Some cities create housing areas by providing taller building. Others create housing by building houses on a wider area of land. What solution is better?

Nowadays, due to constantly increasing population accommodation demand has increased as well.

Thus

, authorities of some municipal areas tackle

this

issue by constructing high-rise buildings. Meanwhile, there are cities that address it by using a much wider area for construction. In

this

essay, I will consider which solution is more beneficial. On the one side are those residential areas, which are under construction of skyscrapers.

This

approach is suitable for those urban areas where lands are limited, while population-density is high.

Thus

, vertical planning is the best solution for high-density cities because

this

away it is easier to satisfy housing demand and provide infrastructure for it.

For example

, Hong Cong is situated on a group of Islands and the city is one of the most populated cities. On the other side are those built-up areas where citizens prefer to build accommodation in widespread areas.

This

course of action is feasible in case if a city has vast empty lands surrounding it, which can be available and suitable for residential construction.

This

method provides the opportunity to create a balanced environment where low-rise buildings naturally alternate trees and park zones.

In addition

,

this

kind of built-up is more practical and safe in earthquake hazardous regions

such

as my hometown

that is

surrounded by a mountain range. In conclusion, both sides have their merits and there is no better option or one solution for all cities.

This

is because both approaches solve specific problems and proceed from the conditions of an area.