Correct Answer: whether four homes should be allowed on most lots
Passage Reference: the city’s plan to allow up to four homes on almost any residential lot, with no special hearing
Why this is correct: The writer is following the city’s plan to allow up to four homes on almost any residential lot. Every person in the post gives a view on that plan.
Tips: For a “mainly about” question, find the city plan in the first paragraph. Then check that each speaker is reacting to it.
Why the other options are wrong:
- how to add a second storey to a bungalow: The bungalow is the blogger’s own home, but the blog post never explains how to add a storey to it.
- why Halifax needs more frequent bus routes: Bus routes come up only in Dahl’s and Latimer’s views about where new homes should go.
- which neighbourhoods have the oldest sewer pipes: Old sewer pipes are one of Dahl’s worries, but the blog post never lists neighbourhoods by their pipes.
Correct Answer: Leopold Dahl
Passage Reference: he is willing to accept duplexes near frequent bus routes, but he argues that fourplexes on streets with old sewer pipes and full curbs should be checked lot by lot
Why this is correct: Leopold Dahl is willing to accept duplexes near frequent bus routes. But he argues that fourplexes on streets with old pipes and full curbs should be checked lot by lot.
Tips: The question joins two views with “but”. Read each speaker’s lines for someone who accepts one kind of home and wants a check for another.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Calla Kowalski: Calla Kowalski wants fourplexes allowed across the city with clear limits and ready-made plans, not a check of each lot.
- Radha Blais: Radha Blais would accept the plan if some units rent below the median. She does not ask for each lot to be checked.
- Ugo Latimer: Ugo Latimer wants a citywide map of sewer and parking capacity. That is not the same as checking every lot one at a time.
Correct Answer: cities where clear design limits raised permit numbers
Passage Reference: cities that set clear limits on height, setbacks and green space saw permit numbers rise without any sudden towers
Why this is correct: Kowalski argues that clear limits on height, setbacks and green space let more homes be built without towers. So cities where such limits raised permit numbers would back her.
Tips: Find Kowalski’s claim about what firm building rules do. The right choice is proof that would make that claim stronger.
Why the other options are wrong:
- residents on narrow streets who cannot find parking: Parking trouble supports Dahl’s warning about more cars on streets with no driveways, not Kowalski’s citywide plan.
- reports of backed-up sewers on older streets: Sewer problems would support Dahl and Latimer, who want pipes and capacity checked before permits go out.
- owners who would rather keep their bungalows: Owners who prefer bungalows would not show that the new rule produces more homes, which is Kowalski’s claim.
Correct Answer: some new units would rent below the median for years
Passage Reference: if a share of the units in each building had to rent below the local median for a fixed number of years
Why this is correct: Blais would support the plan on one condition. A share of the units in each building would have to rent below the local median for a fixed number of years.
Tips: Look for “if” in Blais’s lines. Read the whole condition, including how long it should last.
Why the other options are wrong:
- every new unit would be sold rather than rented: Blais speaks for renters and wants some units kept at lower rents, so selling every unit is not her condition.
- each permit would need a public hearing: Blais wants the rent promise written into the permit. She does not ask for hearings, which Kowalski wants to avoid.
- rents on older homes would be frozen: Blais’s condition covers units in the new buildings, not rents in older homes.
Correct Answer: support the change and ask for a few safeguards
Passage Reference: So my wish list is simple: the citywide rule, a rent-protected share, and the capacity map first.
Why this is correct: In the last paragraph, Kowalski has won the writer over. Then comes a wish list: the citywide rule plus a rent-protected share and the capacity map first.
Tips: Read the last paragraph, where the writer gives a clear view and then a short list. Both parts together show the purpose.
Why the other options are wrong:
- warn neighbours that fourplexes will ruin the street: The writer wants to build a fourplex for the family, so the post is not a warning against them.
- report how council voted on the new rules: No vote is reported. The plan is still being discussed.
- complain about the cost of building a fourplex: Building costs are never the blogger’s complaint. The cost worry in the blog post is about rents for renters.
Correct Answer: a catalogue of plans approved in advance
Passage Reference: she wants a catalogue of pre-approved plans so small builders are not stuck paying for hearings
Why this is correct: Kowalski, the planner, wants a catalogue of pre-approved plans so small builders do not have to pay for hearings.
Tips: The comment writer is a small builder, so look for the planner’s idea that helps small builders. It is in the second paragraph.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a single flat fee for small builders: Kowalski talks about the cost of hearings, but she never suggests a flat fee.
- a faster hearing for small builders: Kowalski wants small builders to skip hearings with ready-made plans, not to have faster hearings.
- a grant for builders who use local wood: No grant or building material is mentioned in the blog post.
Correct Answer: be priced beyond the reach of renters
Passage Reference: the new units could be priced beyond the reach of the renters the change is supposed to help
Why this is correct: Blais says the new units need some protection. Without it, they could be priced beyond the reach of the renters the change is supposed to help.
Tips: The comment names Blais, so go back to her lines in the third paragraph. Look for what she fears will happen “without some protection”.
Why the other options are wrong:
- be too small for families with children: Blais never talks about the size of the units. Her worry is the price for renters.
- block sunlight from the houses next door: Sunlight is never mentioned. Kowalski’s height limits are the only rules about building size.
- sit empty for most of the year: Nobody says the units will stay empty. Blais worries about who can afford them.
Correct Answer: follow bus and train service
Passage Reference: the new rules should follow bus and train service instead of treating every quiet crescent the same
Why this is correct: Latimer argues that the new rules should follow bus and train service instead of treating every quiet crescent the same.
Tips: Find Latimer’s lines and look for what he says the rules should be linked to. Notice the phrase “instead of”.
Why the other options are wrong:
- follow the width of each street: Latimer never mentions street width. Dahl is the one who talks about full curbs and cars.
- follow the size of each lot: Lot size comes up only in the blogger’s description of the bungalow, not in Latimer’s view.
- follow what each neighbourhood votes for: No neighbourhood vote is proposed. Latimer ties the rules to transit service.
Correct Answer: can no longer manage her stairs
Passage Reference: My mother lives alone in Truro and can no longer manage her stairs
Why this is correct: The blogger writes that their mother lives alone in Truro and can no longer manage her stairs.
Tips: The comment is about the writer’s mother. Look for the sentence about her in the first paragraph and read why she needs help.
Why the other options are wrong:
- has just moved to Halifax: The mother still lives in Truro. She has not moved yet and is waiting to start packing.
- needs a car to reach the shops: The blog post never mentions a car or shopping. The problem is the stairs.
- has never lived in a city: The blog post says nothing about where the mother lived before Truro.
Correct Answer: a public map of sewer and parking capacity
Passage Reference: he also wants a public map of sewer and parking capacity released before the first permits go out
Why this is correct: Latimer, the transit planner, wants a public map of sewer and parking capacity released before the first permits go out.
Tips: The comment calls him the transit planner. Look for what he wants released before the first permits go out.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a vote by neighbours on each building: Latimer never suggests a vote. He wants information published before permits go out.
- a limit of two homes on each lot: Latimer backs more homes and never asks for a two-home limit. Dahl is the one who prefers duplexes in some places.
- a parking permit for every household: Latimer wants parking capacity shown on a map, not permits handed out to each household.
