The developments along Olive Drive before and after the construction of new facilities between 1980 and 2010
The two maps illustrate the changes in the construction of new facilities along Olive Drive from 1980 to 2010.
Overall, it is clear that there were more commercial establishment along the road during the development period as well as the extended area for residents. Furthermore, at the North-side of the map in 2010, a new school was built on the unused land area in the left map.
Looking at the maps more closely, one can see that the adjacent shops on the left-hand side of the map in 1980 were superseded by the shopping centre and the supermarket separately in 2010. Also, the community centre was abated to create a small hub for the bank, while the previous area for the bank was transformed into the café zone. After the development, the bank lied behind the community centre instead of along the Olive Drive as initial. Meanwhile, the hospital did not have any changes in their location, they stood at the east-side of the map throughout the years. Furthermore, look at the North-side of the map, it is apparent that a new school was constructed across from the hospital in 2010, on the unused land area near the resident’s houses. Over the course of 30 years, the houses were doubled than its in the previously 1980 figure.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-08-24 | Tôn Nguyễn Hồng Phúc | 73 | view |
| 2021-01-04 | vivitoben | 76 | view |
- The number of public transit passengers from 1989 to 2009 and bus tram passenger numbers between 2000 and 2008 in Mel 78
- The number of British visitors to the US and American visitors to the UK from 2011 to 2015 The amount spent by those visitors in that period 67
- The usage of oil in four different countries between 1966 and 2006 as a percentage of total energy use within each nation 84
- The difference in the Internet users in three different countries and the world average between 1998 and 2013 67
- The percentage of US music album sales by gerne in 2008 2009 2010 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, look, so, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 6.8 15% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1026.0 965.302439024 106% => OK
No of words: 217.0 196.424390244 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.72811059908 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.8380880478 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66875586222 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 118.0 106.607317073 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543778801843 0.547539520022 99% => OK
syllable_count: 308.7 283.868780488 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.4589008889 43.030603864 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.0 112.824112599 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1111111111 22.9334400587 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.77777777778 5.23603664747 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.242623745875 0.215688989381 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11583022468 0.103423049105 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.139084815291 0.0843802449381 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.242268256215 0.15604864568 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.164655874227 0.0819641961636 201% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.2329268293 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 61.2550243902 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.45 11.4140731707 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.06136585366 100% => OK
difficult_words: 44.0 40.7170731707 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.