Some people think it is important to keep and maintain old buildings rather than replace them with modern building.
The question of replacing old buildings with new ones is highly topical nowadays. It is considered by
great
part of Add an article
a great
the great
the
society that everything should be renovated and refreshed including edifices. Their opponents claim that old Correct article usage
apply
constructions
can possess crucial value for the culture, on the one hand, and are still occupied by people living in them. I prefer to agree with the latter point.
It's not a secret that constructions
tend to be crashed and dilapidated over time. They change their shape becoming unsuitable for living and that's the first
reason why they should be replaced with time. For example
, if the roof of the construction is erased because of enduring action of sun or moisture this
building cannot be exploited with the purpose of living.The next
reason is the aesthetician one. Some buildings can be so ugly and unattractive that they just cannot answer new demands and tastes. Examples of those are soviet standard panel or brick residential 5-floors constructions
, that
are called "Correct pronoun usage
which
khrushchevki
", which were built with thoughts of everything but aesthetic.
Correct your spelling
Khrushchev
However
, not all the
houses deserve reconstruction or demolition. Some of them might be either of cultural significance or of a historical one. As an example, we can take printing yard on Nikolskaya Street in Moscow. It's a building that was constructed in the 19th century and Correct article usage
apply
this
fact can be noticed if we look at the backside of the construction. It looks extremely decrepit and rundown in the background but this
dilapidation has its own charm and emphasize
how ancient the building is. So, in my opinion, it should not be reconstructed or even restored. Change the verb form
emphasizes
Furthermore
, there might be not only historical or cultural reasons but humanistic ones. For instance
, the building can be inhabited by families living there for years and refusing to leave their places of living. Of course, their desires should be taken into account as well. In many cases
it seems more rational to allow these people to stay in old buildings rather than organize their resettlement for financial reasons or for others.
To conclude, the answer to the question about managing the destinies of old Add a comma
,cases
constructions
cannot be concrete and explicit. The decision to maintain old houses or to replace them with new ones should be based on common sense. However
, I strongly believe that if there is any
opportunity to preserve ancient Correct your spelling
an
constructions
it should be done to save cultural heritage.Submitted by lady.saprykina on
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Your opinion
Don’t put your opinion unless you are asked to give it.
If the question asks what you think, you MUST give your opinion to get a good score.
Don’t leave your opinion until the conclusion.
Here are examples of instructions that require you to give your opinion:
...do you agree or disagree?...do you think...?...your opinion...?