Some cities create housing areas by providing taller buildings. Others create housing by building houses on a wider area of land. What solution is better?
The construction of a city's buildings differs from one country to another. There are cities which decide to build high buildings, like skyscrapers, while there are some which create smaller buildings but in a wider part of the land. Although there are merits and dismerits of each choice, I think that expanding cities upwards is a better solution.
Some would argue that tall cities present challenges for their inhabitants, and they do not offer a better quality of life like a spread-out city. Condensed urban ureas with lots of tall apartments blocks, like New York City or Shanghai, are famously difficult to live in due to effects of overcrowding on sanitation, safety, and traffic conditiions. In contrast, decentralised cities like Los Angeles allow for the development of unique individual neighborhoods, more space for residental construction and a reduction of urban issues. Individuals living in these cities often report a greater feeling of satisfaction and many emigrate to such cities because of the better living conditions.
However, those in favour of taller buildings can logically point out the resultant advantages for the area around a city. It is often hard to check the growth of economically important cities that can lead to massive urban sprawl, as in the case around Mexico City. By building more skyscrapers, the surroundings area can be preserved or used in another way. Pristine natural lands can be designated as national parks. If the city requires more food to feed its population, there could be proximately located farms with fast delivery times. This land can also be turned into quiet suburban towns to give residents the choice of raising a family outside the city and still earning a good wage and having access to cultural benefits of large metropolises.
In conclusion, horizontal cities facilitate more positive living conditions, but taller cities make more sense in the modern world.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-12-17 | buiminhduc | 11 | view |
| 2021-12-17 | buiminhduc | 11 | view |
| 2021-07-17 | lilin_ | 84 | view |
| 2021-06-18 | rafsanfardin | 56 | view |
| 2021-05-23 | Awadhesh Mourya | 78 | view |
- In the past people lived in one place for a long time but now they can live in many different places what are the reasons Is this a positive or negative development 84
- The bar chart shows the percentage of the total world population in 4 countries in 1950 and 2003 and projections for 2050 73
- Rich countries often give money to poorer countries but it does not solve poverty Therefore developed countries should give other types of help to the poor countries rather than financial aid To what extent do you agree or disagree 47
- Buying things on the Internet such as books air tickets and groceries is becoming more and more popular Do the advantages of shopping in this way outweigh the disadvantages Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own kn 73
- Some cities create housing areas by providing taller buildings Others create housing by building houses on a wider area of land What solution is better 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 301, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'surroundings'' or 'surrounding's'?
Suggestion: surroundings'; surrounding's
...City. By building more skyscrapers, the surroundings area can be preserved or used in anothe...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, still, while, i think, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1628.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 311.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2347266881 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8718812917 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.627009646302 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 516.6 506.74238477 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.2097990587 49.4020404114 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.285714286 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2142857143 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.06120827912 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20853921188 0.244688304435 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0731245821823 0.084324248473 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.061000305107 0.0667982634062 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126797945865 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0722976317747 0.056905535591 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.4159519038 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.