Band 6+: Write about the following topic: Many major cities are facing a housing crisis as they cannot provide enough land for new buildings. Some local governments believe the problem could be solved by reassigning park land for residential development, because this land would be better used for housing. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

In larger cities, providing land for the construction of new buildings to solve a housing crisis, has become a great concern. Using park land for residential development is considered a solution by some local goverments. Although I think this could be a way to solve the problem, having areas to rest in a city is also important, so I strongly disagree.

Firstly, using park land for the construction of new buildings could benefit the economy of these cities. Additionally, population could grow since more people would have the option to move in. This increase of habitants would bring new bussinessess, which could potentially improve the economy and lifestyle of these regions. For instance, new stores, new bars and new restaurants would bring joy and market movement to the city.

However, taking away green land could have negative results. For many individuals, these areas are needed to disconnect from noise pollution, becoming part of their daily routine to stay calm in the discomfort of a big city. Park lands are normally used for walking, jogging, meditating, taking children to play or simply sitting down to relax after a long work day.

In my opinion, while reassingning park lands could be a solution for housing crisis, it is not worthy to destroy these areas that are greatly appreciated for its populations. Other way to solve this problem would be expanding the cities in their perimetres or building higher skycrapers that can host more individuals. This way, a good balance between increasing population and keeping green spaces, could be kept.