When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
TS: I strongly disagree that historic buildings should be sacrificed for the sake of modern development. In fact, perservation of historic buildings is important for education and tourism of the cities. For the purpose of modern development, the urban planners should try to build satellite cities around the old cities to balance the need for preserving historic buildings and the demand of space for economic development.
ts1: preservation of historic buildings can create educational value for young people, researchers and the city residents
- for young people, the buildings can help them to learn more about the history of the city and the nation
- for researchers, they can collect more first-hand historical data
- for city residents, the buildings help cultivate their sense of identity as part of the city
ts2: well-preserved historic buildings can also boost the tourism of the city as well as the nation
- the histortic buildings may attract more tourists
- the booming tourism can create more jobs
- it can help attract more foreign investment
ts3: some people may argue that the city needs more space and land for economic development
- more land is needed for housing, transportation and office building
- urban planners should consider building satellite cities around the old city
- it is easier to build a new city from scratch than to renovate the old city
- such policy can also help lift the people in the suburban and the rural area from poverty