While it is believed by some people that the most effective way to lessen the time spent commuting to an office is to replace parks and gardens extremely near to the city centre with residential buildings for employees who commute to work, others disagree with this development. In this essay, I will explain both arguments and express my opinion in the conclusion.
To begin with, the former argument of constructing apartments for travelling office workers by demolishing parks and gardens which are next to city centres. This is a reasonable debate from the point of view of the employees who travel to their workplace on a regular basis. Owing to the increased levels of traffic might have made them debate this approach. For example, in New ,Delhi it is almost taking 2 hours to travel approximately 10 kilometres due to heavy traffic in the main cities.
Although the former view is a valid one, that cannot be made effective in the cost of environmental damage. Demolishing public gardens and parks can cause serious effects on the environment, it can lead to increased pollution levels, climate change and floods. Besides, an increase in pollutants, results in health hazards such as cancer, and other lung-related issues for city pupils. For instance, many scientific articles published this theory, which is also proved in the twenty-first century. Therefore, there should be other alternative methods to solve traffic congestion rather than destroying existing recreational facilities.
In conclusion, even though traffic congestion is a serious problem, I think they should be some other alternative methods to improve it rather than causing additional damage by destroying parks and gardens. If governments come up with a different procedure to tackle this matter, that would control serious upcoming challenges and damage.