Zoning laws in the town of Brugerville were changed in 2018

Question

Zoning laws in the town of Brugerville were changed in 2018, increasing the minimum distance between a store’s parking lot and the street from 250 to 500 feet. The greater this distance, the fewer the number of available parking spots at any given store, and the fewer the available parking spots, the less foot traffic there will be in the store. Despite this, no store in Brugerville that had its own parking lot experienced a decrease in foot traffic during 2018.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why there was no decrease in foot traffic in Brugerville stores that had their own parking lots?

(A) The number of stores with parking lots in Brugerville decreased by 10% from 2017 to 2018.
(B) All the Brugerville stores that were in business in 2018 were already at least 500 feet from the street.
(C) In 2018, the local economy in Brugerville was substantially better than the local economy of any other town in the county in which it is situated. 
(D) The global trend towards online purchases was particularly strong in Brugerville during 2018.
(E) None of the Brugerville stores that had parking lots in 2018 opposed the change in the zoning laws.

EMPOWER  gmat    CR Question Pack 2

Question 16: Brugerville

48 Hour Answer & Explanation Window  
 Earn KUDOS!  Have your explanations evaluated to help boost your learning. Post your reasoning why the answer you chose is correct, and why the other 4 options are incorrect within 48 hours of this post.

Scroll Down For Official Explanation

◀ Group 3 Question 15 
 ▶ Question 17 
 ⏏ CR Library Pack 2 Home

Akp880 · Answer

Zoning laws in the town of Brugerville were changed in 2018, increasing the minimum distance between a store’s parking lot and the street from 250 to 500 feet. The greater this distance, the fewer the number of available parking spots at any given store, and the fewer the available parking spots, the less foot traffic there will be in the store. Despite this, no store in Brugerville that had its own parking lot experienced a decrease in foot traffic during 2018.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why there was no decrease in foot traffic in Brugerville stores that had their own parking lots?

Explanation  : Let's tear apart the argument -

Premise 1 -Zoning laws changed in 2018---increased min distance b/w a store’s parking lot and the street from 250 to 500 feet.

Premise 2- The greater this distance>>the fewer the number of available parking spots>> the less foot traffic in the store.
 
 Conclusion : no store in Brugerville that had its own parking lot experienced a decrease in foot traffic during 2018.

You can clearly observe a logical jump from premise to the stated conclusion. Our purpose here should be to fill this logical gap with the help of proper reasoning that why despite such changes in zoning laws foot traffic didn't decrease in stores,what can the possible reason??  Lets review each option one by one-

(A) The number of stores with parking lots in Brugerville decreased by 10% from 2017 to 2018.
 Irrelevant.We are talking specifically about stores that had their own parking lots.Even if this option is true it doesn't give an explicit reason for unchanged foot traffic in the subject stores.

(B) All the Brugerville stores that were in business in 2018 were already at least 500 feet from the street.
 Bingo!! Correct.This is what we were loking after as it fills the logical gap b/w premise and stated conclusion that why despite changes in zoning laws foot traffic in those stores didn't decrease.

(C) In 2018, the local economy in Brugerville was substantially better than the local economy of any other town in the county in which it is situated.
 Out of scope.

(D) The global trend towards online purchases was particularly strong in Brugerville during 2018.
 Out of scope(Our matter of discussion is unchanged foot traffic in stores)
 
(E) None of the Brugerville stores that had parking lots in 2018 opposed the change in the zoning laws.
 Irrelevant.Opposition or support to the law is not a matter of concern here.
 
 Hence B is the correct answer.

prateekchugh · Answer

Zoning laws in the town of Brugerville were changed in 2018, increasing the minimum distance between a store’s parking lot and the street from 250 to 500 feet. The greater this distance, the fewer the number of available parking spots at any given store, and the fewer the available parking spots, the less foot traffic there will be in the store. Despite this, no store in Brugerville that had its own parking lot experienced a decrease in foot traffic during 2018.

Premise 1: Zoning laws in the town of Brugerville were changed in 2018, increasing the minimum distance between a store’s parking lot and the street from 250 to 500 feet.

New Law: Distance b/w street and shop increased from 250 to 500 ft.

Premise 2: The greater this distance, the fewer the number of available parking spots at any given store, and the fewer the available parking spots, the less foot traffic there will be in the store.

Increase Distance Street to Shop---> Less Space available for parking---> Less customer will come

Premise 3: Despite this, no store in Brugerville that had its own parking lot experienced a decrease in foot traffic during 2018.

Hmmmm....Despite of New law, the customer are still coming at high rate.

How this is possible? If customer park somewhere else and come to the shop or Shop already implemented this law. Therfore no reduction in custimers. 
 
Which of the following, if true,  most helps to explain why  there was no decrease in foot traffic in Brugerville stores that had their own parking lots?  PARADOX

(A) The number of stores with parking lots in Brugerville decreased by 10% from 2017 to 2018.  Then Customer foot print should decrease, but we need to find why it increased. Does not solve the answer. Incorrect 
(B) All the Brugerville stores that were in business in 2018 were already at least 500 feet from the street.  Correct. It already implemented the law. Customer rate is stable. 
(C) In 2018, the local economy in Brugerville was substantially better than the local economy of any other town in the county in which it is situated.  Totally Out of scope. We just want to know why customer rate increased even after the Law. Incorrect 
(D) The global trend towards online purchases was particularly strong in Brugerville during 2018.  Then Customer visit should decrease. But it is increasing. Incorrect 
(E) None of the Brugerville stores that had parking lots in 2018 opposed the change in the zoning laws. No oppose, then customer rate should decrease.  Why its increasing? Does not solve the paradox. Incorrect

naomimunitic2 · Answer

agreed answer B, 
LEFT WITH A OR B, 
IF WE NEGATE A IT STILL DOES NOT GIVE AN ANSWER

EMPOWERgmatVerbal · Answer

Official Explanation:

Zoning laws in the town of Brugerville were changed in 2018, increasing the minimum distance between a store’s parking lot and the street from 250 to 500 feet. The greater this distance, the fewer the number of available parking spots at any given store, and the fewer the available parking spots, the less foot traffic there will be in the store. Despite this, no store in Brugerville that had its own parking lot experienced a decrease in foot traffic during 2018.
 
 Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why there was no decrease in foot traffic in Brugerville stores that had their own parking lots? 
 
 (A) The number of stores with parking lots in Brugerville decreased by 10% from 2017 to 2018. 
 (B) All the Brugerville stores that were in business in 2018 were already at least 500 feet from the street. 
 (C) In 2018, the local economy in Brugerville was substantially better than the local economy of any other town in the county in which it is situated. 
(D) The global trend towards online purchases was particularly strong in Brugerville during 2018.
(E) None of the Brugerville stores that had parking lots in 2018 opposed the change in the zoning laws.

Question Type:   Explain / Strengthen
  Boil It Down:   Brugerville zoning took away parking spots from stores, which could potentially lower foot traffic to stores. However, stores that had their own parking lots didn’t see any decrease in foot traffic.
  Goal:    Find the most logical explanation for why this happened.

Analysis:

This question asks us to explain an apparent discrepancy. First we are told that the greater the setback, the fewer the number of parking spots AND the fewer the number of parking spots, the less foot traffic. From this, one can conclude that a greater setback would result in less foot traffic. However, we are then told that a law dictating greater setbacks did NOT result in less foot traffic. This is the apparent discrepancy, or paradox.
 
There is no paradox if the law doesn’t actually change matters for stores. Choice B says that the existing stores were already set back beyond what the law required, so it should not be a surprise that the law didn’t have any effect on any stores.
 
(A) The number of stores with parking lots in Brugerville decreased by 10% from 2017 to 2018.
 We have no way of knowing what effect the decrease in stores with parking lots from 2017 to 2018 would have on the stores in existence during the year 2018 as far as foot traffic goes. The argument is only about what happened during 2018.

(B) All the Brugerville stores that were in business in 2018 were already at least 500 feet from the street.
 This is the correct choice. It should come as no surprise that the new law wouldn’t affect foot traffic if it didn’t affect parking lot space.

(C) In 2018, the local economy in Brugerville was substantially better than the local economy of any other town in the county in which it is situated. 
 This is an irrelevant comparison. We are only interested in changes in foot traffic in Brugerville stores during 2018.

(D) The global trend towards online purchases was particularly strong in Brugerville during 2018.
 If anything, this would have worsened foot traffic in the stores, so it certainly doesn’t explain away the apparent discrepancy.

(E) None of the Brugerville stores that had parking lots in 2018 opposed the change in the zoning laws.
 The attitude taken by the store owners to the law is irrelevant to the question of foot traffic. We only are interested in what the results of the law were, if any.

Don’t study for the GMAT. Train for it.

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Zoning laws in the town of Brugerville were changed in 2018

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Zoning laws in the town of Brugerville were changed in 2018

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards