A Princely Idea

Dan Fisher’s piece covering Prince Charles’ views on recent English architecture (“Royal Critic: A Power in Architecture,” Sept. 11) appropriately reminds us of modern urban aesthetic conditions that are in danger of being neglected here in America as they have been in London.

I see signs in my own city of San Diego that could possibly stir Prince Charles to invent even more descriptive adjectives.

San Diego’s planners, while very good at measuring the heights of things, quoting square foot figures and caring endlessly about “impacts” seem to be operating in an architectural desert. Good examples are the University City/La Jolla Village area, where ghastly new buildings are scarring the skyline and Mission Valley, where the obnoxious recent structures are complemented by one of the most confusing street systems I have ever attempted to negotiate. Both of these examples are reminiscent of that which I saw in London and that which Prince Charles is going on about today.

London, Rome, et al, designed in ancient times for horses and chariots, certainly have enormous city planning problems today. But what is San Diego’s excuse? Eighty percent of everything in San Diego has occurred during the last few decades!

Since the United States, unfortunately, has no Prince Charles, we could at least purchase enough copies of his book, “A Vision of Britain,” to present each city planner in America with one. I would make the book’s “10 principles” of good architecture required reading for San Diego planners, with a proviso that each must pass a comprehensive examination covering these principles plus use at least one of them in his/her very next project or be transferred to sewers where their talents might possibly be more useful.

CHARLES McGEHEE

San Diego