Some people think that the best way to reduce spent in travelling to work is to replace parks and gardens close to the city centre with apartment buildings for commuters, but others disagree.Discuss both views and give your own opinion .

Those who have long distances to travel to offices and schools may well believe that if apartment blocks built near to commercial and business hubs would greatly reduce both hours wasted and stress. There are though those who favour that central areas should remain surrounded by green areas. My opinion leans strongly with those who hold the latter view. As it is noted some argue that placing apartment buildings near the centre is surely convenient for the commuter.

For example

, they do not need to take subways or walk far to offices, stores, shops and other places of business.

However

, but building too many apartments near the city centre makes problems for those in the middle,

for instance

, given the concentration of roads near to urban areas, both businesses and people will suffer heavy traffic jams during rush hours, which result in creating lengthy delays.

Therefore

, easily proving hardly the best way to reduce the time spent in travelling.

Conversely

, viewing

this

from the perspective of replacing parks and gardens with high-rises means workers will have no places to relax, and the environment deteriorates and in turn for those who work there suffer a detrimental effect on their productivity.

Besides

, compared with apartments, centrally placed pleasant open spaces creates positive effects on the city’s environment and attitude on those whose employment is situated. In conclusion, replacing gardens and parks with apartments is not the best method to save people’s time travelling to work, it will have a negative effect and harm the city’s environment, those who work in central areas and the outcome is the city being subject to traffic jams increasing time wasting rather than reducing it.