One school of thought emphasizes the significance of spacious outdoor shared spaces, named as squares or parks, in all urban areas. While acknowledging the reasons for this proposal, I would argue that it is simply not feasible in many parts of the world.
On the one hand, the construction of urban community-owned areas can foster several different development scenarios. In the realm of real estate, the properties in the immediate vicinity of municipal leafy parks or open public squares can be doubly priced either due to the increasing demand of green living or the business opportunities. This can be observed at Vinhomes Ocean Park which is a prosperous residential area surrounded by public open spaces such as parks, central lakes. In addition, community cohesion can also be strengthened, as the presence of urban shared areas offers an abundance of platform for social interactions among residents and venues for community events as well as festivals.
On the other hand, I am convinced that not every town or city can manage to operate public areas. To specify, the implementation of multi-coding shared areas should align with the urban development patterns. For instance, Hung Yen, a town with a focus on industrial development, might prioritize its land fund to construct companies and factories.
To recapitulate, while there are justifications for supporting the development of public areas, I would contend that it is not a feasible option for parts of each country.