It is a topic of debate for a while as a set of people put forward the idea of replacing the open areas with high-rise residential buildings to cut the travel time of city commuters, while others oppose this idea. I too firmly withstand the latter viewpoint. The aim of this essay is to discuss both the point of views in details before reaching a reasoned conclusion.
The proponents of erecting apartment and flats, and replacing parks and gardens consider that it would help to ease the life of commuters. The fact is that millions get on to the roads on daily bases to reach their workplaces, and an average dweller of mega cities waste 1 to 2 hours commuting to and from work. It is not just a waste of time that can be utilized in a more productive manner but also the discharge of toxic fumes from vehicle is polluting the air which is posing a serious threat to the health of inhabitants. As per an official report, skyscraper constructed at a plot of an average sized park can accommodate 1000 families which can result in a substantial cut in the amount of time invested along with traffic and pollution.
However, the opponents believe this approach would engender numerous problems, hence, should be managed differently. Needless to say, midtowns are full of hustle and bustle where people come for enjoyment too. For instance, shopping malls, clubs, pubs, casinos here attract millions which means people living around would always be disturbed with the noises around. In addition, parks and gardens are not only health-giving to the visitors but also offer a platform to socially interact with others and appreciate the natural beauty.
After analysing both views, I have reached to the conclusion, urgent steps need to be taken to reduce the travel time in mega cities but it should not be compromised with nature. In fact, work from home, rapid transit system and other options are more viable in order to facilitate travellers.