With the increasing of population, some believe that the areas of land that are used as parks would be better used to provide more housing. I firmly disagree with this statement facing the fact that removing park areas to place new constructions could possibly decrease the quality of life of the habitants.
While new housing spaces appears to be a better use of land in the city, resulting in more space to accommodate the expansion of the population. It is very important to focus on the quality of life that is being provided to the community as well. Preserving the parks would not only have an impact on nature, but can also bring health improvement to the population. It is proven that cities with more afforestation suffer less from high temperatures in the summer season. In addition, the parks can be used for leisure time, exercising and many other activities.
As an exemple of the previous statement, the city of Curitiba, in Brazil, advertise itself as sustainable and has a lot of initiatives to preserve nature spaces. One of the most famous is the implantation of parks in strategic areas to prevent floodings. In the case of strong rains, the river overflows and the rest of the land is responsible to drain and avoid the flood to spread to the rest of the city. As a result, the city can benefit from the effective solution and the parks are also being used as spaces for socialization.
Summarizing, it is important to have space to accommodate how the population is escalating. However, using the park areas is not the solution and can cause many more damage to the city, once preserving could work as an initiative to provide health and quality of life to the community,