Tips: Separate the speaker's own opinion from the views of the groups they describe.

Why the other options are wrong:

• a promising idea, mainly because of the cleaner air and lower noise.: Cleaner air and less noise are reason enough only for some residents. The speaker's own view rests on careful planning.
• a promising idea, best limited to one or two streets for good.: Using one or two streets is a pilot idea from the middle-ground group. Trials let cities adjust plans, so they are not meant to stay fixed.
• a promising idea that should wait until transit reaches every area.: The speaker wants transit options in place. They never say transit must reach every area before anything starts.

Correct Answer: supported short-term street closures to reduce pollution.

Why this is correct: The survey found that 62% of residents in large cities supported short-term street closures. Their reason was to reduce pollution.

Tips: Keep each view linked to the people who hold it, and to their reason.

Why the other options are wrong:

• supported short-term street closures to bring shoppers downtown.: Bringing people downtown is part of the advocates' case. The survey gives reducing pollution as the reason.
• supported short-term street closures to make walking safer.: Safe and pleasant streets come from the urban planner's comment. The survey gives reducing pollution as the reason.
• supported street closures only during festivals and special events.: Closing streets only during special events is an idea from the middle-ground group. It is not the survey result.

Correct Answer: draw larger crowds and lift many cafés' weekend sales.

Why this is correct: City figures showed foot traffic rose by over 30% during pedestrian periods. Many cafés also reported higher weekend sales.

Tips: Ask what each source actually measured, then match it to the point it supports.

Why the other options are wrong:

• draw larger crowds, though café sales stayed about the same.: Many cafés reported higher weekend sales. Sales did not stay the same.
• bring more people downtown on weekdays as well as weekends.: The foot traffic rise was during pedestrian periods. Nothing is said about weekdays.
• make visitors stay longer and spend more on each trip.: Staying longer and spending more is the urban planner's suggestion. The Montréal figures measure the whole area, not each visitor.

Correct Answer: understanding, saying the concern reflects real needs.

Why this is correct: The speaker says this argument is not simply dismissive of change. It reflects the reality that many Canadians still depend on cars.

Tips: Listen for the words the speaker adds after describing a view. They show the speaker's attitude.

Why the other options are wrong:

• polite, but suggesting the concern is mostly fear of change.: The speaker says the opposite. The argument is not simply dismissive of change.
• sympathetic, but sure that better transit already solves it.: The speaker says cities should make sure transit is in place. They never say transit already solves the problem.
• respectful, but saying the concern matters less than pollution.: The speaker never weighs car users' needs against pollution. They say the concern reflects real needs.

Correct Answer: fewer cars, even briefly, change the air and the noise.

Why this is correct: Fewer cars, even temporarily, mean lower emissions and less noise. At the Vancouver festival, the speaker noticed the difference in air quality and noise.

Tips: Think about which point a personal story is attached to.

Why the other options are wrong:

• street festivals bring more visitors and better café sales.: Visitors and higher café sales come from the Montréal figures. The Vancouver memory is about air and noise.
• people notice less noise much more than cleaner air.: The speaker noticed a difference in both air quality and noise. They do not say one was much bigger.
• the air stays cleaner for days after a closure ends.: The speaker noticed a difference during the festival. Nothing is said about the air after it ended.

Correct Answer: keep the trial and change it so that these seniors can still get downtown.

Why this is correct: The speaker wants to strengthen downtown without excluding certain groups. Trials let cities collect data and adjust plans, so the city should change the trial.

Tips: Apply the speaker's own advice to the new situation before you choose.

Why the other options are wrong:

• keep the trial and move the car traffic onto nearby residential streets.: Critics warn that rerouted traffic causes congestion on residential streets. Nothing suggests the speaker would accept that new problem.
• pause the trial until public transit reaches every part of the city.: The speaker wants transit options in place, not transit in every part of the city. Trials are meant to be adjusted, not stopped.
• add more closed streets, since the rise in foot traffic shows it works.: Rising foot traffic is only part of the evidence. The speaker does not want a plan that leaves some groups out.