Urban sprawl has ushered in high-density housing, contributing to vertical-growth buildings to accommodate more people. Some proponents believe that local authorities need to protect cultural recognition, building new constructions in traditional styles. Although I acknowledge the importance of historical buildings, I can partially agree with the statement, as modern houses are more functional.
On the one hand, antique buildings are undeniably invaluable for cultural identity, as they serve as a reminder of the past. In the advent of urban sprawl, the preservation of traditional styles is crucial for city’s recognition, as contemporary concrete boxes blend in with surroundings, creating a dull appearance of a city. Historical facades and landmarks are not only aesthetically pleasing but also are an effective way to promote a town, attracting visitors worldwide. National designs can yield benefits for both foreigners who can evaluate their historical literacy, and a city, distinguishing it and raising international recognition.
However, modern buildings are undoubtedly fundamental in the face of rapid urbanization and demographic rise. Cutting-edge constructions such as skyscrapers can provide high-density housing and, consequently, accommodate more individuals and alleviate market demand and soaring prices. Moreover, state-of-the-art houses can supply people with unprecedented amenities, enhancing the rate of life quality among citizens and simplifying their routines.
To sum up, although traditional designs are pivotal for the cultural heritage and city’s identity, I believe that modern buildings are integral to citizens’ well-being and welfare. The government needs to strike a balance between old and new if we are to maintain sustainable development without posing a threat to historical evidence.