Nowadays, the development and the growth of cities need the creation of new areas with various facilities for people. It is widely discussed whether it is relevant to use these spaces more for parks than housing. From my point of view the saving of parks can bring numerous advantages for the population and cities.
Firstly, new buildings for living are utterly vital due to the fact of the increase of population which need more homes. This implies that the number of people in cities rises because of plenty of possibilities, such as work or study. Consequently, these individuals wish for new housing facilities for life. What is more, the availability to live near all substantial areas in a city can be excessively productive for the economy of time and money. It means that there is a possibility of not wasting a lot of hours and not squandering money for transportation, especially in an emergency situation.
On the contrary, parks can assist in fighting air pollution in huge manufacturing areas. For instance, each city or town creates factories, schools, and shops which have an adverse development for the atmosphere, namely air pollution. On the other hand, trees can absorb the impurities in the air and process more clean air which is significant for our breath and, hence, for our health. As a result, the saving and innovating of new nature facilities, such as parks in the above-mentioned case, can demolish or, at least, slow and reduce the air pollution in urban spaces. Moreover, clean air can enhance the health of the population.
All things considered, the demand on housing facilities and attempts to reduce time and expenses for the way to work or study are precisely eminent for the individuals. On the contrary, the air pollution and opportunities to decrease it which can improve the health of people should be more essential for future development of the city and the whole population.