It is thought that spending an excessive amount of money be invested in constructing large outdoor public areas is an absolutely vital for cities and towns. While this goal can contribute to a rise of recreational territories for citizens to relax, I believe that it is better to avoid expending too much funding on it; there are other more crucial things to outlay.
To embark on, having provided more such kind of spaces, the citizens of a certain towns would be able to have a rest in near areas than going to some special spots. In other words, in this workaholic era, people recreate in these places without making long commutes to the spots, where they can have a relaxation. Not only can aforementioned areas supply with only vegetation, but also with distinct sorts of other facilities: museums, exhibitions, concerts and outdoor games. For example, Tashkent City Park, located in Tashkent city, provides individuals with these opportunities. Moreover, it benefits people materially since it is affordable to take part in such outdoor events as opposed to the special Halls. As a result, citizens would have an easy access to an avalanche of facilities and stay frugal.
On the other hand, expenditure on these public spaces hugely provokes to the mitigation of the cost on other issues. That is to stay, should the government pay more attention to the health or poverty –related problems more, it would be expedient due to the fact that a hefty number of humans suffer from being unable to cater their basic needs: healthcare, education and food. Furthermore, the state ought to take into account a trouble of overpopulation; should more lands are occupied by outdoor public spaces, it can be a pitfall as a consequence since it grounds for reduction of spaces for housing. Thus, it is provident to allocate ample investment to the open-air public spaces, encompassing the necessity of tackling other issues.
The conclusion to be drawn is that in some peoples’ opinions it is advantageous to spare more funding support on outdoor public spaces. In my view, it ought to be implemented partly without extra-expenditure, taking into consideration of other troubles.
It is
thought
that spending an excessive amount of money
be invested
in constructing large
outdoor
public
areas is an
absolutely
vital for cities and towns. While this goal can contribute to a rise of recreational territories for citizens to relax, I believe that it is better to avoid expending too much funding on it; there are
other
more crucial things to outlay.
To embark on, having provided more such kind of
spaces
, the citizens of a certain
towns
would be able to have a rest in near areas than going to
some
special spots. In
other
words, in this workaholic era,
people
recreate in these places without making long commutes to the spots, where they can have a relaxation. Not
only
can aforementioned areas supply with
only
vegetation,
but
also
with distinct sorts of
other
facilities: museums, exhibitions, concerts and
outdoor
games.
For example
, Tashkent City Park, located in Tashkent city, provides individuals with these opportunities.
Moreover
, it benefits
people
materially
since it is affordable to
take part
in such
outdoor
events
as opposed to the special Halls.
As a result
, citizens would have
an easy access
to an avalanche of facilities and stay frugal.
On the
other
hand, expenditure on these
public
spaces
hugely
provokes to the mitigation of the cost on
other
issues.
That is
to stay, should the
government
pay more attention to the health or poverty –related problems more, it would be expedient due to the fact that a hefty number of humans suffer from being unable to cater their basic needs: healthcare, education and food.
Furthermore
, the state ought to take into account a trouble of overpopulation; should more lands
are occupied
by
outdoor
public
spaces
, it can be a pitfall as a
consequence since
it grounds for reduction of
spaces
for housing.
Thus
, it is provident to allocate ample investment to the open-air
public
spaces
, encompassing the necessity of tackling
other
issues.
The conclusion to
be drawn
is that in
some
peoples’ opinions it is advantageous to spare more funding support on
outdoor
public
spaces
. In my view, it ought to
be implemented
partly without extra-expenditure,
taking into consideration of
other
troubles.