Why does the new MP for Hove, Celia Barlow, think the Gehry design for the King Alfred site represents 21st-Century progress?

It is no more about progress than were the ghastly council tower blocks built in north Brighton in the Sixties. They may look different and be inferior quality but then, they still meant progress.

Equally, why is opposition to such a visual monstrosity considered to be opposition to developing the site? The current structure of the leisure centre is beginning to resemble a run-down, abandoned factory.

Of course we want it developed, but the chosen development needs to be a long-lasting improvement not a child-like fantasy.

Celia Barlow makes an example of the Portland Gate development, which is located close to my home.

Yes, we lost an art deco building, albeit one in terrible condition, but the replacement is a pleasant enough building which does not overwhelm the locality or offend the eye.

She shouldn't make the mistake of thinking ordinary people don't matter - we pay a huge amount in taxes and we are not necessarily uneducated in what looks stylish.

Unlike some weird work of art which might be displayed in a gallery and only viewed by those who wish to do so, this heap of junk is going to be forced upon our optic nerves every day of our lives.

I think, judging by reaction in The Argus over past months, most people simply do not want it. For heaven's sake, give it a rest.

-Dr M Boyask, Hove