It is often argued that offering tall apartment buildings is the most effective solution to housing shortages in major cities. While I agree that high blocks can help accommodate growing populations, I do not believe they are the best opportunities as a more balanced approach is needed.
On the one hand, there are vast array of advantages to building upwards. Firstly, skyscrapers only need a small piece of land, which is especially important in highly populated urban areas where space is the major and most expansive factor. By housing thousands of peopleon a really small area, cities can save urban area from getting demolished. Secondly, tall apartment blocks are the best decision for a combined area which can include shops, schools, public transport and all modern features, this can improve environment and lower carbon emissions.
On the other hand, relying only on high rise buildings possesses significant drawbacks. Living in tall buildings can negatively affect people’s health due to limited access to green zones, reduced privacy and much less free space for creating cozy atmosphere. Although, such way of builing is thought to be only for wealthy people, alot of families cant aford this type of appartemnts. As far as im concerned, i would offer to combine skyscrappers development in commercial centres with the imporvement of living conditions in subburbs. For expample the development of infrastucture such as public transoprt of moder conveniences.
In conclusion, although tall apartment blocks are the best for government way to increase housing capacity, they are not the only decision.