Some cities create new housing for their growing populations by constructing a smaller number of high-rise buildings. Other cities create more of low-rise buildings. Which solution is better, in your opinion?
As the global population is ballooning at a rapid rate, providing shelter to this increasing population is one of the biggest challenges faced by numerous nations today. Whereas some cities opt for constructing skyscrapers to accommodate its residents, others still prefer traditional fewer-story residential complex. This essay will argue that constructing high-rise buildings is superior as it would result in better utilization of available land and affordable housing.
Practically, building skyscrapers is the only way to solve numerous intractable problems related to housing. Firstly, since such buildings can consist of multiple stories, they would result in better utilization of available land on which are built on. Burj Khalifa, for instance, have approximately 100 stories which can accommodate thousands of people yet occupying a few yards on the ground. Thus, this kind of architecture is necessary to combat housing issues in cities where land scarcity is becoming a grave concern for governments. In addition to this, because high-rise buildings usually have hundreds of apartments, builders provide affordable mortgage agreements especially when one is opting for the top-floor apartments. In this way, these structures not only save the most valuable asset which is land but also provides cost-effective homes to its residents.
On the other hand, if cities continue to opt for fewer-story buildings, the scenario will remain unchanged. Apparently, these buildings cannot accommodate thousands of people as their multiple-stories counterparts can. Owing to which construction of more low-rise structures will continue that is not going to exacerbate the issue of land scarcity. Take Old Delhi, as an example, this part of Delhi was built upon the traditional low-rise building architecture as a consequence of which new residents have to live away from it simply because there is no land available for construction now. Such examples speak volumes about how inefficient approach it is.
In conclusion, constructing sky-high buildings is the most viable solution to provide realistically priced shelter to city residents while putting less stress on the available land resources.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, firstly, if, so, still, thus, whereas, while, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1882.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 329.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.72036474164 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25891501996 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16446219926 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.598784194529 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 575.1 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.8732457999 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.466666667 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9333333333 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.6 7.06120827912 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.300215350733 0.244688304435 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0941986470639 0.084324248473 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0525339989208 0.0667982634062 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190338291444 0.151304729494 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0348625584189 0.056905535591 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.0946893788 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.9 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.57 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.