📝 Model answerBand 8.5277 words

Band 8.5 model answer

A model answer written to illustrate a Band 8.5 response to this question, with the rubric breakdown and what carries it. Written by us as a teaching example, not a verified exam script.

High-rise buildings are the only practical solution to urban housing shortages. To what extent do you agree?

8.5

Overall

8.5

Task response

8

Coherence & cohesion

8.5

Lexical resource

8

Grammar

The claim that high-rise construction is the only practicable answer to urban housing shortages presents a false choice. I disagree with the absoluteness of this position: while tall buildings are a valuable part of any dense city's housing toolkit, they are neither universally appropriate nor the sole effective solution.

High-rise developments are clearly well-suited to cities where land is genuinely scarce and expensive, such as Hong Kong, Singapore, or Manhattan. In these contexts, building vertically allows large numbers of people to live within walking distance of employment, transport, and amenities, reducing sprawl and its associated infrastructure costs. Efficiently designed residential towers can also deliver economies of scale in utilities and building management.

However, high-rise construction comes with significant drawbacks that limit its universal applicability. Building and maintaining tall structures is substantially more expensive per unit than mid-rise or low-rise development, particularly once lifts, specialist structural engineering, and fire safety systems are factored in. In cities where land costs are lower, these economics often make towers a less efficient choice than well-planned medium-density neighbourhoods of four-to-eight-storey buildings. Such typologies, common in Paris and Barcelona, achieve high population density without the cost premium or the social challenges sometimes associated with very tall residential blocks.

Beyond cost, planning permission, local community concerns, and historic cityscape protection frequently make high-rise development politically contentious or legally restricted in many urban areas. Governments that restrict themselves to a single housing typology as a matter of policy will inevitably face bottlenecks.

The most effective urban housing strategies combine multiple approaches: densifying existing residential zones, converting commercial properties, reforming planning rules to accelerate mid-rise construction, and deploying high-rise development selectively where it genuinely makes sense.

✅ What carries it
  • Rejects the false binary cleanly in the introduction and sustains that nuanced position throughout
  • Economic analysis of per-unit costs adds concrete rigour to the critique of high-rise
  • Paris and Barcelona cited as credible medium-density alternatives
⚠️ What keeps it from higher
  • The final paragraph's multi-point list reads slightly like a policy memo rather than a developed analytical conclusion
⚡ Your turn

Write your own. Get a real band read.

Reading a model answer only takes you so far. Write your own response to this question and we’ll grade it against the four official rubrics, the same way we scored this one.

Attempt this question