A highly controversial issue relates to whether the authorities should regulate the design of recently built buildings in enormous cities or not. In this essay, I am going to examine this question from both points of view andd then provide my own opinion on the matter.
On one side of the argument, there are people who argue that the benefits of controlling the scheme of lately erected constructions considerably outweigh its disadvantages. The main reason for this belief is that the governments could maintain safety for people using the buildings. It is also possible to say that the design of recent constructions must meet some safety standards so that they will not cause dangers to their users in the future. For instance, there are earthquakes frequently occurring frequently in Taiwan. Hence, its government compels most of the buildings to meet some standards to be sustainable to earthquakes.
On the other hand, it is also possible to make the opposing case. It is often argued that people who invest in the buildings should have rights to design them according to their preferences. People often hold this notion because there will be a wide variety of amazing constructions if the designers feel free to be creative in designing the structures. In other words, being free to decide on the design of the buildings, designers may create extraordinary erections which will contribute to architectural diversity of a country. To illustrate, Landmark 81 has become the tallest building in Vietnam with an amazing design due to the permission of creativity.
In conclusion, I believe both arguments have their strong points. On balance, however, I suppose that the design of new constructions should be regulated by the governments because all of the buildings should be guaranteed to be safe in use.
A
highly
controversial issue relates to whether the authorities should regulate the
design
of recently built
buildings
in enormous cities or not. In this essay, I am going to examine this question from both points of view
andd
then provide my
own
opinion on the matter.
On one side of the argument, there are
people
who argue that the benefits of controlling the scheme of lately erected
constructions
considerably
outweigh its disadvantages. The main reason for this belief is that the
governments
could maintain safety for
people
using the
buildings
. It is
also
possible to say that the
design
of recent
constructions
must
meet
some
safety standards
so
that they will not cause
dangers
to their users in the future.
For instance
, there are earthquakes
frequently
occurring
frequently
in Taiwan.
Hence
, its
government
compels most of the
buildings
to
meet
some
standards to be sustainable to earthquakes.
On the other hand
, it is
also
possible to
make
the opposing case. It is
often
argued that
people
who invest in the
buildings
should have rights to
design
them according to their preferences.
People
often
hold this notion
because
there will be a wide variety of amazing
constructions
if the designers feel free to be creative in designing the structures.
In other words
, being free to decide on the
design
of the
buildings
, designers may create extraordinary erections which will contribute to architectural diversity of a country. To illustrate, Landmark 81 has become the tallest
building
in Vietnam with an amazing
design
due to the permission of creativity.
In conclusion
, I believe both arguments have their strong points. On balance,
however
, I suppose that the
design
of new
constructions
should
be regulated
by the
governments
because
all of the
buildings
should
be guaranteed
to be safe in
use
.
7.5Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
7.5Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
7.5Mistakes