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.

Nowadays his-rise

buildings

are proliferating across all the cities with advanced amenities. Many prefer the new arrangements while others believe in preserving the earlier sites. In

this

essay, I will share my viewpoint on supporting the current construction with facilities. To commence with, recent

buildings

have recreational facilities.

In other words

, a housing complex has a swimming pool, gym and music room which will help individuals to take up activities in their vicinity.

This

boosts confidence in the younger generation as they are exposed to a plethora of things and get a chance to socialise.

Moreover

, parents are stress-free as they need not pick up and drop off their children for extra-curricular activities as it's within their housing complex.

On the other hand

, historic

buildings

are not safety compliant. They aren't built to withstand floods or earthquakes.

Although

historic

buildings

preserve our culture and educate people, maintaining historic property requires investment as well as manpower. These resources may not be easily available. The old

buildings

occupy a lot of space because it has less number of levels and larger rooms.

Hence

, a sky-scraper would be 30 storey building with lesser space as compared to the old property.

Thus

, accommodating the growing population. To summarise, it's a good idea to have mod cons for ease of living. It has advanced features and many people can dwell.

Conversely

, it's cumbersome and expensive to preserve old structures.