I don’t entirely disagree with Lucy Rogers’ points (inbox, 10 December) in relation to my column (19 November, page 31)
But in response;
- There is a big difference between tokenistic consultation (“Non-sultation”) and what Lucy refers to as “meaningful consultation”. She is right that the latter has great value. However, it needs to be properly designed and managed.
- I do not believe that “design by committee” produces good architecture.
- I think it is very sad that so little high-quality, contemporary architecture is built in this country. The only reason MVRDV got to build the amazing, inspiring and beautiful Balancing Barn is because it’s in the middle of nowhere, out of sight. It breaks my heart that most UK children are unlikely ever to experience a space so moving, so captivating, so exciting.
- Unfortunately, huge quantities of really crap buildings get through planning. Those developers and their so-called “architects” know how to work the system and have no desire to do anything other than make short-term money for their shareholders. We live with their legacy of cheap and ugly townscapes. People are so used to it, I don’t believe that local consultation alone can improve it.
P Scheurer, via building.co.uk