In the construction and engineering industries, one of the first criteria in judging a design is whether it meets the basic requirements of the project.

A reasonable way of ensuring this requirement is met is to engage a design team with a good track record, as with the design and construction of Crawley Leisure Centre, which is a first-class facility.

Brighton and Hove City Council thought otherwise in its plans to replace the King Alfred leisure centre when it engaged a "world-class" architect, who had designed a museum and art gallery in his distinctive style, but where the accent seemed to be on the structure's shape rather than what it would contain.

Putting aside arguments about design or suitability, the two towers were designed to provide accommodation for residents, not to make a statement of the spirit of the city or as a monument to the architect.

Purely economically, I would guess the cost of the towers would be 50 per cent more than conventional towers of a similar height.

Has anybody checked what the extra cost is and whether it is worth it?

"World-class" architects and their buildings should be handled with care, a good example.

The Scottish Parliament's original budget was £40m, its final cost was more than £400m, paid by the taxpayer, and it was three years late.

-Brian Beck, Lewes