Thanks to the comprehensive urban renewal program, the city of Transopolis did successfully revitalize, with its current prosperous industrial factories, low crime rates and benefits of property tax revenues for the entire city. Yet, if the authorities plan to apply same program to the opposite side of the city where residential area declines, several issues are required to consider and tackle first.
To begin with, the timing to implement this comprehensive urban renewal program is not exactly the same criteria compared to ten years ago. It may be true that ten years ago the opposite side of the city was suitable for this renewal program. However, abundant conditions have changed since ten years ago, and the current condition is not ideal for the urban renewal program. To illustrate this point, consider the economy for example. Ten years ago, industrials were prosperous. Thus, it is reasonable that the need for industrial factories for production exceeded its supplied counterparts. Consequently, it is feasible to replace a declining residential areas with the construction of several factories. Then, this area started to thrive as the industrial. Nevertheless, nowadays the industrial is not the main stream, and more and more once prosperous factories become abandoned. Hence, the residential area from the opposite side of the city is not suitable for the program.
Moreover, it is not ignorable that the location to apply the renewal program is significant. The reason why the city of Transoppolis succeeded in the program is mainly because it is near the freeway where transportation is convenient. On the contrary, the opposite site of the city locates remotely from the nearest freeway. As a result, if the opposite site of the city is implemented with the urban renewal program, the doomed future is not unpredictable for its inconvenience of situated far from the freeway.
Finally, there is still citizens who live in the unoccupied residential area. If authorities insist to take similar action of using the renewal program, they have to consider a solution to convince citizens to move away from their homeland, which is of difficulty. For instance, it is necessary the authorities to contrive a plan to relocate those citizens. Besides, for citizens, they will be persuaded to move only if the benefit to move away outweigh its costs of staying in their original home. Therefore, authorities should tackle with this issue of top priority if they plan to use the same program to the opposite site of the city.
In conclusion, it is not plausible to apply identical comprehensive urban renewal program to the area where resident rate is declining on the opposite site of the city, for the timing of implementation is not feasible as ten years ago, and for the location where it is far away from the freeway. Apart from these conditions, the citizens who live in the unoccupied residential area are also an intractable issue to solve. Thus, if authorities consider taking same action in the opposite side of the city, they should deal with above problems as well.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 10, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are still citizens'?
Suggestion: there are still citizens
...ituated far from the freeway. Finally, there is still citizens who live in the unoccupied residential ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, consequently, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, still, then, therefore, thus, well, apart from, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as a result, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 55.5748502994 131% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2591.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 504.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14087301587 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73813722054 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.928081405 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.422619047619 0.468620217663 90% => OK
syllable_count: 851.4 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.5928746184 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.958333333 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.625 5.70786347227 169% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.340627379559 0.218282227539 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10237002358 0.0743258471296 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0720485127652 0.0701772020484 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.197794617703 0.128457276422 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0895969206249 0.0628817314937 142% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 98.500998004 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.