Task 2: 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 buildings or expanding the cities' field accompanied with a number of low- rise houses. In

this

essay, I will shed some light on the merits and drawbacks of both solutions to prove my support for the

first

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

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 which 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 or storied houses, the authorities of cities will be hard to find where are new houses locate because land space is limited.

Furthermore

, widenning the urban land

also

cause to spend money on infrastructure systems (road, electricity) or public amenities (hospitals, schools or parks) that make goverment's budget become less. In conclusion, comparing the advantage points cause to result that constructing the higher building is better than spending money on constructing houses for the need of citizens' accommodation.