The role of building housing areas remains a topic of a significant debate in recent time. While some cities create it by making buildings taller, others create it by making more buildings on a wider area of land. This essay aims to consider both views and give arguments in favor of the latter.
With regard to the primary opinion, there are cities, that make housing by creating a higher constructions, which provides more space for different goods. In other words, this can free up space for shops, hospitals or schools for those who will live there. By locating all goods closer to them, their lifes will be easier. Moreover, the more free space in the city, the more infrastructure can be developed. For instance, different parks, museams or fountains can be built instead of wider houses.
Turning to the secondary opinion, some cities make housing by creating buildings on a wider place without overloading the ground, which is a benefit because it guarantees no destruction during earthquakes. To elaborate, the first layer of the ground is not that reliable in some cities to create high houses because any movement of the tectonic plates may cause a fall of high constructions. It happens due to the fact that it is too heavy to stay and will fall with higher probability than lower buildings. A standout example of this may be restrictons in Vietnam about creating houses no higher than five floors building, which provides a safety to all inhabitants. I firmly believe that this solution is better because it is more secure, which is more important.
To conclude, creation a higher housing area provides more free space for some goods. On the other hand, creating wider houses guarantees a safety, which i believe, is more crucial.