Some cities create housing for growing populations by building taller buildings while other cities have opted to build on wider areas of land.
Which solution is better?
In this day and age, cities are expanding upward to respond to urbanization. Some people suppose this method is beneficial while others assume that it is better to expand horizontally. On balance, I tend to believe vertical buildings have greater advantages.
To begin with, building skyscrapers is a measure to make room for other infrastructure of the city. By constructing taller buildings that provide accommodations for residence, other spaces will be taken advantage of for park construction as well as public services or infrastructures. Besides, surplus land can be used to build organic farms that provide healthy food for the city’s population. This land, otherwise, can be used to create playgrounds for children or natural places for families. California, for instance, builds skyscrapers on the half sides and uses the other sides for planting trees.
The second good point of the vertical city is that it is more safety and convenience for people in different ways. With the rapidly increasing trend of population, there would be no place for mankind to settle down. Therefore, apartments help to satisfy housing demand, provide better and greater accommodations for residence. Moreover, it is undeniable that apartments for housing have safeguards so that house owners can feel safe since their houses are protected all the time. This approach is completely suitable for high-density cities such as Hong Kong, Shenzhen, or New York City, where people can find a comfortable house as well as finding a sense of safety.
In conclusion, even though people believe horizontal cities could facilitate people at a certain level. However, vertical cities are more suitable for the escalating pattern of population and urbanization.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, however, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, well, while, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 41.998997996 64% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1478.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 273.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41391941392 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03075426705 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.619047619048 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 463.5 506.74238477 91% => 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: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.4704309933 49.4020404114 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.5333333333 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2 20.7667163134 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.73333333333 7.06120827912 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => 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: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.349774618332 0.244688304435 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114168410907 0.084324248473 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0477938772656 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192218149736 0.151304729494 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0630443563738 0.056905535591 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.0946893788 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.