Reader views (51)

 Add your view

The 'unelected elites' have to respond to the complaints and objections of the local community as part of the planning process, although not as democratic as it could be, its a lot more transparent than snide, background maneuverings of the prince.

Maybe the Prince seems democratic to an Austrailian, you voted to keep him, but it doens't to an increasing number in the UK who've never been given the opportunity to choose.

Why doesn't he keep his mouth shut and stick to opening supermarkets.

- Tom, London, 27/05/2009 14:36
Report abuse

This could be a great victory for local democracy. The local inhabitants are horrified by the attempt of an unelected architect to impose his dated ideals upon others

- David, Fulham London, 27/05/2009 10:54
Report abuse

Rodgers is not the best of his generation, what work that he has done is good, I do not know one. His plans are just terrible and pure junk. Well done Charles

- Tony, London, uk, 27/05/2009 05:03
Report abuse

The Prince is far more democratic than the unelected elites who foist dehumanised, hugely expensive, energy-hungry eyesores on the public.
And the 5000 jobs referred to aren't going to 'disappear just because the glass ego-tower won't be built. The jobs will be there for the new development.

- Judet, Melbourne, Australia, 27/05/2009 02:34
Report abuse

Scotty, ALL public figures need huge sums of money to be looked after, remember.

- Delia Hake, Waltham Cross, Hertfordshire, 27/05/2009 01:24
Report abuse

I don't think we should worry too much about Roger's concern for the unemployed of London. His main concern is to squeeze as much profit per square foot for his developer mates.
The fact that the creation is likely to be monstrous and contextually inappropriate concerns him not in the slightest.
We locals don't like Roger's grotesque plan for a part of London we love.And the sooner Rogers and his clique are removed from the purlieu of Mayor Johnson the better for London and Londoners.

- Justin Downes, London, 26/05/2009 23:48
Report abuse

Just take a walk from Chelsea Bridge to Wandsworth Bridge. 90% of the new riverside buildings are totally hideous and in 25 yrs time will be knackered. SO GO FOR IT CHARLES !

- Charlie, London, 26/05/2009 23:45
Report abuse

I am old enough to remember that you dared to criticise an architect in the late 1960s early 1970s then you were seen as a reactionary,they tore down wonderful old buildings and gave us things like the Nat West tower.

- John, Kent, hartlip,kent, 26/05/2009 23:15
Report abuse

Prince Charles will have done a massive favour for the people of London if he has persuaded the Qataris to ditch Roger's pig-ugly scheme and replace it with a design that complements rather than insults Chelsea.

The tiny minority of bitter commentators criticising the Prince on this site are obviously extreme anti-royalists and would condemn him even if he said the Earth was round or London buses are red!

- Thomas, London, 26/05/2009 22:55
Report abuse

Scotty: democratic process ? Revolution in the air ? If the electorate are in revolutionary mood it's not with the royal family right now but with the failing and twisted democratic processes in this country which seem so unable to represent our views. I wonder which design preference a poll of local people would go for ? Probably not the Rodgers one. Chelsea has been in the charge of one party for longer than living memory and will surely always be so. Yes they're voted in but let's not pretend there's a realistic democratic alternative there. The Prince was right to intervene in this instance.

Boludo - don't forget the UK government still gives aid money to India, some 62 years after independence.

- Oli, London, 26/05/2009 22:44
Report abuse

If he wants to worry about carbuncle architecture, he should start lobbying now against the giant 'glass ears' building that we're going to erect in front of Buckingham Palace after it's been made into an art gallery to rival the Louvre and house some of the 150,000+ paintings in the Royal Art Collection which we own yet currently see only 2% of. He's supposed to be a ceremonial figurehead head of state in waiting but there's no way this man won't use every means at his disposal, and that's a lot of wealth, prestige and power, to wield all the influence he can for whatever his pet causes turn out to be in the future. What if he was trying to argue something you hated, how would you feel about his interference then? There's no telling what bee he might find buzzing round his bonnet next and he won't listen to advice from anyone. Just remember that inbreeding isn't healthy for body or mind, and his parents are both descended from Queen Victoria. It doesn't bode well.

- Mai, Fall of the House of, Windsor, 26/05/2009 22:38
Report abuse

I suppose it's all right for Prince Charles to 'meddle' now though what will happen when he becomes King, as the monarch is not supposed to express opinions on anything (at least that's my understanding). However, there are times when I wish Charlie (and his wife for that matter) would disappear on to a desert island, and in my opinion this is one of them.

- Judith, King's Lynn, Norfolk, 26/05/2009 20:32
Report abuse

Good for Charles. Architects might like to impress each other in their own universe, but what about the rest of us mere mortals? We who have to live and work in these 'Modernist' creations? The timely intervention of the Prince must have saved us all from all sorts of horrors we don't know about. Le Corbusier might have favoured glass and concrete cells for the workers but I bet he never resided in one of his horrible designs for long.

- Gordo, Birmingham, UK, 26/05/2009 19:56
Report abuse

well done Charles. How many of these supposed 5,000 jobs would be British. I have heard developers over the years saying they would create lots of jobs. None seem to employ the numbers promised. Brutalist glass steel and concrete constructions which get torn down in 40-50 years are not for this development.Its time someone told these developers where to go. Glass and steel eyesores we dont want.

- Jim, London, 26/05/2009 19:47
Report abuse

No-one voted for Lord Rogers and Qatari Diar's scheme, so how is it democratic for them to get their way. Their proposal would have been rejected by Westminster Council anyway, as a result of pressure from local residents and the project obviously not complying with the design mandate, so all Prince Charles has done is supported democracy by giving local residents a preferred alternative. The authors of this article appear biased in favour of Rogers.

- Chris P, Next to Chelsea Barracks, UK, 26/05/2009 19:32
Report abuse

If you take Prince Charles view, none of the buildings he loves so much would ever have been built. I don't want to live in a city that is 'Mock Tudor' or in a city that looks like a post card. I want to live in a city that has architecture that evolves.

He has a right to his opinion. But when he starts to use his connections to influence matters he oversteps the mark.

- Annoyed Of Croydon, London, 26/05/2009 19:29
Report abuse

I walk past everyday, whatever Rogers et al do would be an improvement to the site and the neighbourhood.HRH is not happy with the style thats all, he knows little of architecture and does not represent the majority but rather himself. Building yourself a toytown in Dorset doesnt make you an architect, just rich.its an issue of taste or rather timidity to taste: something new, someone else's cooking, not what the next door sloane sq toff neighbours want. Where would is the challenge, the joy in building more of the same, why not try something new, move forward not hide in the old hoping everything bad will go away.how can london move forward in the 21st century when all we appear to espouse has expired and is fit for museum exhibits. Long live the queen, the longer he's kept off the throne, the likelier we'll keep evolving in the modern world.

- An_Architect, london, 26/05/2009 19:01
Report abuse

Anyone who can save us from yet another Richard Rogers building has my thanks.

- Robin, London, 26/05/2009 18:51
Report abuse

Is this the new way to push these shambolic ideas through. By refering to the unemployment figures. Nuffsenuff!

- Bill, Belfast, 26/05/2009 18:49
Report abuse

"... it is difficult to know where he gets his ideas of representing the public..."

That would be the large numbers of every day people that have loudly agreed with him that the planners have not only failed to consult in any way, shape or form, but have completely ignored.

And the snide, rather underhanded and completely unnecessary comments about hitting the workers?

Who are most of the building site workers these days - those who come into Britain specifically to do these jobs, we're told! It isn't Britain's job to provide employment for the EU workers. If they are in Britain already and that's the only work that would be available, why would they be allowed to stay if unemployed?

...a simplistic argument, I admit. But it is a direct response to the petulent accusations of these particular elitist architects.

- Rogan, Irving, 26/05/2009 18:17
Report abuse

Since I live in London I myself am getting sick of seeing these crazy buildings being built. London is a traditional and historical city which is know for its heritage sites buildings. If you want to build fancy designs then do it in Canary Wharf and Docklands. This is what the new city of London was designed for. But please leave traditional London alone. Also if you want crazy building designs then go to Dubai. I do not usually support Prince Charles policies, but on this concern I support him 100%.

- Ej Joseph, Long Island, USA, 26/05/2009 18:17
Report abuse

Prince Charles is only doing what the majority of the Londoners want: the preservation of some sort of architectural integrity.

Look around. When you see some discordant contribution from the architectural profession, ask yourself this: "Does this in any way fit in with the immediate environment?" If it doesn't, then it is obviously the product of an architect who puts his own ambition/ego before that of the people who have to look at his work.

If I lived in Chelsea, I would certainly not wish live with a steel and glass construction of dubious architectural merit situated in an area of late Victorian building. These developers have no concept of aesthetic.

- Nick, St Albans, 26/05/2009 17:58
Report abuse

I agree ! Well Done Prince Charles ! Most Londoners are sick of seeing these awful eyesores being built. Let's try and stick to tradional buildings. Modern architecture has no place in such beautiful areas of London.

- Jim, London, 26/05/2009 17:37
Report abuse

Mark. It's not really a democratic process when you stuff the quango's and boards who make decisions on these matters with your own supporters is it, whilst ensuring that the people can't vote them out of office if they feel they are doing a bad job or not representing their interests? Charles has just as much right to an opinion as you do and there isn't a reason in the world why he can't air it. He meddles because, just maybe, he cares.

- Rob, London, 26/05/2009 17:22
Report abuse

Good for Charles. It needs someone to keep architects under control judging by some of the outrageous constructions one can see. I've nothing against architects as such but some seem to live in a different universe.

- Gilbert, London, UK, 26/05/2009 17:22
Report abuse

Why don't they dismiss him as a crank, and go ahead with whatever THEY know is best.
T h Leeds

- Thomas Hayes, Leeds UK, 26/05/2009 17:11
Report abuse

Lets face it Charles made the point in the past and is doing it again, London has some terrible looking buildings. Our elected representatives have proven themselves to be less than honest and above not above bribes. So we have to have someone who speaks up. If Charles does that then good for him. The jobs will still be there but for heavens sake lets get some decent looking buildings up. If some guy objects to not making as much money right away so be it.

- Peter, Camberley UK, 26/05/2009 17:07
Report abuse

HE SHOULD STICK TO TALKING TO HIS PLANTS THE GUY HAS NOT GOT A CLUE HE SHOULD HANG HIS HEAD IN SHAME AND SHUT UP AND KEEP HIS REMARKS TO HIMSELF LIKE HIS FATHER ALWAYS PUTS HIS FOOT IN IT,

- Jim Fennessey, london, 26/05/2009 16:52
Report abuse

Well done Charles. Its about time someone spoke up against the modern buildings, they are cold and stick out like a sore thumb, they look out of date more quickly than classical designed buildings,the more traditional designed building would not look out of place,infact it will enhance the surrounding area of which there are quite a few glorious designed buildings.

Why don't Lord Rogers and his team try and beef up Battersea Power Station, that WOULD be a task and save face at the same time.

- Roy, london, 26/05/2009 16:51
Report abuse

err, jim, yes it is. There is a planning process which has been established in the best democratic tradition which is being interfered with by an unelected public figure who believes they have the right to meddle. To seek help from your elected representatives is democratic. Don't be so glib, for your own sake.

- Mark, kent, 26/05/2009 16:36
Report abuse

How about some more sash windows like in the new wing of the Royal Hospital building? I really do not understand the attraction with this old rubbish!!

- Guni, London, 26/05/2009 15:56
Report abuse

The privileges of rank

- Bernard Parke, GUILDFORD, 26/05/2009 15:47
Report abuse

And Lord Rogers getting his NuLiebor chums to intervene on his behalf is democratic? Pot, Kettle, Black anyone?

- Jim, London, 26/05/2009 15:44
Report abuse

Surely Prince Charles can comment on proposed designs without all they toys being thrown out of the pram. If nothing is built then yes 5000 jobs would be lost, if something is built then up to 5000 jobs could be lost. It's all about perspective. However, I would be inclined to welcome critisism of any plans before they are actually brought to fruition, owing to the fact that a local cartoonist, sorry architect, designed a blue and white bulding in tile effect, to sit in a gap created by demolition in a local sandstone terraced building of not inconsiderable size

- Al, Kingstown UK, 26/05/2009 15:26
Report abuse

We should be grateful that Prince Charles has the profile to stop this eyesore from being built, instead of criticising his interference. When are we going to realise how privileged we are to live in a country with so much heritage all around us that so many other countries envy? Try visiting soulless Singapore where the skyscrapers have bulldozed over any kind of culturally interesting,historical buildings in the name of moving with the times and you will see what the UK could become if we let modern architects loose on beautiful neighbourhoods like Belgravia.

- Sinead, Singapore, 26/05/2009 15:24
Report abuse

We should ignore the anti-Royal rhetoric from some. Prince Charles is just voicing his opinion and he represents the beleaguered majority who believe developments should compliment their surroundings. Richard Rogers is a New Labour crony and part of the modern establishment. He cannot abide anyone who doesn’t agree with his pretentious designs. He’s also a hypocrite who wants concrete council estates to be given listed status and keep the poor residents in squalor, while he lives in a traditional Georgian house. He’s using typical New Labour scare tactics. Changing the design won’t affect jobs.

- Danny, London, 26/05/2009 15:16
Report abuse

Congratulations to HRH. He speaks for the majority and his position can make things heard which most mere mortals can't.
It is not anti-democratic as no one is forced to listen nor accept his views.

- Peter Glazier, Sao Paulo,Brazil, 26/05/2009 15:15
Report abuse

Prince Charles has helped create more jobs than this useless government! He has inspired thousands of young people to make the best of their talents and has actually prevented the waste of many lives. He is right to try to stop another montruosity scarring a much loved area of London.

- Beatriz, London, 26/05/2009 15:06
Report abuse

Why not sequester the development to provide flats for our MPs. Seems an ideal opportunity.

- Ytc, London, UK, 26/05/2009 15:03
Report abuse

well, not being a charles' fan, i have to say I accept his comments.5000 jobs at risk ? pground System? Possibly but then if they are a spare capacity of workers what about modernising the London Underground System ? It is an appauling one; Ecuador has a tramway, Alegeria will have soon a modern tube, Morroc will open next year a new tranway link, The US are investing in fast train to cover SF and LV, france well cannot compare the systems (and we have the same deficit running at 70 % GDP). We have a third world system and the 5K can be employed on these type of projects.
Flats in Chelsea wont be anyway for the average Londoners

- Marco, london uk, 26/05/2009 14:47
Report abuse

Good man, somebody has to speak for 'us' now that Politicos and the City can't be trusted.

- Steve, London, England, 26/05/2009 14:45
Report abuse

"Prince Charles was accused today of putting 5,000 jobs at risk..."

Good to see they're not going for cheap emotional blackmail then. I take it a revised plan won't employ anyone at all and will just miraculously build itself.

And how about:

"They do not understand that the Government and the royal family are separate."

Oh please, now the billionaire 'johnny foreigners' and their expensive advisers are all a bunch of uneducated idiots are they?

The architects and project managers don't like the fact that someone has had the temerity to come out and say their ego-driven, profit machine project is horrible and that most people don't like it.

They like it even less that it was said by someone who is famous enough not to be simply ignored like all the local residents have been.

Living in the penthouse of an exclusive tower-block may be fun, but for everyone else stuck under its new and oppressive shadow, somewhat less so...

- John, London, 26/05/2009 14:42
Report abuse

Good for Prince Charles. The original design looked awful, as does the other Candy and Candy site in Knightsbridge.

Also quite ridiculous to blame him for "putting 5000 jobs at risk". May as well blame His Highness for the property crash too!

- C Harrison, London, 26/05/2009 14:33
Report abuse

Oh my god, FIVE THOUSAND jobs at risk! Then again who cares, they won't be five thousand British jobs. My brother in law is a cleaner because as a brick layer he can't get work any more in this country because he's British.

As for Prince Charles, he's entitled to an opinion so why shouldn't he question the design of this building. I would too but in my case nobody would listen.

- Jj, London, 26/05/2009 14:31
Report abuse

I think many people will be delighted that Prince Charles has intervened Thought this was an ugly scheme totally out of harmony with the area Developers and their money have done so much damage to London over the years and blighted enough areas.

- Sheila, london uk, 26/05/2009 14:29
Report abuse

Just get rid of the Chavvy Rogers with his bling drawings and bring in someone who will meld the site in with The Royal Hospital.
That would be style and substance.

- Minnie Ovens, London, UK, 26/05/2009 13:18
Report abuse

More flats for the uncontrolled masses from all over the world. (and all their children)

- Grim Reaper, Hell, 26/05/2009 13:10
Report abuse

Why can't Prince Charles realise that he is simply a non-elected figurehead who has no authority to meddle in planning regulations. With the electorate in a revolutionary mood he and his fellow royals might be advised to keep a low profile before the spotlight turns on his family and the huge cost of security for younger royals who choose an international, hedonistic life style at our expense.
He might like to contemplate on why serving officers in the armed forces require personal bodyguards even when on duty and why young women carouse their way around the world with round the clock protection.
Rather than interfere in matters that have nothing to do with him let him dig into his own purse and contribute towards these costs thus saving the beleagured taxpayer the odd million or two that we're currently paying to maintain his family.

- Scotty, Cambridge UK, 26/05/2009 12:59
Report abuse

Not just Prince Charles I hope: he represents the traditional opinion but not necessarily all traditionalists - and the modernists will just say he was interferring instead of representing a large mass of public opinion. Not least of all, the people destined to live there might have a say: shadowy 60s tower blocks with a token dot of windy grass on top probably wouldn't be the preferred choice of most families . . .

- Roz, France, 26/05/2009 12:45
Report abuse

How about something truly British like a recreation of the 'Bombay slums' in India on this site? It would be a real icon and an artistic impression for London as a reminder of money from India that helped build the red brick buildings in Britain. Boludo from Bombay Slum

- Boludo, Bombay, 26/05/2009 11:51
Report abuse

How about something truly British like a recreation of the Cotswold on this site? It would be a real icon for London.

- Kimberley, London, 26/05/2009 10:27
Report abuse

Add your comment