BruceWayne23
Hey,
Can you explain how the answer for 3rd question is B? I think it is A
The question asks:
Choice B:
Two problems:
Problem 1: Unsupported assumption
The passage
never says Wilcox surrendered ownership.
Submitting a map to a county recorder
does not imply giving up ownership.
So B
adds an unsupported claim.
Problem 2: Ownership change does not create a suburb
Even if he surrendered ownership, that would mean:
- the land is no longer private
But that
still does not connect Hollywood to Los Angeles.
You could have:
- a public town
- still geographically and economically separate.
So it
does not enable suburban development.
BUT,
Choice A:
The passage already says:
So transportation
already connects Hollywood and Los Angeles.
Please let me know if I've understood it wrong.
BruceWayne23 The first paragraph mentions, the 160 acre land, later christened as Hollywood was a private property land of Wilcox.
The second para - states the submission of the new city grid map to the county recorders office.
The lines - “
where residential and official lots were carved out around dirt avenues and pepper trees.”
So, post submission of the new city map, these developments are taking place. If you look at the Hierarchy order, the Los Angeles county occupies the highest level, while the Hollywood region is below it. I am using this hierarchy to just make it clear that , the Hollywood is getting attached to the Los Angeles county.
So, a city which is adjoining to a main central city, is usually called a sub urban city. So, submitting the new city grid map, Hollywood has become the suburb of Los Angeles county. Subsequently, developments are taking place.
Now, to your doubts - the option B mentions surrender. Wilcox submitted and didn’t surrender. Superficially this statement seems good.
Ownership change to a private entity is different from ownership to a government entity.
Any government cannot infringe upon private lands, unless under exceptional cases like - presence of natural resources, archeological sites, government constructions like industries, infrastructure developments are coming. So, unless Wilcox grants permission to use his property , government cannot step in.
so, government ownership changes the scenario altogether. Only government classifies an area as suburb or township or city etc.
For such classification to occur, which paved the way, or which helped the transition to occur ?
Moreover, the question mentions
IF TRUE - assuming the option to be true, which supports the theme Hollywood transitioning to suburbs. So, Option B seems a valid case.
Now coming to the option A -
Introduction of a faster streetcar line brought Hollywood closer to the city of Los Angeles.
Does this really brings Hollywood closer to LA ? Yes absolutely true. No doubt on that.
But did this enable the transition from Private land to suburb ? No. The road connects the suburb to the city LA. But, not enabling the transfer of private property to suburb regions.
Hope this clarifies ur doubts. I have tried my best to make this clear for u.
Let’s wait for OA