Mass transportation revised the social and economic fabric of the American city in
three fundamental ways. It catalyzed physical expansion, it sorted out people and land
uses, and it accelerated the inherent instability of urban life. By opening vast areas of
unoccupied land for residential expansion, the omnibuses, horse railways, commuter
(5) trains, and electric trolleys pulled settled regions outward two to four times more
distant from city centers than they were in the premodern era. In 1850, for example, the
borders of Boston lay scarcely two miles from the old business district; by the turn of
the century the radius extended ten miles. Now those who would afford it could live far
removed from the old city center and still commute there for work, shopping, and
(10) entertainment. The new accessibility of land around the periphery of almost every
major city sparked an explosion of real estate development and fueled what we now
know as urban sprawl. Between 1890 and 1920, for example, some 250,000 new
residential lots were recorded within the borders of Chicago, most of them located in
outlying areas. Over the same period, another 550,000 were plotted outside the city
(15) limits but within the metropolitan area. Anxious to take advantage of the possibilities
of commuting, real estate developers added 800,000 potential building sites to the
Chicago region in just thirty years-lots that could have housed five to six million
people.
Of course, many were never occupied; there was always a huge surplus of
(20) subdivided, but vacant, land around Chicago and other cities. These excesses
underscore a feature of residential expansion related to the growth of mass
transportation: urban sprawl was essentially unplanned. It was carried out by
thousands of small investors who paid little heed to coordinated land use or to future
land users. Those who purchased and prepared land for residential purposes,
(25) particularly land near or outside city borders where transit lines and middle-class
inhabitants were anticipated, did so to create demand as much as to respond to it.
Chicago is a prime example of this process. Real estate subdivision there proceeded
much faster than population growth.
1. With which of the following subjects is the
passage mainly concerned?
(A) Types of mass transportation
(B) Instability of urban life
(C) How supply and demand determine land use
(D) The effects of mass transportation on urban
expansion
2. The author mentions all of the following as effects
of mass transportation on cities EXCEPT
(A) growth in city area
(B) separation of commercial and residential
districts
(C) changes in life in the inner city
(D) increasing standards of living
3. The word "vast" in line 3 is closest in meaning to
(A) large
(B) basic
(C) new
(D) urban
4. The word "sparked" in line 11 is closest in
meaning to
(A) brought about
(B) surrounded
(C) sent out
(D) followed
5. Why does the author mention both Boston and
Chicago?
(A) To demonstrate positive and negative effects
of growth
(B) To show that mass transit changed many cities
(C) To exemplify cities with and without mass
transportation
(D) To contrast their rates of growth
6. The word "potential" in line 16 is closest in
meaning to
(A) certain
(B) popular
(C) improved
(D) possible
7. The word "many" in line 19 refers to
(A) people
(B) lots
(C) years
(D) developers
8. According to the passage, what was one
disadvantage of residential expansion?
(A) It was expensive.
(B) It happened too slowly.
(C) It was unplanned.
(D) It created a demand for public transportation.
9. The author mentions Chicago in the second
paragraph as an example of a city
(A) that is large
(B) that is used as a model for land development
(C) where land development exceeded population
growth
(D) with an excellent mass transportation system
参考答案:
DDAAB DBCC