Reading Denise Craghill’s review of the “Stonebow Inquiry” (Letters, April 12) I couldn’t help wondering if a huddle of worthies-led citizenry might not be as inimical to the townscape of York as a planning committee bent on splurging a government grant.

Stonebow House stands or (preferably) falls by its architecture. What I called, with a shudder, “cosmetic”, Denise Craghill calls “stylish alterations”.

Brutalism, or what should perhaps be called Brutism, won’t admit of that. What to do? Stonebow House fails functionally as it does aesthetically, but get the function right, and in the short term we should be able to live with it. Preserve us from painted concrete prefab blocks and window boxes!

Hundertwasser’s architectural ideas were pure fantasy. I can’t see them transposed to York or being accepted if they were. Planners who can’t get King’s Square right are likely to make a total hash of prettifying Stonebow House.

The present occupants deserve rehousing. We have a duty towards them, but the lumpish podium must go if the longed-for vista is to be restored.

William Dixon Smith, Welland Rise, Acomb, York.