Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Contemporarily, the use of private vehicles increasingly influences modern society, especially in the inner city. As the product of industrialization, the automobile is rapidly affecting daily life with its dexterity and convenience. Meanwhile, despite its merits, issues related to the environment have emerged. Research by Chesterton (2018) points out there are 1.4 billion cars on the road, which means private vehicles account for 18%. The private vehicles in this essay could be defined as a transportation tool which is not available for use by the general public, it belongs to personal property and is widely used for commuting or travel. This essay will discuss whether or not individual cars should be prohibited in city centers since air pollution has many side effects on physical and mental health and is often caused by cars; parking area will take up space that could have been used for more important buildings; however, if private cars are banned, commuting will probably cause the problem.
Firstly, the inner cities’ automobiles should be banned because it will directly cause air pollution. In recent years, Urban Heat Island (UHI) has aroused wide concern. Recent studies illustrate that a more accurate range is between 5 and 15 degrees (Mohajerani et al., 2017). Akbari and Taha (2001) point out the most significant cause of UHI is urbanization. Therefore, an increasing number of cars are the main contributor to the heat island effect. Simultaneously, the worse environment could directly influence physical and mental health. A classic example is the London smog in 1952. It is widely believed that the first Industrial Revolution required large quantities of coal, which caused deadly smog in London. Additionally, Rao (2014) states that the environmental problem caused by haze is extremely remarkable when the wind is low and the inversion layer is fully developed. The Ministry of Health’s committee (as cited in Rao, 2014) estimated that the respiratory diseases accounted for 59 % of the increase in deaths. Hence, due to the sudden increase of cars in London the UHI effect and air pollution are out of control. City dwellers are suffering from this terrible air condition. On the other hand, restricting vehicles in the city center is the most effective way to solve UHI and air problems. Therefore, it could be concluded that individual cars should be prohibited in the inner city because it causes air pollution which has many side effects on physical and mental health.
Furthermore, individual cars should be restricted in the inner city because parking areas will occupy a wealth of public resources is. On the one hand, a green belt and giant shopping centers are much more important for the inner city. They will not only purify environment but also stimulate the economic growth. Automobiles usually spend 80% of their time parked at home, 4% in motion, and 16% parked outside, most likely in the urban areas (Ison & Mulley, 2014). As a result of this, inner cities should provide plenty of space for daily parking needs. At the same time, with the growth of population and the development of industrialization, shopping centers, and green belt become more important in big cities. In the 1970s, the open and public spaces have stimulated the rapid construction of shopping centers to replace the traditional street shopping trend (Grube-Cavers & Sánchez, 2014). Abaza (2001) believes that role of urban malls is the construction and reproduction of culture. Building the shopping center is much more important for parking areas. Meanwhile, the green belt also contributes to the city design. This is supported by Taylor (2010) who reports that green belt is a valuable resource if managed effectively, the green belt will to a large extent help combat climate change, provide health and fresh environment for the public, and support wildlife. Take, for example, New York’s Central Park. It is designed for resort, leisure, and recreation. Although Central Park faces a $38 billion budget deficit in the next several years, its contribution to society is undeniable, such as mitigating the urban heat island effect, purifying air, and noise reduction. Most importantly, Central Park has become a New York landmark, it has boosted the tourism industry. Hence, private cars should be limited in the inner city, and parking area should be used to build more meaningful buildings, such as shopping centers and Central Park.
Finally, on the other hand, if private vehicles are banned from entering the inner city, workers should take public transportation, such as rail and bus. It is widely believed that restricting private cars in cities will push great pressure on public transport and to a large extent bring inconvenience to the workers. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 2016), figures from New South Wales state show that 84.7% of households own at least one car, while 9% did not. This is further supported by Silva & Lightfoot (2010) who also found using public transport to commute is only 13.2%. For example, in Melbourne, this situation is more widespread. As the State Government of Victoria (as cited in ABS, 2006) mentions, “Over the 90% of households in Melbourne just within 400m of public transport service”. Therefore, compared with public transportation, personal vehicles are more popular for commuters. Furthermore, in order to accurately calculate the distance traveled by car, Google Maps usually show that driving to work is the most convenient route (Australasian Railway Association [ARA], 2015). Meanwhile, if prohibiting individual cars run in the inner city, it means public transport and service need to completely cover the whole city, which means the government should increase the budget in building public stations. ARA (2015) illustrates that the NSW government spends $8.3 billion to build North-South Railway and announces to provide $4 billion in improving the Sydney light rail. Therefore, public transport cannot satisfy daily requirements, such as commuting and travel. Personal vehicles are not only flexible but also highly mobile, so individual cars should not be banned in the inner city.
In conclusion, this essay has discussed whether or not the private cars should be banned for the inner city via three main perspectives which are the environmental effect by cars in the downtown; parking area could be used for more meaningful buildings; and more importantly, individuals’ automobiles will to a large extent convenience daily commute compared with public transport. Lastly, with the information mentioned in this essay, the merits of banning personal cars for the inner city outweigh its disadvantages. Therefore, it could be concluded that personal cars should be prohibited in center city, because it is not environment friendly and probably takes up many of public resources. Building a livable, convenient, and healthy city is the top priority for the government in the long term.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.