A group of individuals presents the view that there are several advantages to living in horizontal cities, while others prefer to live in vertical cities. I strongly agree with the former opinion.
On the one hand, some people justifiably argue that horizontal cities can contribute to lower population density. Undeniably, with fewer people living in a neighborhood, traffic congestion as well as air pollution would decrease significantly. Another underlying argument in favor of this opinion is that these cities provide people with a pleasant atmosphere to live in. Some spacious buildings possess eye-catching yards that can connect people with nature. By living in these areas, people can spend some quality time with their family members and, in turn, may lead to a greater degree of happiness.
On the other hand, another group of people claims that vertical cities may result in efficient use of land. They firmly insist that these cities may leave more green spaces for the general public. I, however, do not find this argument convincing, as not only may vertical cities occupy a large amount of land, but they can also contribute to overcrowding. This situation is compounded by the fact that once an area has several tall buildings. As a result, these areas are more likely to suffer from traffic congestion and noise pollution in the long run. Undoubtedly, people who live in these cities may be more prone to a wide variety of health problems, such as respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.
To conclude, in my view, living in horizontal cities could yield desirable results, because these areas offer a relaxed atmosphere for unwinding. They can result in lower population and less air pollution in a region as well.