THE Prince of Wales has been criticised by some of the world’s leading architects for “using his privileged position” to intervene in the design of a controversial luxury development in one of the most attractive parts of London.

The architects, who include five winners of the Pritzker prize, architecture’s equivalent of the Nobel prize, complain that Charles has “skewed” the democratic process by using his royal connections in an attempt to stop modernist plans for the former Chelsea Barracks.

Last week The Sunday Times disclosed that the prince had been successful in persuading the Qatari royal family, who own the site, to consider having more traditional brick and stone buildings for the development at the expense of the glass and steel proposals submitted by Lord Rogers, the project’s architect.

The prince, no stranger to clashes with the architectural establishment, argues that the proposed buildings would look inappropriate adjacent to the Royal hospital, Chelsea, designed by Sir Christopher Wren.

The attack on the prince, who is known for his traditional views on architecture, comes in a letter to today’s Sunday Times. It is signed by, among others, Jacques Herzog and Pierre de Meuron, Lord Foster, Zaha Hadid, Renzo Piano and Frank Gehry, who are leading figures in their field. Among their works are the “bird’s nest” stadium for the Beijing Olympics, the Gherkin and Tate Modern in London, the Pompidou Centre in Paris and the Guggenheim museum in Bilbao.

“If the prince wants to comment on the design of this or any other project we urge him to do so through the established planning consultation process,” they write.

“It is essential in a modern democracy that private comments and behind-the-scenes lobbying by the prince should not be used to skew the course of an open and democratic planning process that is currently under way.”

They point out that Westminster city council has already adapted and changed the project’s design in response to comments from planning officers and extensive local consultation, and that statutory bodies such as the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (Cabe), which oversees architecture and design on behalf of the government, have also been consulted.

“Westminster’s planning committee will meet shortly to deliver its verdict,” they continue. “Its members should be left alone to decide whether the Rogers scheme is a fitting 21st-century addition to the fabric of London.

“The developers have chosen carefully in selecting the best architect for the sensitive project. Rogers and his team have played their part in the democratic process. The prince and his advisers should do the same.”

Speaking yesterday, another signatory to the letter, Richard Burdett, the architect and academic, added his personal criticism of Charles. “[The prince] is basically saying that Rogers should be fired,” said Burdett, who is also overseeing designs for the London 2012 Olympics. “Yet Rogers, of all people, has been about making city centres liveable. Charles, who is himself unelected, has also written a letter [to the Qataris] which is all about history rather than about a modern design in keeping with a developing city and the neighbourhood.”

Charles seems to have a particular dislike of designs by Rogers, who is a Companion of Honour, an award granted by the Queen. Rogers was one of the architects who put in proposals for the extension for the National Gallery in 1984, which were criticised by the prince. He famously called one of the plans “a monstrous carbuncle on the face of a much loved and elegant friend”. He also objected to Rogers’s ideas to redevelop Paternoster Square, next to St Paul’s Cathedral.

The prince wants his favourite architect Quinlan Terry, who is noted for neo-classical design, to take over the Chelsea project.

Clarence House declined to comment.

Built by the prince’s opponents

— Lord Foster’s City Hall, housing the London mayor, was nicknamed “the glass testicle”. Boris Johnson rechristened it “the onion”.

— Foster’s National Sea Life Centre in Birmingham, opened in 1996, has been called “excruciatingly dismal” by critics.

— Heathrow’s terminal 5, designed by Lord Rogers, was called “a disaster” after baggage-handling chaos last year.

Explore Property

• Buying & Selling

• New Homes

• Overseas

• Interiors

• Investment

• Gardens

• Cool In Your Code

• Specials

• First-time buyer

Times recommends

• Second homes: credit crunch casualty or money-spinner?
• How I built my own sliding house
• Top 10 incentives for house buyers