Too many of the capital's new developments are heedless of their immediate surroundings

The Vauxhall Tower, south London. Photograph: Katherine Rose

The skyline statement ("London's skyline is about to be transformed with 230 new towers", In Focus) coincided with the submission last week of a planning proposal for what would be the tallest residential tower in Camden, north London. This massive development right next to the only green space in Swiss Cottage would dwarf Basil Spence's adjacent Grade II listed library. Despite residents' representations, no real changes have been made to the scheme. Indeed, the height of the tower has been increased from 16 to 24 storeys.

The bland and characterless tower would loom, without any relationship, over residential neighbourhoods. Its shocking and profound impact on the surrounding conservation areas has been ignored. No thought has been given to the ways the tower will appear from Primrose Hill, Hampstead Heath and Regent's Park.

This damage might be justifiable if the development was offering permanent affordable housing for families. Yet of 184 flats, fewer than 14% will be allocated to social housing. The developers' proposed model of mass private rental has not been tested successfully for five years or more anywhere in London. How can five-year tenancy agreements for small flats built over the most polluted traffic gyratory in Camden, targeted at young professionals and offering no facilities for families, build a sustainable community?

The proposed development hinges on the fact that Camden council recently reclassified Swiss Cottage as a major town centre, without any real consultation with residents. This means that high-rise building can now be encouraged here. The heart is being ripped out of local democracy. Hand in glove with the developers, London's councils and its mayor are forcing these highly inappropriate developments on communities, irrespective of their vocal opposition.

Sarah Howard Gottlieb

Swiss Cottage Action Group

London NW3

Civic democracy will continue to be powerless as long as a minister, on a whim, can grant planning permission. In Vauxhall, three of the 10 towers about to engulf Vauxhall Cross came into being in this way, despite enormous opposition.

The St George Tower (or Vauxhall Tower) was granted on appeal by John Prescott in 2005, despite advice from his advisers in December 2004 that it "could set a precedent for the indiscriminate scattering of very tall buildings across London".

The two towers to be built on the Kylun/Wendover site were approved by Eric Pickles in August 2012. He was apparently advised that they "would kick-start the area's regeneration". Two years on, the empty site is again for sale.

Pauline Gaunt

London SW8

London's problem is not its changing skyline or the number of tower blocks springing up. It's what those tower blocks are being built for that is the real issue.

On Tuesday, Boris Johnson approved two blocks in Islington that the council had turned down because there was insufficient housing for people on low incomes. Using his planning powers, Johnson has now given the go-ahead to the two schemes with the proviso that there should be 30% "affordable units" out of 1,000 homes.

But that is meaningless. The government's definition of affordable is 80% of market rents, which means that for Islington a two-bedroom flat would let at £22,256 per year, affordable only to the City workers down the road.

This is happening across the capital with developments that will do nothing either to improve London's housing situation or cater for its citizens.

Architectural fashion changes; Centre Point was once regarded as a blight on the landscape but is now seen as a masterpiece. It is not a skyline commission that is needed, but a housing commission to examine urgently the fundamental issues around homes for Londoners.

Christian Wolmar

(seeking Labour nomination for the 2016 mayoral election)

London N7 

> via The Guardian