The council of Maple County, concerned about the county’s becoming overdeveloped, is debating a
proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the
council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limiting the supply of new housing, could lead
to significant increases in the price of housing in the county. Proponents of the measure note that
Chestnut County established a similar measure ten years ago and its housing prices have
increased only modestly since. However, opponents of the measure note that Pine County adopted
restrictions on the development of new residential housing fifteen years ago, and its housing
prices have since more than doubled. The council currently predicts that the proposed measure, if
passed, will result in a significant increase in housing prices in Maple County.
The council of Maple County is concerned about the hindrance in the county's development by restricting the supply of new housing. On the contrary, they are also concerned about an increase in housing prices due to the restriction. However, their assumption that the price will increase as a result of restriction is based on some unwarranted assumptions, which, to prove their point valid and persuasive need to be clarified.
Firstly, they assume that the county is being overdeveloped and they attribute this phenomenon only to the increase in housing. Maybe the population of the county is growing rapidly, they need more supply of houses that will meet the demand. Due to its good living conditions, more people are migrating to the county from nearby counties. An Increase in housing perhaps is a necessity, not something excessive. If this is the case, then the council's assumption that the county is being overdeveloped will not hold water.
Secondly, proponents of the supporters give a 10 years old example of Chestnut County that took the same approach without an increase in housing prices. The two timelines may not be comparable at all. Maybe 10 years ago the population was much less than today, so the demand for new houses was low. Maybe most of the people of the chestnut county already owned a house, most of them didn't need a new house, thus the demand for new houses was proportionate to the low supply. After 10 years Maple county may face an outcome completely opposite of that faced by Chestnut.
Finally, opponents of the approach also give the example of Pine county where restriction of housing indeed increased the price. Perhaps Pine County was a developing county 15 years ago, people were coming around the country to Pine county to get jb, to have a better living standard. It may also happen that people were more affluent in Pine County so, buying a new house was not a big deal for them.
15 years later there is no guarantee that, Mapple city is going to face the same fate Pine city did.Maybe economy has changed a lot during these 15 years. Perhaps, Mapple county-dwellers are actually moving to nearby cities and demand for housing is actually decreasing. Thus, restriction on housing in Mapple county, may not increase housing prices like it did in Pine county.
The council may not be accurate in their prediction as there is a variety of criteria that were not taking into account while assuming what is going to happen in the future. Further research on people's income, demand on housing, the present price of houses may provide a deep insight into this problem.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 447 350
No. of Characters: 2113 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.598 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.727 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.538 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 156 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.286 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.54 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.34 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.585 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 442, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
...xcessive. If this is the case, then the councils assumption that the county is being ove...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 384, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...nty already owned a house, most of them didnt need a new house, thus the demand for n...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 476, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “After” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...es was proportionate to the low supply. After 10 years Maple county may face an outco...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 101, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Maybe
...ing to face the same fate Pine city did.Maybe economy has changed a lot during these ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, thus, well, while, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2191.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 445.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92359550562 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59293186426 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61327155761 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.476404494382 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 674.1 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.5895924997 57.8364921388 60% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 104.333333333 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1904761905 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.61904761905 5.70786347227 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.12837553091 0.218282227539 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0478921431792 0.0743258471296 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0640095270044 0.0701772020484 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0743536408219 0.128457276422 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0589778644895 0.0628817314937 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.