Some people think that old buildings should be knocked down and give way to the new buildings. To what extent do you agree or disagree? How important are old buildings to us?
- State your opinion clearly (whether you agree or disagree). Explain in brief what you are going to write in the body paragraphs.
- Nowadays, city planners are very often confronted with controversy about whether an old building should be demolished or maintained.
- Paragraph 1: Poor in condition and low in quality, some buildings pose a danger to people inside as well as pedestrians.
- Paragraph 2: Reconstruction of such structures will trigger damage to cultural heritage and prevent architects from getting inspired by their predecessors.
- Restate your opinion with a clear and direct sentence
Every property has its value and lifespan. So do the buildings. Nowadays, city planners are very often confronted with controversy about whether an old building should be demolished or maintained. I think that old buildings should be destroyed and new buildings should be constructed in their place. I will discuss my point of view in the next few paragraphs.
If we talk about old buildings that possess no exceptional value while becoming dilapidated, entire destruction is an acceptable and understandable decision. Poor in condition and low in quality, some buildings pose a danger to people inside as well as pedestrians. Also, they might stand in the way of a new road line or impede other urban development projects. Whether they have been reinforced or not, these buildings can blemish the landscape and hardly justify continued maintenance. Replacing such buildings with new ones meets the renewed needs of the city.
There is no doubt that some old buildings are of archaeological, aesthetic, or architectural significance. They might either be important to a culture or unique in terms of architecture. Reconstruction of such structures will trigger damage to cultural heritage and prevent architects from getting inspired by their predecessors. Because of their uniqueness, antique buildings are supposed to act as a source of tourism income, if maintained well. But it is to be noted that the cost of maintenance is very high and it is questionable whether the money spent on them will be rewarding.
Although many people are in the favour of retaining old buildings that they enhance the stature of a country, most of them also degrade the impression because of their rusty, broken structure.
In summary, though old buildings must be preserved for the sake of cultural heritage, their continued maintenance is an unnecessary overhead to the government. Instead, they can be demolished, and new buildings can be constructed.
Band 9 Sample Essay
Signup/login to unlock band 9 essay and ace the IELTS
Construction and destruction of new and old buildings respectively have always been a matter of contention amongst the school of thought of architects and construction planners. Some say that the crumbling down of the older derelict building should be made more intensive and that it should be replaced by the newer ones. I completely agree with this standpoint and in the upcoming paragraphs, I shall be talking about the same.
The first supporting idea of the entire obliteration of the old denuded buildings is the redundancy it has in the terms of adding values of any sort to the ambience of the city or region they are present in. From the monetary aspect, if we look at it as an asset, it doesn’t have anything to provide or juice out any benefit from. It stays as a drab occupant that otherwise if had been replaced by an efficient property, could have generated a substantial revenue and economy from. Moreover, owing to the distending population size, many a time such repudiated buildings create an unnecessary dearth of space and therefore curb the potential development of a progressive asset. Then, reconstruction of such debilitating buildings doesn’t seem to be a prudential and justifiable action to go ahead with as it takes a considerable amount of money to convalescence such hollow structures, the money could, however, be used for creating new ones that would be sturdier as well as much economical to invest on.
Another important reason that would make the inclination more angled towards the ravaging of old buildings would be the potential threat that it carries for the people that are inhabitants of such buildings and even for the people or living beings and the properties nearby. Given that they are old and rickety, they are generally not even able to bear the shocks of earthquakes and are the first ones to get decrepit from such catastrophes. In such cases too, the establishment of the new buildings are far more pragmatic, profitable and much safer.
Although the older buildings of cultural and traditional essence are the major sources to ensnare and enamour the tourist-gaze, the underlying ill effects of such worn-out structures are doing more harm than good. Moreover, the ones that are neither of heritage importance nor are they sturdy or reconstructable, are blatantly pointless to have.
Conclusively, it could therefore be stated that building newer buildings upon the destruction of the older ones is a better alternative, more often than not.
More Writing Task 2 Essay Topics
- Celebrities Earn More Money Than Other Professionals Is This Justified
- In Some Countries At Secondary Or High School There May Be Two Streams Of Study
- The Planet’s Population Is Reaching Unsustainable Levels
- International Sporting Occasions Are Essential In Easing International Tensions
- Some People Say That In All Levels Of Education
Also check :
- IELTS Writing Task 2
- Tips to write introduction in IELTS Writing Task 2
- Tips to write great writing essay
- IELTS Sample essays
- IELTS Writing task 2 Preparation Tips
- Tips to Improve IELTS Writing Skills
- How to get band 8 in IELTS Writing Task 2
- IELTS writing practice test
- IELTS Writing recent actual test
- Band 9 essays
- Advantage and Disadvantage Essays
- IELTS Writing Answer sheet
- IELTS map vocabulary
- IELTS Writing Task 1 Connectors