Some people think that city planner should consider creating more green spaces and planting trees, while others argue that they should focus on building new homes. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

People

are calling into question that more green parks and trees should be settled in detrimental areas. While some advocate that it is necessary to build new homes

instead

. Both sides of the argument present rational ideas which will be elaborated along with my own take on the matter. on the one hand, having green and flourishing areas take priority in some

people

's opinion. The most compelling reason is that green space and having an array of trees would expand the air quality. To put it differently, with the extension of air quality the ecosystem gets freshened up which have a direct result on peoples quality of life.

This

is clearly delineated in cities near rainforests

such

as Belem in Brazil,

people

are less likely to have heart disease in these cities.

Moreover

,

this

concern is definitely environment-friendly and non-polluting, leading to securing the health of our younger generation.

However

, others support the idea of having built more residential areas in these spaces.

To begin

with, the housing issue has always been ubiquitous and

people

are very susceptible to threats posed by being homeless. Under

this

circumstance, more affordable houses

such

as studios could be made to not only accommodate more

people

but

also

develop the urban sprawl. A good illustration of

this

is the 60 feet micro-studio in New York City

that is

budget-friendly and can fit in more

people

. Simply put, all walks of life Would be able to accommodate their needs even the proletariat whose desires have been suppressed. to conclude, there are logical points on both sides;

however

, I am of the opinion that having planted more and more fresh trees when it comes to

people

's health. It seems to be unreasonable to put the environment in jeopardy by generating more houses.