Urban sprawl is an increasing issue around the world. One way in which to solve this issue is to construct cities vertically rather than horizontally. Are such cities a good idea?
The importance of sprawling, which is always debatable, has now become more controversial. The substantial influence of urban sprawl has sparked contention over the potential impact of this trend in recent years. Some people suggest that the solution to this issue is to manufacture cities vertically rather than horizontally. This essay will elaborate that constructing the cities in an upward direction is essentially a brilliant idea and will lead to a logical conclusion.
Firstly, there are numerous reasons why building the houses on top of one another can be beneficial, but the most conspicuous one stems from the fact that it can save a lot of green space. Furthermore, increased green zones are immensely positive for climate. As an illustration, according to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment, which discovered that creating tall buildings are tremendously valuable for saving animals and forests. Thus, constructing cities vertically plays a vital role in saving the environment.
Secondly, the key justification for upholding this notion is rooted in the fact that vertical towns could be a compelling step for boosting the economy. For instance, research conducted by a prestigious organization has asserted that the global economy was increased by an average of five percent when houses are constructed vertically. Thus, constructing vertical buildings plays an imperative role in financial interests.
From what has been discussed above, it can be concluded that the role of vertical houses is optimistic and it can help in resolving the issue of urban sprawling. Not only it is a favorable idea for saving the planet from global warming, but also it can improve the financial condition of people around the world. Therefore, I profoundly believe that building vertical cities is an excellent idea.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... vital role in saving the environment. Secondly, the key justification for upho...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.5418719212 161% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 6.10837438424 131% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 5.94088669951 202% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 31.9359605911 85% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.75862068966 226% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1586.0 1207.87684729 131% => OK
No of words: 293.0 242.827586207 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41296928328 5.00649968141 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10670579058 2.71678728327 114% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 139.433497537 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580204778157 0.580463131201 100% => OK
syllable_count: 498.6 379.143842365 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.65517241379 55% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 12.6551724138 111% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.6135609087 50.4703680194 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.285714286 104.977214359 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9285714286 20.9669160288 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.78571428571 7.25397266985 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 6.9802955665 201% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 2.91625615764 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.329877441705 0.242375264174 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107275465497 0.0925447433944 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0812635563895 0.071462118173 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.19004012083 0.151781067708 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0866456743162 0.0609392437508 142% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 12.6369458128 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.1260098522 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.9458128079 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 11.5310837438 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.64 8.32886699507 116% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 55.0591133005 169% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.94827586207 116% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.5123152709 95% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.