Some feel that cities should be designed to be beautiful, while others feel their functionality is more important. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.
Urban design is a multidimensional enterprise considering to various aspects. Some people think that city’s function takes more precedence while others feel that it should be aesthetically designed. This view appears on both sides of arguments which I will elaborate in the following paragraph.
On the one hand, objectors of creating beautiful city debate that mitigating causalities from various disasters becomes the crucial factor in city development. Considering that, when the city appearance is the main focus rather than geographical and topographical surveys, residents are threatened by the collapse of building. After the devastating earthquake, 80% Japan’s constructions implement earthquake-resistant buildings. Furthermore, in terms of daily mobile activities, the major needs of city dwellers should be supported by the state service buildings and business headquarters. If the administrative and commercial sectors are separated, individuals will be difficult to administer their legal permission or credential data files.
On the other hand, exponents of this view state that this recommendation can attract worldwide tourist to escalate socio-economy aspect. Turning city into a tourism destination makes a better country revenue and raises people’s awareness advancing this area. For instance, Paris, the wonderful city destination, receives regional income approximately $300 USD. Moreover, recreational area can be presented by picturesque city providing comfortable and relaxing places of living. Aside from increased life pleasure, this helps society relieving their stress from work pressure and imbalance life. Through Biophilic (natural space-connected human) design, Changi Airport demonstrates great control and effectiveness in encouraging well-being.
Overall, it seems to me that developing aesthetic city brings more positives impacts including to generate income-related tourism attraction and to ensure the ideal public space. This is as long urban planning is validated to be well-design of resistance and resilience in the long-term.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-27 | Mollymaul | 89 | view |
| 2022-04-28 | just_maianh | 77 | view |
| 2022-04-28 | just_maianh | 89 | view |
- In some cultures children are taught by their parents that they can achieve anything with hard work What are the advantages and disadvantages of this trend 89
- In many societies there is growing emphasis on individualism with people prioritizing their personal goals and desires over collective interest Is this a positive or negative development 78
- Friendships that take place online are not as meaningful as those where people meet each other face to face To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- Some feel that individuals should try to assimilate completely to the country where they live while others feel it is more important to preserve their native culture Discuss both views and give your own 61
- People nowadays send text messages more frequently than they talk on the phone What are the reasons for this trend Do the advantages of texting outweigh the disadvantages 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 211, Rule ID: MAIN_FOCUS[1]
Message: Use simply 'focus'.
Suggestion: focus
...g that, when the city appearance is the main focus rather than geographical and topographi...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, if, moreover, so, well, while, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1791.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 290.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.17586206897 5.12529762239 120% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39764379433 2.80592935109 121% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 176.041082164 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.713793103448 0.561755894193 127% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.1129835441 49.4020404114 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 111.9375 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.125 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.6875 7.06120827912 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.258346950565 0.244688304435 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.071447961187 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0893708466059 0.0667982634062 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16030250395 0.151304729494 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0994127001288 0.056905535591 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.83 50.2224549098 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.9 11.3001002004 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.27 12.4159519038 147% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.93 8.58950901804 139% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 78.4519038076 173% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.