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.
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. Thus, if authorities consider taking same action in the opposite side of the city, they should deal with above problems as well.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, then, thus, well, for example, 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 : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1952.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 376.0 441.139720559 85% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1914893617 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40348946061 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97257629397 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 204.123752495 81% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.438829787234 0.468620217663 94% => OK
syllable_count: 634.5 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.8468021619 57.8364921388 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.444444444 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8888888889 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.05555555556 5.70786347227 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.376448244802 0.218282227539 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124543301952 0.0743258471296 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0699055742585 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231938424411 0.128457276422 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0695374404979 0.0628817314937 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 98.500998004 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.