In many cities, planners tend to arrange shops, schools, offices, and homes in specific areas and separate them from each other. Do you think the advantages of this policy outweigh the disadvantages?
There has been a trend towards designing different parts of a city for specific purposes, such as residential, commercial, recreational and educational activities. In my opinion, this approach can be viewed positively, despite its drawback.
Planned development can ensure that cities have facilities and buildings that cater for the diverse needs of city dwellers. Land-scarce cities have struggled to keep pace with the demand for housing and commercial development, and the risk is that profit-driven developers invest heavily in lucractive projects regardless of the long-term impacts on cities. This kind of unplanned development can be curbed by appropriate zoning policies, for example, keeping sufficient open spaces in residential communities, and disapproving any industrial development in the proximity of schools. All these regulations can achieve the appropriate use of land for different, and sometimes conflicting, public interests.
Another benefit is that zoning can maintain the characteristic of a city over the course of expansion. Some communities have their own character and architectural heritage, but contemporary constructions differ in styles and heights. The compatibility of historical and modern buildings can be achieved if different sections of a city serve distinct purposes. The city council can designate some business districts where office blocks and shopping malls are built, while mandating the architectural styles of some neighbourhoods. If new shops, houses and places of worship are consistent with older counterparts in aesthetic features, the city can preserve their legacy for future generations.
In conclusion, dividing a city in different functional zones has its advantages, although it may increase the time of travelling to different places.
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 90
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, so, well, while, for example, in conclusion, kind of, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 41.998997996 69% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1536.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 261.0 315.596192385 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.88505747126 5.12529762239 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.32702534332 2.80592935109 119% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.647509578544 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 477.0 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.3022290636 49.4020404114 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.0 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.75 20.7667163134 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 7.06120827912 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.077091480112 0.244688304435 32% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0308004830982 0.084324248473 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0206185191886 0.0667982634062 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0477763845173 0.151304729494 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0161216082274 0.056905535591 28% => 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: 17.2 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 50.2224549098 66% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.88 12.4159519038 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.97 8.58950901804 128% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.