Modern buildings change the character and appearance of towns and cities. The government should insist that new buildings be built in traditional styles to protect cultural identity. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Every city has its architectural character, but the similarities between cities are more obvious these days than in the past. However, I disagree that modern buildings should be built in traditional styles. In the following paragraphs I shall put forth my arguments to support my views.

Firstly, in most large cities, land is scarce and consequently it is very valuable. This has led to the construction of tall buildings which occupy only a small area of land while providing lots of floor space where people can live or work. We also have to meet the needs of the growing population for which tall buildings are the answer. Moreover, there is no need for deforestation to provide more land.

Secondly, modern materials are more practical. Now we use concrete and steel instead of stone, timber or brick. Because of these things buildings can be built comparatively quickly using prefabricated materials. They do not use local materials, such as stone, timber or brick, which used to give character to those buildings. Finally, changes are taking place in climate and energy sources are depleting fast. So we need energy efficient houses. Modern buildings use double glass front walls and POP( Plaster of Paris) ceilings which lessen the energy requirements. Moreover, now we need smaller houses as family structure is changing.

However, I believe that every city should have one or two unique buildings which give character and identity to the city. The twin towers in Kuala Lumpur or the Opera House in Sydney are examples of this approach, and I agree with this kind of initiative.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, it is the need of the day that modern buildings be built in today’s contemporary styles and to give identity to a place one or two unique buildings may be there in every city.