When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasonings for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
“New is always better.” is a famous line from the television show, How I met your mother. Similarly some people argue that modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings for the modern purposes. However, I disagree with this statement in that historic buildings can also be used for modern purposes.
First, historic building can be a better option since it tends to be built with higher quality materials than the newly built ones. Old buildings which were built before the World War Ⅱ tends to be built with high quality materials. Old hardwood and solid bricks which modern developers cannot find nowadays were the main materials for the buildings. Moreover the regulations back then were much stricter than nowadays. Thus it can stand strong wind better due to its wind restraint construction. For example, developers had planned to tear down Kennedy-Baker-Walker-Sherrill house and build new office building. However, it could be preserved because council approved the zoning deal. After this approval it has been used as the new office building for the Knox Wellness which the developers wanted to build. Since West Knoxville is prone to tornadoes, many city developers think it was a great choice to use old buildings for the office in the long term. Therefore if developer need a building in the area prone to tornadoes or other natural disasters, it is better to use old buildings for the modern purposes.
Also, there are some business fields which thrive better when it is located in the old buildings. Atmosphere is very important for making customers buy one’s products. Granted, major chain stores can sell better in the newly built buildings. They need to display modern and clean images. However, urban activist Jane Jacobs stated that some business can earn more economic advantages if it is located in old buildings. For example, bookstores, ethnic restaurants, antique stores, pubs, and small start-ups can sell better in the historic buildings. Unique and quirky ambience of the stores can attract people who enjoy traditional foods and collect antiques. Therefore there is no need to destroy historic buildings if developers want new buildings for these purposes.
In summary, modern developers should not be always given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. We should scrutinize the purpose and area of the business thoroughly before we decide to tear down old buildings.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-21 | jason123 | 66 | view |
| 2019-11-30 | vikey | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-01 | chagens96 | 66 | view |
| 2019-08-22 | tanishqjain1002 | 50 | view |
| 2019-08-21 | Charan H S | 50 | view |
- People’s attitudes are determined more by their immediate situation or surroundings that by society as a whole. 50
- People's behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting 58
- When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you 50
- Governments should focus on solving immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future. 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 102, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Similarly,
...television show, How I met your mother. Similarly some people argue that modern developme...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 353, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...e the main materials for the buildings. Moreover the regulations back then were much str...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 422, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... then were much stricter than nowadays. Thus it can stand strong wind better due to ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 959, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ldings for the office in the long term. Therefore if developer need a building in the are...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 666, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...traditional foods and collect antiques. Therefore there is no need to destroy historic bu...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, moreover, similarly, so, then, therefore, thus, well, for example, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 33.0505617978 64% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 58.6224719101 63% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2094.0 2235.4752809 94% => OK
No of words: 394.0 442.535393258 89% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31472081218 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9235097438 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 215.323595506 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520304568528 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 630.0 704.065955056 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.6511484633 60.3974514979 46% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 91.0434782609 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1304347826 23.4991977007 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.47826086957 5.21951772744 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.436236497614 0.243740707755 179% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130565440393 0.0831039109588 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.119360284134 0.0758088955206 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.293621842019 0.150359130593 195% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0711595316922 0.0667264976115 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.22 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 100.480337079 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.