top of page

Newly Constructed Buildings in Big Cities Should be Controlled by Governments - Task 2 Band 9 Essay

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.


Write about the following topic:


Some people feel that the design of newly constructed buildings in big cities should be controlled by governments. Others believe those who finance the construction of a building should be free to design it as they see fit.

Discuss both these views and give your opinion.


Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experiences.


You should write at least 250 words.


Task 2 Essay Band 9 Essay Sample (Design of newly constructed buildings in big cities should be controlled by governments.)

Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner


Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score



Model Essay 1

In metropolitan landscapes, the debate on whether government should dictate the architecture of new buildings or leave the decision to the financiers sparks considerable discourse. This essay contends that while government oversight ensures urban harmony and safety, the creativity and innovation of private investors should not be stifarled. The discussion will delve into the merits of both regulation for communal benefit and the freedom of design in fostering architectural diversity.


Governments argue that controlling building designs ensures cohesive city aesthetics and adherence to safety standards, preventing haphazard development that could detract from the city's charm. For instance, Paris's uniform building heights and façades underpin its world-renowned beauty, a testament to effective urban planning. Moreover, regulations can mandate environmentally sustainable practices, crucial in today's climate crisis, while also facilitating the inclusion of green spaces. These measures safeguard public interests, ensuring that developments contribute positively to the cityscape and well-being of its inhabitants, making cities more livable and aesthetically pleasing.


Conversely, allowing financiers to design buildings unhindered encourages architectural innovation and diversity, reflecting a melting pot of ideas and cultures. Dubai's skyline, dotted with architectural marvels like the Burj Khalifa, exemplifies how freedom in design can brand a city as a hub of modernity and progress, while also serving as a canvas for cultural expression. Such environments attract global talent and tourism, fostering economic growth. Furthermore, this freedom can lead to the creation of spaces that are more attuned to the specific needs of their users, rather than conforming to a one-size-fits-all approach dictated by government policies, thereby enhancing functionality and user satisfaction.


In conclusion, balancing government oversight with financier freedom in building design merges urban cohesion with innovation, enhancing cityscapes and economic vitality. This equilibrium ensures safe, aesthetically pleasing environments where creativity thrives, creating cities that embody both tradition and progress.

Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score



Model Essay 2

The architectural identity of urban spaces ignites a debate between the necessity of government intervention and the liberty of private financiers in design decisions. This essay posits that a synergistic approach, marrying regulatory oversight with creative freedom, optimizes urban development. It will explore the imperative of government control for cohesive aesthetics and safety, against the backdrop of financier-led innovation fostering economic dynamism and architectural diversity.


Regulatory frameworks imposed by governments serve as a keystone for urban integrity, ensuring that structures not only meet rigorous safety protocols but also contribute to the city's visual and environmental harmony. For example, Singapore's meticulous urban planning has masterfully sculpted a cityscape where green buildings and public spaces seamlessly coalesce with modern infrastructure, demonstrating how regulation can cultivate sustainable and visually appealing urban environments. Such policies underscore the delicate balance between human habitation and ecological preservation, reinforcing the ethos of collective welfare and shared responsibility towards creating livable cities for future generations.


On the flip side, granting financiers the reins to architectural design unleashes a torrent of innovation, offering cities their distinctive skylines and identity markers. Cities like Chicago, where the Willis Tower dramatically redefines its skyline, vividly illustrate the vibrancy and dynamic character that private investment and architectural freedom bring. This liberty not only underpins economic growth through tourism and investment attraction but also ensures that buildings can adapt to the evolving needs of their inhabitants, promoting a dynamic urban ecosystem. Furthermore, it facilitates a milieu where the contemporary zeitgeist is reflected in the built environment, allowing cities to constantly evolve and resonate with the pulse of their people.


In summary, the balance between government oversight and private creativity is key to urban development, ensuring safety, sustainability, and aesthetic harmony alongside innovation. This approach nurtures cities that thrive economically and reflect the community's essence, marking the pinnacle of urban planning.


Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score



Sample Essay 3

While some people think that design of new buildings in big cities should be regulated by the government, whereas others believe that the government should not interfere in this, leaving it up to the developers or the owners to design their buildings as per their choice. Though the government initiative is more inclusive as it considers betterment for a wider community, it is individual approaches towards attractive building designs that make a city more beautiful. The following paragraphs will elucidate the idea in detail.


On the one hand, government undertaken designs are usually focused on the vast majority of the society. That means, if the government regulates the building design, it reveals a city that in a way the vast majority of the residents want it to look like. Because, more often than not, when an individual designs a building, he tends to think only about his own interest, whereas the government authority would take into account whether the building is blocking an important public place, a broad view of the city, also whether it is affecting the environment in any way, etc.


On the other hand, it is evident that building designs should be at individual discretion, as it is argued that private designs are more innovative which adds beauty to a city look. In fact, the owner of a building should be allowed to design it the way he or she wants. Moreover, individuals keep coming up with new and innovative idea to beat others and contribute the city’s overall beautification. That means, government intervention in building designs would make a city look bland as the authority tends to focus more on utilities, rather than on attraction.


In conclusion, though government intervention in building designs incorporates wider benefits, I believe that people should be allowed to design their own buildings to make their cities looks more exciting and let them come up with new and unique designs that stand out.


Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner


Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score

Comments


bottom of page