Should a city try to preserve its old, historic buildings or destroy them and replace them with modern buildings? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion.

Old and historical buildings are a window into the past that we could not get and help us to learn about the past events.

Thus

, some people believe that a city should protect its antique houses.

However

, others think that the government should replace the old houses with modern ones.

This

essay is going to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of destroying and replacement of old and historic houses.

To begin

with, an old and historical house is not the same thing.

In other words

, a building is not necessarily valuable just because it is old, because historical or cultural value of a building is more important than the age. Despite

this

fact, the experts should determine the historical price of a building and based on

this

decide on the replacement.

For example

, new buildings were under construction in the capital city of Ukraine and experts checked the building for culture value and

then

decided to replace.

Moreover

, urban space can be better used to promote development, but many old buildings are aesthetically pleasing to the eye.

Hence

, the government could reestablish and renovate the building without loosing its historical price.

On the other hand

, tourists are drawn towards old historical buildings.

Thus

, if the council replaces them with modern houses,

then

the number of tourists will dramatically fall dramatically. Even though, space is needed for housing to deal with overcrowding. All in all, land in cities is needed for businesses and commerce, without

this

, the city will not be able to develop.

In contrast

, old buildings offer an insight into a country’s past.