riven stone is constantly tripping people up, not just the elderly, but many other people fall and injure themselves. The passageways from the Market Place are disgusting; the disabled cannot use them because of the uneven surfaces. The cobbles in the Market Place are loose and uneven, to highlight just a few items.

Will spending £215,000 tarting up Long Street with grassed areas and taking away parking areas benefit anyone? I question the need to spend anything like that amount of money as to make Long Street a little more attractive could be achieved for a lot less.

It is my view that to spend anything like that amount on Long Street would be a total waste of public money that could be spent more wisely.

The resident and businesses of Long Street deserve an apology from your paper for your derisory remarks.

Coun ANDREW ROBINSON

West View,

Borrowby.

Editor's note: I'll plead guilty to a touch of hyperbole in the use of description Death Valley. But I challenge readers to nominate a more down-at-heel main thoroughfare in Hambleton.

Better buses

Sir, - I read with interest last week's letter (D&S, Dec 26) from Mr Robinson about bus shelters in Northallerton and Osmotherley.

The county council was not involved in the sale of the original bus station, which happened almost 20 years ago. For the past few years the county council has been actively providing high-quality bus services and improved waiting facilities for passengers, including new shelters in Northallerton which were introduced after consultation with local people.

Following further extensive consultation as part of the Northallerton Traffic Management Strategy, there is considerable local support for more improvements to public transport facilities at the Buck.

Overall, the county council has been very successful in implementing its public transport and traffic management strategies. Last year we improved over 700 bus stops and have undertaken major refurbishment of three bus stations.

This, coupled with the introduction of low-floor easy-access buses onto rural services such as that which serves Osmotherley helped increase bus patronage by 4pc last year.

In the case of additional facilities at Osmotherley, the need for a shelter at West End was not identified as part of our consultation with the parish council and bus operator.

In determining the need for additional shelters we would take account of both the exposure of the site and the extent of passenger usage as well as the availability of funding. I understand that Osmotherley Parish Council has been asked for their comments on Mr Robinson's request.

Coun JOHN FORT

Executive member, Environmental Services, North Yorkshire County Council

County Hall,

Northallerton.