The debate over converting abandoned railway tracks into community bike paths versus preserving them for potential future rail service - (Reading > Viewpoints)

The debate over converting abandoned railway tracks into community bike paths versus preserving them for potential future rail service

This pracrice is for Pro Members Only

Read the following message.

The city council's proposal to transform the defunct Riverside Railway corridor into a recreational bike trailLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.

Choose the best option according to the information.

The main point of disagreement between Sarah Chen and Marcus Thompson centers on . Patricia Rodriguez's position on the railway corridor suggests that . James Morrison's primary concern about converting the railway is that . The debate about the Riverside Railway corridor mainly focuses on . Based on the article, which statement about the railway corridor is true? .

The following is a comment by a reader. Complete the comment by choosing the best option to fill in each blank.

The debate over the Riverside Railway corridor . While Chen makes some valid points about the benefits of a bike path, I think Thompson's suggestion of a makes the most sense. After all, . Rodriguez's argument about immediate benefits seems shortsighted, especially considering that . The city council should carefully consider that once they make this decision, .

Back to Questions