ssue 13 [b]"Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any [b]society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground [b]that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such [b]situations, modern development should be given precedence over the [b]preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be [b]served." [b][b][b]The speaker asserts that wherever a practical, utilitarian need for new [b]buildings arises this need should take precedence over our conflicting [b]interest in preserving historic buildings as a record of our past. In my [b]view, however, which interest should take precedence should be determined [b]on a case-by-case basis--and should account not only for practical and [b]historic considerations but also aesthetic ones. [b]我觉得这样的开头非常适合于陈述自己的反对观点：先重述一遍原文的观点，然后提出自己 [b]的反对观点，甚至有所发挥。 [b]精华：The speaker asserts that… In my view, however,… [b]take precedence over… [b]…should be determined on a case-by-case basis, and should account not [b]only [b]for…but also… [b][b][b]In determining whether to raze an older building, planners should of course [b]consider the community's current and anticipated utilitarian needs. For [b]example, if an additional hospital is needed to adequately serve the health- [b] [b]care needs of a fast-growing community, this compelling interest might very [b]well outweigh any interest in preserving a historic building that sits on [b]the proposed site. Or if additional parking is needed to ensure the [b]economic survival of a city's downtown district, [b]this interest might take precedence over the historic value of an old [b]structure that stands in the way of a parking structure. On the other [b]hand, if the need is mainly for more office space, in some cases an [b]architecturally appropriate add-on or annex to an older building might [b]serve just as well as razing the old building to make way for a new one. Of [b]course, an expensive retrofit might not be worthwhile if no amount of [b]retrofitting would meet the need. [b]从正反两方面阐明了自己关于有无必要preserve the historic buildings, which is [b]largely based on proper situations.正反两方面这样的论述方法是值得我们好好利用 [b]的，因为这样给ets 的感觉是你考虑问题全面，有深度。 [b][b][b]Competing with a community's utilitarian needs is an interest preserving [b]the historical record. Again, the weight of this interest should be [b]determined on a case-by-case basis. Perhaps an older building uniquely [b]represents a bygone era, or once played a central role in the city's [b]history as a municipal structure. Or perhaps the building once served as [b]the home of a founding family or other significant historical figure, or [b]as the location of an important historical event. Any of these scenarios [b]（对任何可能出现的情况的描述和推测） might justify saving the building at the [b]expense of the practical needs of the community. On the other hand, if [b]several older buildings represent the same historical era just as [b]effectively, or if the building's history is an unremarkable one, then the [b]historic value of the building might pale（使…相形见拙） in comparison to [b]the value of a new structure that meets a compelling practical need. [b]认真品味从Any of these scenarios…到末尾的句法。 [b][b][b]Also competing with a community's utilitarian needs is the aesthetic and [b]architectural value of the building itself--apart from historical events [b]with which it might be associated. A building might be one of only a few [b]that represents a certain architectural style. Or it might be especially [b]beautiful, perhaps as a result of the craftsmanship and materials employed [b]in its construction--which might be cost-prohibitive to replicate today. [b]Even retrofitting the building to accommodate current needs might [b]undermine its aesthetic as well as historic value, by altering its [b]appearance and architectural integrity. Of course it is difficult to [b]quantify(=evaluate) aesthetic value and weigh it against utilitarian [b]considerations. Yet planners should strive to account for aesthetic value [b]nonetheless. [b][b][b]In sum, whether to raze an older building in order to construct a new one [b]should never be determined indiscriminately. Instead, planners should make [b]such decisions on a case-by-case basis, weighing the community's practical [b]needs against the building's historic and aesthetic value. [b]虽然最后一段有匆匆带过之嫌，但此篇文章仍不失为一篇好文章：无太多难词，无晦涩难懂 [b]的句法，只有very persuasive的reason and suggestions，这是我们急需借鉴的。>=5 [b]分！ [b]