In a myriad of confusing cultures around the world, the rapid increase in population is posing the demand for residential buildings. It is often argued that new housing infrastructure should be built in existing cities, while others argue that building these in residential areas in rural regions will provide more advantages. I agree more with the former perspective, and reasons will be explained in this essay.
To begin with, the development of residential complexes in urban areas could offer many significant benefits. Big cities and towns already possess current social facilities and public systems, which contribute significantly to reduce the cost of construction and facilitate effective land allocation. In addition, many citizens nowadays tend to migrate to large cities, so constructing residential buildings in current cities also helps to tackle the root of housing shortage effectively.
Furthermore, expanding housing buildings in urban regions could help to reduce urban sprawl in the countryside. When urbanization is mitigated, a considerable amount of agricultural land will be protected, thereby assisting in ensuring food security to maintain social stability as a whole.
However, new houses should also be constructed in the countryside due to some merits. Rural regions often have more undeveloped land, which can be used to build new residential infrastructure. Unlike big cities, building more houses may worsen urban overcrowding, traffic congestion, and environmental pollution.
In conclusion, I believe that constructing new houses in current large cities may have advantages that outweigh the downsides. Nevertheless, new housing infrastructure should also be allocated to rural areas, helping with the pressure on big urban regions.