In many cities there are area of lands that are used as parks,with increasing population levels,these areas would be better used to provide more housing. Do you agree or disagree? Give reasons for your answers and include relevant any examples from your knowledge and experience

Open spaces should be allocated for more residence due to outburst of excessive population where open yards are used as parks for recreation. I firmly disagree with this prior statement. In this forthcoming essay, i am going to highlight the causative factors behind my beliefs. In one camp, green areas are a large scale of traction for city dwellers. The pollution made by vehicles, industries and the burning fossil fuels in general is subsided by the preservation of parks. Likewise, perks of having parks is that a great deal of people can expend their leisure period by doing sporting in open areas, walking and relishing the natural view. For instance, the world health organization proclaimed that every town should have 9 square meters of green space for per person for leading sustainable lifestyle. What is more, eldest and juveniles may lead sedentary lifestyle shortage of recreation. Demolition of parks may turn the metropolitan into desertification and it negatively affects on food production, livelihood and provision of other ecosystems. With the growing population in many countries, majority people are leaving rural areas for a better lifestyle where city’s are becoming congested due to developing infrastructure of urbanization. some local government are willing to reassign these areas for accommodation. Hence, a good initiative can be taken to mitigate the repercussions is to create rooftop garden. To cite an example, in many developed cities people keep indoor plants and cultivate on their backyard. Most importantly, authorities should impede the migration of influx villagers towards city by strengthen the amenities in countryside. To recapitulate, there are innumerable potential factors supporting the idea of yards should be conserved against the real estate market. it’s contrary can be overlooked. on the grounds of this, I hold radically opposite view with the provided statement.