1 quot Commuters complain that increased rush hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time The favored proposal of the motorists 039 lobby is to widen the highway adding an additional lane of

There is a problem of traffic jam in Blue Highway published in local newspaper. Motorists suggest that simply widening the road would solve the issue, however opposing group argues only solution to this problem is through adding a bicycle line. Although, opposing group’s idea seems logical at first glance, there are certain assumptions which weaken their position. To ensure the effectiveness of the second group’s solution, 3 main questions need to be answered.

Firstly, members of the opposing group assume that as residents are fond of bicycles, paving a bike road will motivate them to ride bicycles and decrease the usage of cars. However, if the people using the Blue Highway need to ride for more than 3-4 kilometers, before mentioned scenario is unlikely. Also, even if the destination is not that far, if we consider weather conditions during winter, number of riders will surely decrease. Thus, such assumption needs to be proven before being accepted as a fact. One way for ensuring the future usage of the bikes, is through completing reports and asking residents whether they will use the bicycles daily on the Blue Highway, instead of cars or not.

Secondly, even if people begin using bikes during rush hour, it is still ambiguous and unsupported to assume that traffic problem will be solved. Maybe, certain portion of people will stop driving cars, but still important portion of them simply will not have such luxury. Considering it is a highway and not inner city road, it is possible that companies use this road for logistical purposes. If trucks or similar heavy machinery will use the highway, traffic jam might not be solved entirely as they do not have the option of using bike lines. Thus, the data of heavy machinery using this highway should be collected and considered.

Thirdly, it is assumed that last year’s line addition worsened existing traffic. However, other causes of the issue should be eliminated before assuming it. It is possible that although adding new line, lightened the jam, sudden increase in number of residents in suburbs who works in city center, made the problem actual again. For this reason, comparing the usage of the highway in last year and this year might give new view to the problem. If increase of the highway usage compared to last year is a fact, then adding another lane could solve the issue.

In conclusion, although argument of adding new bike line solving the traffic jam holds water, answers of 3 questions are necessary to evaluate the situation correctly: real number of prospective bike users who will decline the usage of cars, number of heavy machinery using the highway and lastly, comparison of the usage of the highway between last year and this year. Only after analyzing above mentioned questions, one can adequately decide how to solve the traffic jam issue.

Votes
Average: 6.9 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 602, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is through completing reports and asking residents whether they will use the bicy...
^^
Line 5, column 501, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e highway usage compared to last year is a fact, then adding another lane could s...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, third, thirdly, thus, in conclusion, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2611.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 521.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01151631478 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77759609229 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52812619879 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 204.123752495 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491362763916 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 816.3 705.55239521 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.3757922921 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.52173913 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.652173913 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.73913043478 5.70786347227 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.155687858389 0.218282227539 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0479644453558 0.0743258471296 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0448505038861 0.0701772020484 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0797259865191 0.128457276422 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0436850409666 0.0628817314937 69% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 98.500998004 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 521 350
No. of Characters: 2536 1500
No. of Different Words: 243 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.778 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.868 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.437 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 188 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 140 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.652 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.252 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.652 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.29 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.29 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.094 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5