When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
One cannot just simply agree or disagree to the statement that modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. There are various reasons why some of us would say that modern development is the way to go. But, some of us would completely differ to that. However, I believe that a number of factors should be taken into account before deciding the fate of an old structure that if it is to stay the same or utterly transformed by the erection of a new edifice.
Well, initially in order for a historic structure to be erased by a new development, there should be a complete check of strength, stability and sustainability. It is a very well-known fact that older structures were constructed with utmost purity and without much adulteration of materials and equipment. Hence they turned out to live a longer life. I can refer to a personal example of my old home being demolished in order to construct a new building, because the family was expanding and we required more space. The workers that came to dismantle the building took longer than they thought because the building had such good strength. Even now half of the building still exists and stays erect firmly without any danger. My point is if an old build out could be modified, renovated and fresco-ed into a lively structure there should be measures taken to do it, because I believe that they continue to go on forever and they have sentimental values and memories attached to it. I adored my old home so much and I literally cried and still have tears in my eyes every time I think of the time there.
On the other hand, if nothing could be done about and old building that is wrecking by the day and doing nothing but imperiling the lives of people using it or passing by it, then there should be replaced by a new more sustainable establishment from which people can benefit from and that is not a danger to the lives. Yet, I also believe that some historical buildings hold a certain amount of cultural heritage and monumental importance to a city or country. Therefore, every effort should be exhausted to preserve such memorial structures because in turn they become a source of tourist attraction and generation of foreign revenue.
To conclude, I think that before giving preference to a modern development, one should look at the possible options to recreate and renovate and old place and should not disregard the factor of solidity that comes from an old construction, and if nothing conforms then a modern construction for modern purposes should be preferred.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 307, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...dulteration of materials and equipment. Hence they turned out to live a longer life. ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, look, so, still, then, therefore, well, i think, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2140.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 446.0 442.535393258 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.79820627803 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5955099915 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75930910266 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 215.323595506 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529147982063 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 685.8 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.1730404753 60.3974514979 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.75 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.875 23.4991977007 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0625 5.21951772744 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.285707655233 0.243740707755 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0844506487577 0.0831039109588 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0862881147107 0.0758088955206 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185774719815 0.150359130593 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.047592087833 0.0667264976115 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.1392134831 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.8420337079 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.1743820225 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.86 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.