Nowdays ,and around different cities, debates countinue about wether old building should be replaced by new ones, or preserved for futur generations. While some argue that modernization is essential for the urban development , others believe that historical building must be protected as a part of our cultre. In my opinion , a balance between the two approaches is the suitable solution.
On the one hand, supporters of the modern construction highlight the urgent need of safety, space and perfection. Most of the old buildings are weak and vulnerable to sudden earthquicks . Also , they took a huge place especially in the city center where we should have beneficial centers as much as we can , such as a modern hospital, primary school , and a university , that is why the destruction of an ancient monument can help the citizens by offering an approximent sites .finally, the argue that the previous building sometimes give a bad view , and replacing them by a modern one will made the street and the city in general looking more perfect and pretty.
On the other hand, protective people believe that old establishement are an important part of the country culture especially the one dating from the previous civilization like monuments in cairo , which are a big part of egypt history. Moreover, we can count on the past constructions to lead the city tourism , by being a tourist site , and people come to visit it from all around the world , we have the Pisa in Italy as an ultimate illustration.
In my point of view , cities should adopt a mixed aproach , which means that building that are not safe and unsuitable should be replaced by an usefull one for the best of the city and citizens. and the one which are in a pretty good state , must be protected and maintained for historical and cultural reasons.
To sum up, although modernity is necessary in our era , the preservation of old building is equally important to preserve our history.Overall, maintaining a balance between development and preservation is the best combinision .