Nowadays, people travel from suburbs to city for work and the time spending on commute has been increased from past years. While there are some arguments in replacing the park and garden in the city center with apartment buildings, I totally disagree with this opinion and the commute time can be deducted in several ways.
On the one hand, city parks and gardens play a vital role in both the environment and urban culture. It's doubtless that afforestation can improve the living condition and provide a relaxing spot for all the residents living around. Without the parks, workers may feel depressed when they can only see the "concrete jungles". Meanwhile, parks can be the landmark of the city and bring economic benefit. For instance, Central Park is in the center of New York Manhattan. It appeals to a lot of tourists from worldwide to visit it every year. People who work in Manhattan can take exercise or admire the scenery for different seasons in Central Park.
On the other hand, I think there are other ways to tackle the problem. First and foremost, with the development of technology, people can work from home and perform the same functionality as they work in the office. This could save tons of commute time and people can take more exercise. Secondly, government and train operating companies can set more express lines for people who live outside of the city. It can hugely cut down the traveling time by stopping in fewer stops. Thirdly, companies can move away from the city center and hire employees from local places. In this way, it would not only benefit the local economy and provide employment, but also reduce the commute time for local residents.
In conclusion, parks and gardens serve an indispensable role in the city environment. Government and companies can take actions to improve the commute situation.
Nowadays,
people
travel from suburbs to city for
work
and the
time
spending on commute has
been increased
from past years. While there are
some
arguments in replacing the
park
and garden in the city center with apartment buildings, I
totally
disagree with this opinion and the commute
time
can
be deducted
in several ways.
On the one hand, city
parks
and gardens play a vital role in both the environment and urban culture. It's doubtless that afforestation can
improve
the living condition and provide a relaxing spot for all the residents living around. Without the
parks
, workers may feel depressed when they can
only
see
the
"
concrete jungles
"
. Meanwhile,
parks
can be the landmark of the city and bring economic benefit.
For instance
, Central
Park
is in the center of New York Manhattan. It appeals to
a lot of
tourists from worldwide to visit it every year.
People
who
work
in Manhattan can take exercise or admire the scenery for
different
seasons in Central Park.
On the other hand
, I
think
there are other ways to tackle the problem.
First
and foremost, with the development of technology,
people
can
work
from home and perform the same functionality as they
work
in the office. This could save tons of commute
time
and
people
can take more exercise.
Secondly
,
government
and train operating
companies
can set more express lines for
people
who
live
outside of
the city. It can
hugely
cut
down the traveling
time
by stopping in fewer
stops
.
Thirdly
,
companies
can
move
away from the city center and hire employees from local places. In this way, it would not
only
benefit the local economy and provide employment,
but
also
reduce
the commute
time
for local residents.
In conclusion
,
parks
and gardens serve an indispensable role in the city environment.
Government
and
companies
can take actions to
improve
the commute situation.