2019-04-06: Task 2

Some think the best way to reduce time people spending traveling to work is to replace the parks and gardens close to the city centers with apartment buildings where commuter can live, while others disagree.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Concentration of corporate hubs in major cities has aggravated the issue of road traffic management. Construction of residential properties in the open public spaces near the center of city could provide resolution as mooted by some, on the other hand some sections of society oppose this idea. This essay will discuss both the views and will opine why this will not be a great idea.
Firstly, developing a housing community near the workplace for a majority of professionals will soothe the stress levels, as they have to travel a meager distance. This will in turn lead to softening of traffic congestion and lower consumption of fuel. Thus, control on pollution and green house gas emissions. In addition to these benefits, masses will have more personal time. For instance, a recent survey by Care foundation in four metro cities found that humans residing in proximity to their workplace have less lifestyle disorders as compared to others.
On the other hand, open spaces like gardens and parks are the lifeline of cities. They act like refreshment centers. The flora and fauna enables natural environment that provides fresh and recyclable air. Furthermore, it enhances healthy lifestyle specially among the kids and elders who loves to flourish in outdoor environment. It leads to overall development when public in general come out of their houses and socialize. This is the real essence of healthy living.
To summarize, in my opinion it is not a feasible idea to convert parks into concrete jungle. Other alternatives like cycling paths and public transport initiatives should be incentivized for smooth movement of passengers. In this way we can secure a better future.