Some people believe that to reduce the time people spend commuting, parks and gardens close to city centres should be replaced by apartment buildings. Others disagree with this idea. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Sample 1 Some People Believe that To Reduce the Time People Spend Commuting
People have a different view concerning replacing green areas (gardens and parks) with the working place. While some believe that community playgrounds near the metropolitan must be altered with the office, others feel it is unnecessary. Also, I think it should not be done because it is the main place for social gatherings and releasing stress.
On the one hand, many reasons people believe the green place near the city should be replaced. First, it saves up-down time and reduces the number of traffic on the road during peak hours because more people use the pavements to reach the office. Ultimately, it helps to save the environment. The second one, people can save the cost and time of commuting, which aid them in enhancing their productive time in the office. Thus, alteration of the public area with working place is useful.
On the other hand, those who believe the above idea is not worthy of providing their view. Firstly, those places are the main source of social gatherings. People may spend their spare time with friends and family, which helps them release the anxiety and stress of the whole day. The second one is when the office building comes close to the living place, it negatively influences the environment. For instance, carbon dioxide emissions will be increased with the fume of the factory. Eventually, that change is not effective for anyone, not for people or the atmosphere.
In my opinion, the green area should not be replaced with building at any cost as it is not good for human health and the environment.
In conclusion, although some people feel parkland should be changed with a place to work, other people have a contrary view. I feel the same that replacement is not worth it due to the usefulness of those places in social bonding and saving the environment.
Sample 2 Some People Believe that To Reduce the Time People Spend Commuting
Some people perceive that tourist centres in the metropolitan area should be converted into residential houses to minimize the number of time people spend travelling. On the other hand, some people do not support this view. This essay will discuss both perspectives, and I will give my opinion.
To begin with, the supporting group believed this because people would be close to their destinations and traffic be brought down to a low level. When houses replace parks and gardens in the city’s centre, people will be proximal to the most visited places like workplaces, shops, and religious centres. Consequently, less time will be required to get to these places since they are stone thrown away. Also, traffic will be reduced since the major means of transportation will be trekking. Therefore, fewer commuters will be on the road, so traffic will be less. Secondly, the opposing group are against this idea because havens and gardens contribute positively to the climate and are important for relaxation.
The scenery of tourist centres helps improve the weather condition of a place and promotes visitors’ relaxation. For example, trees and green plants found in gardens expire oxygen that is important to human living. Similarly, the cool air they provide has a calming effect on the body, thereby reducing stress.
In conclusion, changing playgrounds to housing areas have benefits and consequences. However, I think the best location for parks and gardens is the city centre so that it can be accessible to people and improve the weather because most air pollution occurs in the city centre. Therefore, replacing them with houses is like sacrificing the environment for time management.
Follow Us on IELTSFever Twitter for more updates