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 rapidly growing population in many countries results in a lack of housing space, especially in larger cities. Some metropolises react to this rising demand by building enormous houses, whereas others address the issue by expanding the living areas more widely. Which is the more beneficial approach and are there possibly any disadvantages?
As a response to the high housing demand, big cities such as Hong Kong or New York, have built a lot of so called Skyscrapers, monuments which allow hundreds of inhabitants to live inside due to their gigantic and enormous height. This approach is highly effective in areas where space is limited, therefore a good solution for housing demand in the center of a city. People who live for instance in a five story building can have more social interaction with their neighbors and support each other. Secondly tall buildings are usually less expensive as the rent is split up between more parties. This is beneficial for all people, who could not afford a whole house for themselves - for whatsoever reason. However, these huge buildings lack of personal space for inhabitants and green spaces such as gardens are rarely provided.
Cities and States that don't lack of space more often approach the housing issue by extending the city area and building suburbs that surround it. This has great advantages for both, the population and the environment. It allows people more personal space and moreover provides a safe environment for families with children. Parents might find it more comforting to have their children grow up in a suburban district rather than a skyscraper building, where they cannot control external influences like for example contact with criminals. By stretching out houses over a wider landscape, people are not constantly concentrated in the same area, which eventually could cause traffic pollution to drop. The benefit of improved air is just the first step into improving the environment of big cities.
To conclude, governments of every city should consider individually which solution suits them best by outweighing the benefits and disadvantages of both approaches. Therefore, I refuse to accept one solution as the better one but more think, it is a matter of circumstances that makes one solution more approved.
| 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 |
- People living in large cities have to face many problems in everyday life What are those problems Should the government encourage people to move to regional towns 67
- Learning to manage money is one of the key aspects of adult life How in your view can individuals best learn to manage their money 67
- The table shows the percentage of journeys made by different forms of transport in four countries The bar graph shows the results of a survey into car use Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where re 89
- there is a good deal of evidence that increasing car use is contributing to global warming and having other undesirable effects on people s health and well being what can be done to discourage people from using their cars 84
- The charts below show the results of a questionnaire that asked visitors to the Parkway Hotel how they rated the hotel s customer service The same questionnaire was given to 100 guests in the years 2005 and 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 24, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ely provided. Cities and States that dont lack of space more often approach the h...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, for example, for instance, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1927.0 1615.20841683 119% => OK
No of words: 369.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22222222222 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7780904783 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 176.041082164 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.60162601626 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 602.1 506.74238477 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.7077490663 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.352941176 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7058823529 20.7667163134 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.29411764706 7.06120827912 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.236886335158 0.244688304435 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0725824175959 0.084324248473 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0667155363258 0.0667982634062 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142516923614 0.151304729494 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0407615903008 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.4159519038 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 78.4519038076 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.