When cars and cyclists use the same roads, there are often problems.
Why is this the case?
What are the solutions?
Public infrastructure has always been playing a vital role in the development of every society. A number of issues arise during roads utilization by motorists and cyclists simultaniously. This essay will discuss the main sources of this problem as well as propose some feasible approaches to tackle them.
When cars and bicycles occupy road lanes, the conflict of interests unavoidable due to different speed abilities, sizes and behaviour of mentioned transport modes. This means that every car will inevitably be blocked by a cyclist at some point and will not be able to proceed driving with comfortable speed, which is much higher for cars. Therefore, the usage of public roads becomes inefficient for participants that possess faster means of transportation. For example, according to the report of the public authorities of Munich the average speed on city roads diminished after cyclists were allowed to ride on them, which provoced massive delays in the public transport system in 2001. In other words, an equal access to roads for motortransport and bicycles entails uneffectiveness of vehicles.
In order to address the above-mentioned aspect, the public roads should be properly divided between different users. This includes creation of separate cycle lanes between roads and pavements, so cars can easily navigate through cities without being disturbed by slow bicycle users. Hence, the average speed of drivers remain fast, allowing reduction of time of a ride and costs of vehicle maintenace. For instance, introduction of cycle roads in Berlin led to the increase of speed on the roads in the city centre in 2005. Thus, this separation of different types of transport may drastically improve the experience of every participant.
In conclusion, this essay highlighted the primary reasons behind conflicts on the roads and suggested a viable solution to resolve them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 706, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'equal access'.
Suggestion: equal access
...ansport system in 2001. In other words, an equal access to roads for motortransport and bicycle...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, may, so, therefore, thus, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as well as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1596.0 1615.20841683 99% => OK
No of words: 296.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.39189189189 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93824930608 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.60472972973 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 493.2 506.74238477 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.192794412 49.4020404114 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.0 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1428571429 20.7667163134 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.92857142857 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20245327056 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0671366174065 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0398461020054 0.0667982634062 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125926542415 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0109526271653 0.056905535591 19% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.96 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.