Poor foundations

THANK you for keeping the debate on Edinburgh's new architecture alive – particularly with Brian Ferguson's gutsy article (25 March) and your editorial.

May I be allowed to take issue with a description in the latter, of Caltongate being an example of a "striking development" delayed by the planning process? Caltongate was opposed principally because it is a vile example of the Legoland school of cheap and nasty architecture. Citizens just didn't see the point of pulling down one 1960s St James's Centre and building another less than a quarter of a mile away. And it's worth remembering that the planning authority is still extant; it hasn't gone away.

Caltongate is an iconic development site – holding the line between the Old and New Towns – it always deserved better than the Legoland currently on offer. The site should have commanded a national design competition – resulting in a development conceived by an Edinburgh company, built by Edinburgh companies, and approved, occupied and used by the people of Edinburgh to Edinburgh's general benefit – regardless of the wails and gnashing of teeth from the accountants and international contract lawyers.

Instead, we have proposals for soulless buildings which will fall down, or need to be pulled down, in 30 years (one of the actual Caltongate architect's estimation). We are building a slum for the next generation – how "striking" is that?

DAVID FIDDIMORE

Nether Craigwell

Calton Road, Edinburgh