Letter: Science Museum 'Nimbys' hit back
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Local residents who fear that the Science Museum's huge new Wellcome Wing will reduce the amount of daylight entering their windows are portrayed in Jonathan Glancey's article "The outer darkness" (25 April) as reactionaries standing in the way of progress. The residents of 169 Queen's Gate, described in the article as "anonymous" and living in a "grandiloquent block of late Victorian mansion flats", come in for particular opprobrium.
These same residents have publicly stated their support for the Wellcome Wing on several occasions. What concerns them is not that the new building will exist, but that it is oriented in such a way as to shadow their living rooms and bedrooms. They have merely asked for their right to adequate daylight to be considered. If this is Nimbyism, how would Mr Glancey describe the actions of anti-motorway protesters?
The article does not even mention the major issue. For dozens of residents in the surrounding streets, the main problem is not the Wellcome Wing but the separate industrial-style block which the museum has proposed for its new conference centre in Queen's Gate itself.
The local council has now asked the Science Museum to submit a more suitable design. To represent this as a triumph for a handful of Luddites who are "suspicious of science" is absurd.
Jonathan Glancey should check his facts before sneering at the community spirit of ordinary people who want this multicultural part of London to remain beautiful.
DAVID WICKES
Chairman, 169 Queen's Gate Ltd
London SW7
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments