Utilization of park space has been a matter of contention. Some people hold firm to the belief that those public areas could better serve purposes like building housing or developing business. From my perspective, I absolutely disagree with this notion.
First and foremost, health maintenance is prioritized for discussion. It cannot be denied that green places with trees and plants can absorb carbon dioxide and produce oxygen, thereby making air quality better and cooler the atmosphere for citizens. Studies show that spending time in nature like a park of trees makes a drop in anxiety and depression. This kind of system is especially necessary in urban areas, which have industrialized and release many emissions and exhaust fumes.
In the second place, a healthy playground is of equal importance to utilization of park space. Apparently, a park is a good place for everyone to exercise and stay fit, build a stronger body or just walk simply and enjoy the fresh air. Besides, local administration also can use parks to organize community events and amusement activities for residents. This will bring people together and closer, then establish a healthier and happier society, which can motivate people to work productively.
Last but not least, a better solution is worth contemplating. In fact, growing population cannot be solved, business cannot be developed and economies cannot be boosted completely by using those green areas. Alternatively, government and local administrations should introduce new laws to control population issues and maybe take economic advantages from such parks, like creating booths for selling local specialities or farm products.
All in all, not only health maintenance but a healthy playground and better solutions are the obligations of the utilization of park space. Local authorities ought to thoroughly consider the aforementioned notion to make the right decision.
- Divorce rates in Finland and Sweden 84
- Surveys show that people are living longer in many countries But increased life expectancy has many implications for aging individuals and for society as a whole What are the possible effects of longer living for individuals and society 84
- Some people believe that hosting international sports events is good for the country while some people think it is bad Discuss both these views and state your opinion 89
- The diagram below shows the life cycle of a frog 61
- The chart below shows the results of a survey of people who visited four types of tourist attraction in Britain in the year 1999 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, besides, but, first, may, second, so, then, in fact, kind of, in the second place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 10.4138276553 202% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1622.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 297.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.46127946128 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98986486467 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.656565656566 0.561755894193 117% => OK
syllable_count: 510.3 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.7757869138 49.4020404114 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.375 106.682146367 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5625 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.1875 7.06120827912 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => 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: 0.303455166129 0.244688304435 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0785675035285 0.084324248473 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0451183074428 0.0667982634062 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147102493804 0.151304729494 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0600223990858 0.056905535591 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.0946893788 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.63 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 78.4519038076 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 9.78957915832 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.