The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limiting the supply of new housing, could lead to significant increases in the price of housing in the county. Proponents of the measure note that Chestnut County established a similar measure ten years ago, and its housing prices have increased only modestly since. However, opponents of the measure note that Pine County adopted restrictions on the development of new residential housing fifteen years ago, and its housing prices have since more than doubled. The council currently predicts that the proposed measure, if passed, will result in a significant increase in housing prices in Maple County
Citing the general argument of the Maple county council, that the county is becoming over developed and is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmlands in the county. The council makes an assertion that it would directly increase the cost of housing. However their argument relies on unproven assumptions and is therefore unconvincing.
To begin with, the argument makes an assertion that the proponents of Chestnut County after establishing a similar measure had its housing prices increase modestly. The mere fact that stopping development in the county would lead to increase in housing prices makes the argument very weak. Without better evidence the council is comparing their county to that of chestnut. Opponents of the council gave an example that pine county had their housing rate doubled after introducing such restrictions.
Making the debate that Maple County is being over developed and which in turn will prevent the development of existing farmlands is a wasteful agenda. The clear notion behind development of a county is to bring lots of opportunities into the county, which in turn reduces housing cost. Citizens directly and indirectly benefit from development. A stronger argument would have being to say the council is thinking of preserving some farmlands, so our agricultural deposits are not exhausted.
In sum, the argument relies on the concern of Maple County being over developed. The writer to mention the effects of the overdevelopment on the county. A stronger argument would have being, stating the negative effects of the overdevelopment on the county. The writer even said restricting the development would increase cost of housing. Even with additional evidence to support the councils debate regulating the development is much beneficial.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-14 | Anish Sapkota | 66 | view |
| 2023-01-02 | leonor | 68 | view |
| 2022-12-19 | Junu93 | 52 | view |
| 2022-10-21 | zanzendegi | 78 | view |
| 2022-10-07 | nafisasadafprova | 74 | view |
- The following letter is from a group of Linford College alumni to the chair of the art department at the college In a recent survey of college graduates 90 percent agreed that participating in an internship increased their chances of finding a job after g 67
- The drawbacks of traditional energy sources mean that they are not a long term solution to meeting the ever increasing power needs Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain the reasoning 62
- The following is a recommendation from the city manager of Bridge Bay Last year the number of visits to our local beach in Bridge Bay was 50 percent lower than the year before Early last year we ended our contract with Arko Trash Collection a company that 70
- The council of Maple County concerned about the county s becoming overdeveloped is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county But the council is also concerned that such a restriction by limiting the 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 283 350
No. of Characters: 1508 1500
No. of Different Words: 128 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.102 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.329 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.842 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 124 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 97 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.688 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.583 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.188 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.383 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.561 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.128 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 292, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... directly increase the cost of housing. However their argument relies on unproven assum...
^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 2, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the development is much beneficial.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, so, therefore, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1547.0 2260.96107784 68% => OK
No of words: 283.0 441.139720559 64% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.46643109541 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90623100016 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 204.123752495 65% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.466431095406 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 477.9 705.55239521 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.8325230155 57.8364921388 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.6875 119.503703932 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6875 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.3125 5.70786347227 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.431542942591 0.218282227539 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137619774855 0.0743258471296 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.128267917838 0.0701772020484 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.278453843975 0.128457276422 217% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0760814730015 0.0628817314937 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.15 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.66 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.