It is argued that governments plan to build shops, offices, homes, and educational buildings in functional areas and they will be separated. Although this policy has some advantages, I believe that these positive impacts are overshadowed by many adverse influences on the quality of human life.
On the one hand, this plan is a benefit. Firstly, this arrangement facilitates governments’ service management and improves the national economy. In recent times, branches in different locations have required a large number of staff and leaders to operate businesses. Nevertheless, this scheme allows administrations to cut down on the labor workforce for each office, reducing a large amount of the national salary budget. For example, several branches of educational businesses are built in a specific region and managed by an executive, saving a wide amount of money on the State budget.
On the other hand, I believe that the disadvantages of this development outweigh its advantages. The main drawback is that this policy can result in a lack of services, affecting detrimentally the standard of human life. In terms of the form of current cities which have been designed to a mix of various services, allowing citizens to meet their daily needs by accessing amenities of services. However, these arrangements may force individuals to travel a long distance for necessary services, creating discomfort and inconvenience in living conditions. An illustration is that residents cannot receive immediate treatment in case all hospitals are located in city centers, posing a threat to human welfare.
In conclusion, despite some positive effects on living standards, I hold the opinion that arranging buildings into functional areas triggers more adverse influences on human health.