The following appeared in an editorial in a local newspaper. "Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic. Opponents note that last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. Their suggested alternative proposal is adding a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, it is argued, thereby reducing rush-hour traffic."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The authors argument is that, the increased rush- hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center. Inorder to reduce the traffic jam commutators proposed an idea of the motorist lobby is to be widden and also to a lane. But, opponents are alternate proposal is to add a bicycle lane as many of the commutators are bicyclists. the author didn't mentioned who are the opponents we have to consern about the commutators those who complained and they are facing the problem.
Firstly, there is no evidence that majority of commutators are bicyclists . there can be a chance that bicyclists are trying to use the chance to gain their benifits and not conserning the commutators who actually facing the issue.
Secondly, every city has its unique road structures the
