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

It is true that many big cities in the world are facing the housing scarcity due to the bloom of population. There are several issues to solve the problem: either by erecting high buildings or increasing a number of villas in the outskirts. I will shed some light on the merits of the

first

solution to prove my support in

this

essay. On the one hand, building tower is the crucial idea in saving the cities’ area

that is

filled with bottlenecks in terms of transportation and overpopulation.

For example

, a skyscraper in the capital of developing country only occupy about 1000 m2 of area but it is provided numerous apartments for a thousand of households.

In addition

, the high- rise buildings designing with modern facilities

such

as swimming pool, gym center make residents feel pleasure and convenient.

Besides

, from the top of high-rise buildings, people have a chance to enjoy the landscape of cities, but

also

get eccentric experiences. If standing on the 81st floor of Keangnam

that is

one of the top landmarks in Hanoi, tourists can see the historical figures of breathtaking views. On other hand, if individuals want to own villas, the city authorities will be hard to find where are new houses locate because land area is limited.

Furthermore

, citizens

also

hope to the growth of infrastructure systems (road, electricity) or public amenities (hospitals, schools or parks) aim to enhance their life qualities. Following that, it is difficult to tackle two opposite needs simultaneously. In conclusion, the need of accommodation for huge citizen may be to solve via constructing the higher building alternative spending money on constructing houses that should be disappeared in the urban.