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

The debate about whether to construct residences in the downtown area removing parks and gardens to reduce the lengthy commutes has been ongoing for many years. Some people believe that

this

approach is the best way to reduce the amount of travelling time for commuters

while

others disagree.

This

essay will explore the views from both sides and my own opinion in the end. On the one hand, those who advocate for building apartments in the busy centre in place of public green areas debate that

this

method will help employees get to their workplaces more quickly and efficiently.

Moreover

, some proponents argue that

this

strategy can

also

help to lessen traffic congestion and air pollution, as the distance between offices and houses will become within walking distance.

On the other hand

, people who oppose

this

way of solution insist that public parks are vital for urban life, providing residents with access to green spaces and fresh air. Replacing those areas with residential buildings will have a negative impact on the environment and the quality of life for those living in business suburbs.

For instance

, deforestation, which involves the removal of trees, is one of the major contributors to global warming.

Therefore

, protecting existing plants and planting new trees are important strategies for mitigating the effects of climate change. In my opinion, even though shortening commutes time is an important issue, it is

also

equally crucial to maintain the existing green areas and the quality of life for urban people. In conclusion, replacing gardens close to the core city with apartment buildings may seem appealing to some extent, but it is not a sustainable solution in the long term.