Prince Charles told firm to axe architect chosen for St Paul's project

The Prince of Wales secretly lobbied for a leading modernist architect to be dropped from a development next to St Paul's Cathedral, it emerged today.

Jean Nouvel was commissioned by developer Land Securities to design the £500million One New Change office and shopping complex next to the landmark. But in 2005, the Prince allegedly wrote to Land Securities calling for an alternative architect to be considered for the site.

It was announced last week that five of the firms on a shortlist of 10 asked to draw up new plans for the Chelsea Barracks site have links to the Prince.

The original £3 billion proposals to redevelop the barracks site, submitted by Lord Rogers, were abandoned after Charles objected.

The Prince was also accused today of telling English Heritage's chairman to urge Cabinet ministers to block a £200million development at Smithfield Market and it is claimed his aides regularly scrutinise plans by major architects including Sir Terry Farrell, Sir Richard MacCormac, John McAslan and Alan Baxter.

In the private letter to Land Securities, the Prince is said to have made it clear he felt the firm's design approach was wrong. Mike Hussey, then London director of Land Securities, said: "He wrote to me at the time we selected Nouvel and suggested we should meet his preferred architects. He hadn't seen the scheme, he just complained about the selection of the architect. He didn't want a modernist."

In the letter, Prince Charles is alleged to have written that the design should "allow St Paul's to shine bright" and offered his own architectural advisers to the firm. Mr Hussey decided the Prince's suggestion was "not appropriate" and declined the offer.

Sunand Prasad, president of the Royal Institute of British Architects, described the intervention as "brazen" and "pernicious" and called on the Prince to "step back".

He said: "The Prince has an unusual amount of power which, under our constitution, is not designed to be used to interfere with the running of everyday affairs in this country for the simple reason that the prince is not accountable. There was an open competition for this building and then along comes somebody with special powers seeking to influence the outcome in a blatant intervention."

A spokesman for Clarence House said Charles was concerned to retain StPaul's "inspirational" status, but would not comment on the Prince's private correspondence.

Roger Madelin, chief executive of the developers Argent, which consulted the Prince's aides on the £2 billion plan to regenerate disused rail land at King's Cross, said Charles now had a similar stature as a consultee as statutory bodies including English Heritage, the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment and professional bodies including Riba and the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.

In 2004, the Prince wrote to English Heritage's chairman, Sir Neil Cossons, to protest against a plan by Thornfield Properties to redevelop Smithfield Market. Prince Charles is said to have written: "If, as you say (and we all agree!), they make 'a significant contribution to the character and appearance of the Smithfield conservation area and possess great townscape value' then why on earth can they not be listed now?"