siddharth86 wrote:
PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT THE ANSWER OF THIS QUESTION SHOULD BE
To prevent overcrowding, last month the town zoning board limited the number of new buildings that can be constructed in the town in any given year. The board claims that doing so will preserve open spaces and lessen the strain on municipal resources such as schools and garbage disposal. Critics of the changes argue that the plan will harm the community or, at the very least, will fail in its purpose.
Which of the following most supports the claims of the critics of the plan?
Other towns have had mixed success with similar zoning plans.
No new schools have been built in the town in ten years.
Property taxes in the town are higher than in neighboring towns.
Under the new plan, developers may still erect apartment buildings.
The nearest garbage dump is several miles away from the town
I don't think this is a well-designed question at all, for many reasons:
* The question itself asks "Which of the following most supports the
claims of the critics?" Well, the critics make two 'claims': that the plan will harm the community, and that the plan will fail. If we need an answer that supports the claims (plural), then that answer should help support the contention that the plan will harm the community
and that the plan will not succeed. Answer D only supports (rather tenuously) one of those two claims.
* The critics also claim that the plan will "fail in its
purpose". But the stem tells us that the plan has more than one 'purpose: it is meant to 'preserve open spaces', to 'lessen the strain on municipal resources', and 'to prevent overcrowding'. So if we want to support the claim that the plan will fail in 'its purpose', which purpose are we even talking about?
* And if the purpose we identify is "to preserve open spaces", I can't see how D is a good answer. Using D, we're comparing two scenarios: one scenario, where this zoning law is not passed, and developers can build anything they want, and another scenario where developers can only build apartment buildings. It seems to me that in the second scenario, open spaces are far more likely to be preserved. So D does not support the critics' claims, if we interpret the purpose of the plan to be to 'preserve open spaces'.
* This question is also set up like a 'strengthen the argument' question, but
there is no argument. We just have critics saying "the plan is bad". I see some prep company questions set up this way, but I don't think I've ever seen a real GMAT question where we need to strengthen an argument that doesn't exist.