132 9) Some people believe that old public buildings in cities should be restored while others say that they should be demolished and new buildings should be built instead. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.
132 9) Some people believe that old public buildings in cities should be restored while others say that they should be demolished and new buildings should be built instead. DPwgm
It has been a debatable sue as to whether old buildings in urban areas should be renovated or new ones should be constructed in their place. Both the views will be discussed elaborately in this essay and I deem that buildings which have historical significance should be repaired and restored at all costs, however the buildings which are not useful should be knocked down
On the one hand, it is extremely important to preserve old buildings as they provide unique identify to a place. For example, Appleby castle in North West England is a magnificent piece of Normais architecture of old times and is now serving a very good purpose. Additionally, maintaining such kind of buildings can also promote tourism as these moments attract tourists who want to experience the bygone architecture and economic condition of the city over time. Finally, restoring such buildings reduces the construction waste and saves energy spent building materials and tools.
On the contrary, there are many arguments in favour of developing new buildings as these could be made to be energy efficient by using newer technologies which could save a lot of energy later on. For instance, double glass panels could be used for Insulation and terraces could be made to accommodate solar panels. Moreover, such constructions can offer viable measures for the rapidly occurring climate changes and the burgeoning population.
Considering both the views, I opine that constructions which can boost tourism and bring economic benefits should be renovated whereas, unnecessary old buildings should be replaced by new ones
To reprise, although both the views have their own merits, finances should be spent wisely to preserve old historic buildings and achieving utmost benefits by using the contemporary technologies to erect new ones. (289)
It has been a debatable sue as to whether
old
buildings
in urban areas should
be renovated
or
new
ones
should
be constructed
in their place. Both the views will
be discussed
elaborately
in this essay and I deem that
buildings
which have historical significance should
be repaired
and restored at all costs,
however
the
buildings
which are not useful should
be knocked
down
On the one hand, it is
extremely
important
to preserve
old
buildings
as they provide unique identify to a place.
For example
, Appleby castle in North West England is a magnificent piece of Normais architecture of
old
times and is
now
serving a
very
good
purpose.
Additionally
, maintaining such kind of
buildings
can
also
promote tourism as these moments attract tourists who want to experience the bygone architecture and economic condition of the city over time.
Finally
, restoring such
buildings
reduces
the construction waste and saves energy spent
building
materials and tools.
On the contrary
, there are
many
arguments in favour of developing
new
buildings
as these could
be made
to be energy efficient by using newer technologies which could save
a lot of
energy later on.
For instance
, double glass panels could be
used
for Insulation and terraces could
be made
to accommodate solar panels.
Moreover
, such constructions can offer viable measures for the
rapidly
occurring climate
changes
and the burgeoning population.
Considering both the views, I opine that constructions which can boost tourism and bring economic benefits should
be renovated
whereas, unnecessary
old
buildings
should
be replaced
by
new
ones
To reprise, although both the views have their
own
merits, finances should
be spent
wisely
to preserve
old
historic
buildings
and achieving utmost benefits by using the contemporary technologies to erect
new
ones
. (289)
Do not write below this line