The following appeared in a recommendation from the planning department of the city of Transopolis."Ten years ago, as part of a comprehensive urban renewal program, the city of Transopolis adapted for industrial use a large area of severely substandard ho

The arguer has recommended that in order to revitalize city Transopolis further , it should resort to same action that proved fruitful ten years ago. Although at face value, the argument seems convincing to readers, a closer analysis reveals the argument is full of flaws which casts doubt on the proposition of arguer.

In the first place, a period of ten years is a long time and circumstances are bound to be changed since then. It is likely that ten years ago, the city needed an industrial area and measures taken for adaptation of industrial use proved beneficial at that time. The same measure may not work for Transopolis at present as it is possible that the industry requirement is almost saturated in the city. Also it is possible that this city was a frontrunner to take such steps ten years ago and due to lack of similar opportunities , industrialists preferred Transopolis at that time. Since then most of nearby cities adapted similar measures and came up with similar goals. Because of abundance of such towns nearby at present , Transopolis will not be only choice for enthusiastic entrepreneurs.

Secondly, sufficient proof haven’t been put forwarded to show the reasons behind factors like built up of several factories, reduction in crime rates, increase in property tax with the adaptation strategy that was taken ten years ago. It may be possible that the city had taken few other measures apart from only adapting substandard housing area like awareness among residents that how city is providing them livelihood and increase in tax will actually benefit them in many ways, or allocation of more police forces. Unless all the measures are taken at present combined, the strategy to take declining residential area may not prove advantageous to the city.

Thirdly, the arguer cannot guarantee that the residents in that declining neighbourhood are willing to shift to opposite side of the city. If residents demand for excessive amount of money due to shift to another place , the whole strategy may crumble and would be unrealistic to implement. The residents may want to check on the basic civic facilities like energy and water availability, drainage system, security or communication options in the city. Unless all these options are provided to them, they will likely to refuse the offer.

In conclusion, the recommendations seems unconvincing as it does not produce a cogent case that the strategy can be implemented and will be favorable to the city. The arguments provided could have been substantiated by providing additional information like the same environment is present currently that proved advantageous ten years ago or this adaptation is the only reason because of which urban renewal program worked or the residents have agreed to move to other places in the city. In absence of all these information, the renewal strategy remains unconvincing and cannot be implemented at present state.