Sir – It was only after reading that the Museum of Natural History is to reopen that I realised I hadn’t been affected by its closure — due to the number of dinosaurs in your letters page.

Why do so many people want to stop change in Oxford, however essential? Their vision of a medieval city, unchanged by 200 years of industrial and social history, is anachronistic.

People’s reluctance to consider change is not just a ‘city’ thing. People living in Oxfordshire villages routinely fight to stop housing development while, at the same time, bemoaning the fate of their village schools and shops.

Contrast this with villages in rural France, which enjoy new schools, libraries, shops and sports and cultural facilities because they are building homes.

Equally, how many letter-writers complaining of transport and parking problems in Oxford are prepared to get rid of their car and use public transport, walk or cycle? The notion that those who like modernity rather than ancient things should move to Milton Keynes is facile. Of course, it is much greener, more spacious and less traffic-bound than Oxford. Personally, I like many old Oxford buildings but loathe others.

Equally, I love some truly modern architecture but not all of it. Most Oxford houses, as elsewhere in Britain, are pastiche architecture. I hope eventually we’ll build some truly modern houses. That’s my view; I’m neither right nor wrong. And that’s why my hackles rise when your correspondents state as absolute truths that everything old is good and nothing new can be. Oxford should be a city of which we can be proud of both its old and its new architecture.

Stuart Skyte, Oxford