Enforcement of local speed limits through police monitoring has proven unsuccessful in the town of Ardane. In many nearby towns,...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
Enforcement of local speed limits through police monitoring has proven unsuccessful in the town of Ardane. In many nearby towns, speed humps (raised areas of pavement placed across residential streets, about 300 feet apart) have reduced traffic speeds on residential streets by 20 to 25 percent. In order to reduce traffic speed and thereby enhance safety in residential neighborhoods, Ardane's transportation commission plans to install multiple speed humps in those neighborhoods.
Which of the following, if true, identifies a potentially serious drawback to the plan for installing speed humps in Ardane?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| Enforcement of local speed limits through police monitoring has proven unsuccessful in the town of Ardane. |
|
| In many nearby towns, speed humps (raised areas of pavement placed across residential streets, about 300 feet apart) have reduced traffic speeds on residential streets by 20 to 25 percent. |
|
| In order to reduce traffic speed and thereby enhance safety in residential neighborhoods, Ardane's transportation commission plans to install multiple speed humps in those neighborhoods. |
|
Argument Flow:
"The argument starts with a problem (police monitoring failed), then presents evidence of a solution that worked elsewhere (speed humps reduced speeds 20-25%), and concludes with Ardane's decision to adopt this solution."
Main Conclusion:
"Ardane's transportation commission plans to install speed humps in residential neighborhoods to reduce traffic speeds and enhance safety."
Logical Structure:
"This follows a classic problem-solution structure: Since police monitoring failed in Ardane (problem) and speed humps worked in nearby towns (evidence), Ardane should install speed humps (solution). The logical link assumes what worked in nearby towns will work in Ardane too."
Prethinking:
Question type:
Weaken - We need to find information that would reduce belief in the conclusion that installing speed humps will reduce traffic speed and enhance safety in Ardane's residential neighborhoods
Precision of Claims
The argument makes specific claims about effectiveness (20-25% speed reduction), location (residential streets), spacing (300 feet apart), and assumes what worked in nearby towns will work in Ardane
Strategy
Look for scenarios that show speed humps might not work in Ardane specifically, or that they could create new problems that outweigh the benefits. We can't question that speed humps worked in nearby towns (that's a given fact), but we can find reasons why Ardane might be different or why there could be serious negative consequences
This choice tells us that many vehicles currently travel at speeds more than \(25\%\) above the posted limit on streets without speed humps. Rather than being a drawback, this actually strengthens the argument for installing speed humps. If vehicles are going significantly over the speed limit, this reinforces the need for speed humps and suggests they could be even more beneficial than initially thought.
This identifies a genuine and serious drawback to the speed hump plan. Emergency vehicles like fire trucks and ambulances need to respond quickly to save lives, but if they must slow almost to a stop at each speed hump due to their weight, this could significantly delay emergency response times. This creates a safety trade-off where reduced traffic speeds might be offset by delayed emergency services, directly undermining the plan's goal of enhancing safety.
The fact that Ardane's residential speed limit is higher than nearby towns where speed humps worked doesn't necessarily present a drawback. Speed humps could still be effective at reducing speeds from whatever baseline exists in Ardane. A higher starting speed limit doesn't mean speed humps won't work - they might even be more beneficial if current speeds are higher.
This mentions that unfamiliar motorists might encounter speed humps unexpectedly unless proper signage is installed. However, this isn't a serious drawback to the plan itself - it's simply pointing out the need for adequate warning signs, which is a standard and easily addressable implementation detail rather than a fundamental flaw in using speed humps.
This discusses bicyclists' preference for speed humps designed with side spaces for bikes to avoid going over the humps. Like choice D, this is more of a design consideration than a serious drawback. It suggests how speed humps should be constructed rather than identifying a problem with installing them at all.