Last visit was: 06 Sep 2026, 07:18 It is currently 06 Sep 2026, 07:18
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   
555-605 (Medium)|   Non-Math Related|         
User avatar
twinkle2311
User avatar
Joined: 05 Nov 2021
Last visit: 05 Sep 2026
Posts: 211
Own Kudos:
247
 [1]
Given Kudos: 54
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
Schools: ISB '27 Wharton '27
GPA: 9.041
Schools: ISB '27 Wharton '27
Posts: 211
Kudos: 247
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 02:28
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The mayor prefers congestion pricing because it reduces regional traffic, carbon emissions, and large scale gridlock.

Option 1 sounds right as a strengthener imo. It shows that congestion pricing actually achieves the benefits the mayor is counting on. Keep

Option 2 is about adding more lanes, which isn't one of the options being considered. Eliminate

Option 3 is true regardless of which policy is chosen. It doesn't make congestion pricing look any better than traffic calming. Eliminate

Option 4 is just the city council's preference. It doesn't tell us whether the mayor's reasoning is right or wrong. Eliminate

Option 5 sounds a weakener imo. If congestion pricing pushes traffic into residential streets, it solves one problem but creates another. That makes the mayor's preferred option much less convincing. Keep

Ans:
Strengthen : Option 1
Weaken : Option 5
User avatar
jkkamau
User avatar
Joined: 25 May 2020
Last visit: 03 Sep 2026
Posts: 285
Own Kudos:
244
 [1]
Given Kudos: 147
Location: Kenya
Schools: Jones '26 (A$$)
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V46
GPA: 3.5
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Schools: Jones '26 (A$$)
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V46
Posts: 285
Kudos: 244
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 02:35
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
We are looking for a strengthener and a weakener
1. This statement indeed supports the Mayors position by providing additional data
2. This statement is complete off-topic compared to what is being evaluated
3. This statement provides information that is applicable to both propositions and does not favor or weaken either of them
4. It just states a competing value judgement from the council so not relevant
5. The statement weakens the mayors position by providing additional negative consequences of the move
Ans AE

Bunuel
City C is considering two urban planning concepts for traffic management: traffic calming and congestion pricing. Traffic calming involves physical design changes to streets, such as speed bumps, roundabouts, and curb extensions, that are intended to slow vehicles and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. In contrast, congestion pricing is a market-based strategy that charges drivers a fee to enter high-traffic zones during peak hours, aiming to reduce the total volume of cars by incentivizing the use of public transit or off-peak travel. Although traffic calming would likely increase safety and livability at a neighborhood level, the mayor asserts that it does little to reduce regional traffic volume, so she favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.

Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the mayor’s position, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the mayor’s position. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Show more
User avatar
miniB21
User avatar
Joined: 06 Sep 2024
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 98
Own Kudos:
35
 [1]
Given Kudos: 66
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 98
Kudos: 35
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 03:07
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
SUPPORT AND WEAKEN TPA:
SUPPORT: Option A is the strong choice as both the primary objectives will be successfully achieved ie reduced pollution and decreasing traffic times and volumes effectively by communicating during off peak hours and carpooling.
WEAKEN: Option E is the strongest choice of all since it shows how neither of the primary objectives will be fulfilled as drivers take to local roads to avoid paying congestion pricing fee that the mayor supports.
User avatar
Amity007
User avatar
Joined: 12 Sep 2025
Last visit: 05 Sep 2026
Posts: 266
Own Kudos:
493
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,858
Location: India
Schools: ISB
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Schools: ISB
Posts: 266
Kudos: 493
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 03:19
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Conclusion: Mayor favours congestion pricing over traffic calming for it's reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large scale urban gridlock.

1) This telling us that from the report congestion pricing have already succeeded in reducing pollution and decrease in transit time by 80%.
This seems to strengthen mayors choice.
2) This tells us that traffic calming doesn't support in reducing pollution and traffic. Ignore
3) This talking about relation between pollution and gridlock. Irrelevant.
4) This changing the whole reason behind planning for traffic management. So Ignore.
5) This seems to weaken the reasoning provided by mayor to choose congestion pricing, it says even after implementation, there might be situation where it will not serve the purpose.
This is the choice for weaken
SO Strengthener - > option 1
Weakener -> Option 5
Bunuel
City C is considering two urban planning concepts for traffic management: traffic calming and congestion pricing. Traffic calming involves physical design changes to streets, such as speed bumps, roundabouts, and curb extensions, that are intended to slow vehicles and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. In contrast, congestion pricing is a market-based strategy that charges drivers a fee to enter high-traffic zones during peak hours, aiming to reduce the total volume of cars by incentivizing the use of public transit or off-peak travel. Although traffic calming would likely increase safety and livability at a neighborhood level, the mayor asserts that it does little to reduce regional traffic volume, so she favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.

Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the mayor’s position, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the mayor’s position. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Show more
User avatar
priyanka06
User avatar
Joined: 10 Sep 2025
Last visit: 05 Sep 2026
Posts: 60
Own Kudos:
36
Given Kudos: 1
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 60
Kudos: 36
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 03:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Second statement strengthens the argument as it directly supports the mayor's argument and confirms through facts that the method supported by mayor works.

Last statement weakens the argument as it shows the implementation of the mayors choice further escalates the root problem.

Bunuel
City C is considering two urban planning concepts for traffic management: traffic calming and congestion pricing. Traffic calming involves physical design changes to streets, such as speed bumps, roundabouts, and curb extensions, that are intended to slow vehicles and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. In contrast, congestion pricing is a market-based strategy that charges drivers a fee to enter high-traffic zones during peak hours, aiming to reduce the total volume of cars by incentivizing the use of public transit or off-peak travel. Although traffic calming would likely increase safety and livability at a neighborhood level, the mayor asserts that it does little to reduce regional traffic volume, so she favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.

Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the mayor’s position, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the mayor’s position. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Show more
User avatar
Reon
User avatar
Joined: 16 Sep 2025
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 294
Own Kudos:
200
 [1]
Given Kudos: 19
GMAT Focus 1: 575 Q78 V78 DI79
GMAT Focus 1: 575 Q78 V78 DI79
Posts: 294
Kudos: 200
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 04:43
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TC- physical design changes & improve safety
CP- charges fee to enter high traffic zones during peak hours
Mayors favours CP for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large scale urban gridlock.

Strengthen- data from similar city shows that over 80% of urban air pollution originate from regional commuters, and their implementing congestion pricing significantly reduces this pollution and decreases transit times by encouraging commuting during your non peak hours and carpooling.
Data from similar cities have shown that CP works. This directly supports the mayors CP. since it has worked for similar cities it must also work for city C.

Weaken- congestion pricing frequently leads to traffic displacement, in which drivers avoid paying the fee to enter high traffic zones by cutting through residential side streets, increasing both local gridlock and the risk of accidents in neighbourhoods.
Tells about the negative consequence if Congestion pricing is implemented.
User avatar
patnaik1988
User avatar
Joined: 05 Oct 2024
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 78
Own Kudos:
19
 [1]
Given Kudos: 67
Posts: 78
Kudos: 19
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 04:50
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Strengthen the stmt is Option A: If Other cities facing similar issues have implemented congestion pricing and got desired results of less traffic volume and carbon emissions then it Strengthen Mayors position


Weaken Stmt is Option E: If congestion pricing is leading to avoidance of drivers fee and instead increase gridlock and accidents this weaken Mayor's position

Bunuel
City C is considering two urban planning concepts for traffic management: traffic calming and congestion pricing. Traffic calming involves physical design changes to streets, such as speed bumps, roundabouts, and curb extensions, that are intended to slow vehicles and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. In contrast, congestion pricing is a market-based strategy that charges drivers a fee to enter high-traffic zones during peak hours, aiming to reduce the total volume of cars by incentivizing the use of public transit or off-peak travel. Although traffic calming would likely increase safety and livability at a neighborhood level, the mayor asserts that it does little to reduce regional traffic volume, so she favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.

Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the mayor’s position, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the mayor’s position. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Show more
User avatar
harishj1996
User avatar
Joined: 01 Jun 2026
Last visit: 01 Aug 2026
Posts: 38
Own Kudos:
28
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 38
Kudos: 28
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 05:12
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Very simple TPA this time:

Mayor's Position: She favours congestion pricing for reduction of carbon emissions and reducing gridlock rather than make the investment for traffic calming which doesn't solve the goals that she has cited.

Now to strengthen this position:

Option 1: Very clearly, similarly placed cities facing traffic issues due to regional commuters are similarly placed and where they have implemented this and achieved substantially positive results, well then that gives a clear precedent that this scheme when implemented in City C may also work. As such, Option 1 clearly strengthens.

Option 5/E - Weaken : To weaken the position, we need to show that the twin goals of reduction in carbon emission as well as the reduction in traffic gridlock will not happen. This can happen when Option E is analysed which states that the cars would prefer to take side routes, i.e., no reduction in cars to avoid paying the fee levy, and these cars in the residential side streets would clog up the area, i.e., not reducing the traffic congestion. As a result, none of the stated goals as sought are made out.

Thus solved.
User avatar
nuwaaanda
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2025
Last visit: 31 Aug 2026
Posts: 63
Own Kudos:
50
 [1]
Given Kudos: 37
Posts: 63
Kudos: 50
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 05:59
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The correct choice for Strengthen is Option 1: Data from similar cities shows that over 80%....
The correct choice for Weaken is Option 5: Congestion pricing frequently leads to....

Here's my breakdown:
The passage tells us that a city wants to reduce it's traffic problem. There are two possible ways to do it:
1. Traffic calming (TC)
Method: Physical design changes to streets such as adding speed bumps, roundabouts, curb extensions, etc.
Pros: Slows down vehicles. Increases safety for pedestrian and cyclists
Cons: Does little to decrease regional traffic volumes

2. Congestion pricing (CP)
Method: Charges commuters a fee to enter high traffic zones during peak times, thereby incentivizing them to not do it and instead choosing public transit or do non-peak time commutes.
Pros: Reduces Carbon Emissions and manages large scale Urban Gridlock efficiently
Cons: Might not give increased safety and livability

Mayor's conclusion: Pick congestion pricing due to its pros

Now let's look at our choices and identify if they Strengthen, Weaken or do nothing to this conclusion

Option 1: This clearly is the only option which actually strengthens the conclusion of going with CP. Since the mayor has come to the conclusion basis their priority of reducing carbon emissions and managaing urban gridlock, and this option shows us data from similar cities where CP actually gives the desired result, this strengthens the argument. We can safely choose this to Strengthen.

Option 2: The passage does not say anything about building more lanes in either of the methods. This option is completely out of scope and hence we can safely eliminate this as it neither strengthens nor weakens since it is irrelevant.

Option 3: This option talks more about inter-relation of gridlock and emissions. This actually does not tell us anything about the conclusion. This neither strengthens nor weakens the argument. We can eliminate this

Option 4: This option was the one which stumbled me for the weaken choice. While it does talk about City Council's prorities of increasing safety, it does not undermine the mayor's logic of going with CP. It is just a different opinion to that of the mayor's but it does not weaken the mayor's logic of going for CP. The mayor would still hold valid points for choosing CP and the option does not refute any of those points.

Option 5: This clearly is the strongest weakening choice. It actually states that CP does not even solve the problem of reducing traffic. It would just displace the traffic to different streets than where it is seen right now. Thus, if this is true, CP will never be the correct choice. Hence this is our answer for Weaken.
User avatar
gaurikhanna17
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2025
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 73
Own Kudos:
46
 [1]
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 73
Kudos: 46
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 06:20
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
IMO :
Strengthen
data from similar cities ver 80 % of air pollution originates from regional computers and the implementation congestion pricing significantly reduces this pollution and decreases transit times by encouraging during non- peak hours and car pooling.

Weaken : Congestion pricing frequently leading to traffic displacement in which drivers avoid paying the fee ti enter high traffic zones by cutting through in neighbourhood
User avatar
mehtyas
User avatar
Joined: 27 May 2025
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 74
Own Kudos:
61
 [1]
Given Kudos: 832
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 74
Kudos: 61
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 06:29
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The mayor argues that congestion pricing is better than traffic calming because it reduces regional traffic and carbon emissions.

Evaluating the statements, I believe 1st one strengthens the argument by directly showing that congestion pricing reduces pollution and traffic by changing commuting behaviour, and 5th one weakens by showing that congestion pricing can shift traffic into neighbourhoods, creating new congestion and safety problems.

Looking at other options:
2nd - Seems irrelevant as it discusses road expansion, not the 2 policies being compared.
3rd - Offers weak support as it explains why reducing traffic can reduce emissions, but does not show that congestion pricing actually does so.
4th - discusses a different issue by challenging the council's priorities, not the mayor's reasoning.

Answer - Strengthen - Statement 1 and Weaken - Statement 5
User avatar
redandme21
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2025
Last visit: 01 Aug 2026
Posts: 157
Own Kudos:
144
 [1]
Posts: 157
Kudos: 144
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 06:33
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mayor favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.
She doesn't choose the other option, traffic calming.

Strengthen = "Data from similar cities..."
This strengthens the mayor's claim by showing that congestion pricing successfully reduces both regional pollution and traffic congestion.

Weaken = "Congestion pricing frequently..."
This weakens the mayor's argument because it shows that congestion pricing can shift traffic problems rather than solve them. It also makes neighborhoods less safe.

The other options don't provide evidence that congestion pricing is more effective than traffic calming:
+ 2nd discusses the effects of building more lanes, that neither strengthens nor weakens.
+ 3rd explains why reducing gridlock and carbon emissions are related, that neither strengthens nor weakens.
+ 4th challenges the mayor's priorities, that neither strengthens nor weakens.

IMO, this question is more a CR question than a TPA question.
User avatar
kavyamahajan9
User avatar
Joined: 09 Jun 2021
Last visit: 16 Aug 2026
Posts: 44
Own Kudos:
40
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 44
Kudos: 40
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 06:49
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Strengthen - Statement 1 - data from cities....
This statement tells us that implementing congestion pricing actually helps us to reduce carbon emissions with actual studies so this is the best statement for the conclusion

Weakens - Statement 5 - Congestion pricing leads to traffic displacement
This statement tells us how congestion pricing has a bad effect on traffic as rather than killing the traffic rather it displaces it to city neighborhoods , so this is a direct contradiction for the conclusion
Bunuel
City C is considering two urban planning concepts for traffic management: traffic calming and congestion pricing. Traffic calming involves physical design changes to streets, such as speed bumps, roundabouts, and curb extensions, that are intended to slow vehicles and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. In contrast, congestion pricing is a market-based strategy that charges drivers a fee to enter high-traffic zones during peak hours, aiming to reduce the total volume of cars by incentivizing the use of public transit or off-peak travel. Although traffic calming would likely increase safety and livability at a neighborhood level, the mayor asserts that it does little to reduce regional traffic volume, so she favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.

Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the mayor’s position, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the mayor’s position. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Show more
User avatar
canopyinthecity
User avatar
Joined: 12 Jul 2025
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 159
Own Kudos:
106
Given Kudos: 25
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 159
Kudos: 106
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 06:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Option 1 strengthens CP over TC
Option 2 irrelevant
Option 3 irrelevant
Option 4 irrelevant
Option 3 weakens
User avatar
JollyScale
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jul 2026
Last visit: 28 Aug 2026
Posts: 55
Own Kudos:
49
 [1]
Location: India
Schools: HBS '27 CBS '27 Stanford '27
GPA: 6.87/7
WE:Marketing (Finance: Diversified Financial Services)
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Schools: HBS '27 CBS '27 Stanford '27
Posts: 55
Kudos: 49
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 06:50
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
strengthen: the 1st stmt
As it says congestion pricing reduces pollution nd transit time exactly wot the mayor is arguing about

weaken: the last stmt
As it says congestion pricing causes traffic displacement. drivers avoid the fee by using residential streets creating more local traffic & accidents making congestion pricing less effective


Bunuel
City C is considering two urban planning concepts for traffic management: traffic calming and congestion pricing. Traffic calming involves physical design changes to streets, such as speed bumps, roundabouts, and curb extensions, that are intended to slow vehicles and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. In contrast, congestion pricing is a market-based strategy that charges drivers a fee to enter high-traffic zones during peak hours, aiming to reduce the total volume of cars by incentivizing the use of public transit or off-peak travel. Although traffic calming would likely increase safety and livability at a neighborhood level, the mayor asserts that it does little to reduce regional traffic volume, so she favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.

Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the mayor’s position, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the mayor’s position. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Show more
User avatar
geocircle
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2025
Last visit: 27 Jul 2026
Posts: 150
Own Kudos:
143
 [1]
Posts: 150
Kudos: 143
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 06:57
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Strengthen = The first statement.
It directly supports the mayor's reasoning by showing that congestion pricing reduces pollution and traffic through measurable changes in commuter behavior.

Weaken = The fifth statement.
If congestion pricing diverts drivers onto residential streets, it undermines the claim that it's the better overall traffic management strategy by creating new congestion.

The other 3 statements doesn't provide evidence about the effectiveness of either policy.
User avatar
K812
User avatar
Joined: 24 Jun 2020
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 45
Own Kudos:
36
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 45
Kudos: 36
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 07:02
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Pre-thinking the logical chain:

1. Traffic calming slows down vehicles which leads to more safety for pedestrians and cyclists but it does not do much for traffic congestion. One assumption in the chain should be that if vehicles are being slowed down, this does not incentivize much towards lesser travel during peak hours

2. Plan 2 charges fee to enter high traffic zones during peak hours and the fee would incentivize people to travel less during peak hours or use public transport and if this happens, it would lead to less congestion in the city and reduced carbon emission too.

Analyzing choices:

A. If most pollution originate from regional commuters and as per Plan 2, there are going to be lesser private vehicles, so it would lead to less pollution + carpooling/off peak travel also decreases travel time- Strengthener

B. Building more lanes is not part of any of the two plans, so its impact on traffic congestion doesn't matter- Incorrect

C. More gridlock means more pollution but this information does not do anything to the logical chain established above- Incorrect

D. Which goal is more important is not the conclusion here. Which plan helps the goal towards resolving traffic and reduce pollution is important- Incorrect

E. Fee incentivize people to take non traditional route which in turn leads to more congestion in those parts- so overall traffic congestion is not solved- directly attacks the line of reasoning- Weakens
User avatar
topgmat25
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2025
Last visit: 27 Jul 2026
Posts: 150
Own Kudos:
139
Posts: 150
Kudos: 139
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 07:20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Strengthen: The correct choice is the first statement. It provides direct empirical evidence that congestion pricing reduces pollution and congestion, exactly the outcomes cited by the mayor.

Weaken: The correct choice is the fifth statement. Traffic displacement suggests congestion pricing may generate unintended consequences that offset its expected benefits.
User avatar
PulkitSaran
User avatar
Joined: 10 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Aug 2026
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
28
 [1]
Given Kudos: 437
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 34
Kudos: 28
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 07:20
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
City C is considering two urban planning concepts for traffic management: traffic calming and congestion pricing. Traffic calming involves physical design changes to streets, such as speed bumps, roundabouts, and curb extensions, that are intended to slow vehicles and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. In contrast, congestion pricing is a market-based strategy that charges drivers a fee to enter high-traffic zones during peak hours, aiming to reduce the total volume of cars by incentivizing the use of public transit or off-peak travel. Although traffic calming would likely increase safety and livability at a neighborhood level, the mayor asserts that it does little to reduce regional traffic volume, so she favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.

Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the mayor’s position, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the mayor’s position. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Show more

A. Correct. This strengthens the mayor’s position by showing that congestion pricing reduced pollution and traffic volume in similar cities.

B. Incorrect. This tells a drawback of traffic calming but does not tell anything about congestion pricing, which is what the mayor prefers.

C. Incorrect. This does not strengthen/weaken the argument.


D. Incorrect. This does not strengthen/weaken the argument.

E. Correct. This weakens the mayor’s position by showing that congestion pricing has downsides.
User avatar
DishaSaha
User avatar
Joined: 03 Nov 2024
Last visit: 30 Aug 2026
Posts: 64
Own Kudos:
49
 [1]
Given Kudos: 24
GMAT Focus 1: 555 Q81 V75 DI78
GMAT Focus 1: 555 Q81 V75 DI78
Posts: 64
Kudos: 49
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 8): City C is considering two urban plan 16 Jul 2026, 07:20
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
City C,


Traffic management
Concept		ConceptFunction
Traffic calming
(TC)		Physical design changes of roadsSlow vehicles & improve safety
Congestion pricing
(CP)		Incentivising the use of public transit
during peak hours		Reduce Total volume of cars by
incentivising

Author's conclusion,
CP>TC
Author's reasoning,
TC does little to reduce traffic volume.
But CP reduces CO2 emission & efficient Gridlock management.

Answer choice analysis,

A .This is the strengthening option. Since it gives valid instance from the past for a similar city and gives valid logic that may be because of the incentive people are encouraged to travel in non peak hours and carpooling. This would definitely lower CO2 emission as well as traffic congestion.

B.Out of context. As per TC we do not know whether building lanes are in the purview of TC. So it does not strengthen or weaken.

C. This option does not provide any conclusion. It just talks about hoe co2 emission and gridlock is related. does not talk about how to reduce them.

D. This is opposite to the premise. Already mentioned that mayor is favoring CO2 emission over safety of the neighbourhood.

E. Now this is the weaken option. Since it shows how the mayor's reasoning is flawed by showing that how the CP will contribute to the gridlock congestion .
Bunuel
City C is considering two urban planning concepts for traffic management: traffic calming and congestion pricing. Traffic calming involves physical design changes to streets, such as speed bumps, roundabouts, and curb extensions, that are intended to slow vehicles and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. In contrast, congestion pricing is a market-based strategy that charges drivers a fee to enter high-traffic zones during peak hours, aiming to reduce the total volume of cars by incentivizing the use of public transit or off-peak travel. Although traffic calming would likely increase safety and livability at a neighborhood level, the mayor asserts that it does little to reduce regional traffic volume, so she favors congestion pricing for its reduction of carbon emissions and efficient management of large-scale urban gridlock.

Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the mayor’s position, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the mayor’s position. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Show more
   1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
Bunuel
Math Expert
113158 posts
FrozenDragon
DI Forum Moderator
409 posts