One school of thought holds that living in a low-rise city is ideal, while others believe it would be in high-rise buildings. In this essay, i will closely examine both viewpoints before concluding that i agree with the latter.
On the one hand, settling in sprawling city can offer certain environmental and safety advantages for residents. Firstly, in horizontal urban, citizens often live in houses rather than apartments. Because of that, these available land will be used to construct backyards, playgrounds for their children or small gardens for cultivating plants. Therefore, it will not only create a clearer and more spacious atmosphere but also a chance to get closer to nature. Moreover, when it comes to some emergency situations such as: fires or thefts, it will be more easier to seek help from neighbors or evacuate to the safety zone.
On the other hand, vertical metropolis present greater benefits for the long-term living. First and foremost, unlike the low-rise city, a high-rise ones is dominant by numerous tall buildings and skyscrapers, where can accommodate thousands of households. This will address the issue of land scarcity, adapting the growing population and making way for more parks or conservation places. Furthermore, these type of buildings often integrate commercial and recreational facilities such as: restaurants, shopping malls or leisure areas. As a result, residents can save time on commuting to another places. For example, Ecopark, a mixed-used building in VietNam, where residents can entertain, go shopping or eating out within a single place.
In conclusion, while the low-rise urban offer certain advantages, i still believe that the high-rise ones can solve the shortage of lands and create a convenient life for their residents.