There is an ongoing debate about whether cities should be well-designed to appeal boh local residents and international visitors. While this might be the answer for a number of individuals, I would contend that cities should prioritize functionality, affordability, and sustainability over mere attractiveness.
Granted, supporters for stunning cities targeted at both local inhabitants and foreign tourists often highlight the fact that cities with charming layouts could promote a sense of fulfillment among their locals. This can be evidently exemplified by Busan- a coastal city in Korea that recorded significant improvements in the levels of locals’ satisfaction towards their authorities. Moreover, cities with eye-catching exteriors also draw attentions of non-native people, which in turn boosting the city’s economy as well as creating more employments for the local people
However, I would contend that designing attractive buildings often couple with some issues associated with maintenance fees. It is of the concern that these beautiful cities require much more specialized care, which inherently comes at a premium and imposes a financial burden on the local authorities. Furthermore, an excessive investment on urban design will take over fiscal support for other practical problemss auch as traffic congestion, and housing shortages. For example, some cities in developing countries have built massive shopping malls and tourist zones while ignoring poor infrastructure in local neighborhoods.
In conclusion, while tourist appeal can bring some benefits, I strongly believe that cities should be designed with a focus on practicality, sustainability, and the well-being of local residents. The goal should be to create a city that works—not just one that looks good in photographs.