The author's point of view is that the proposed extension of Highway 85 would be bad for the community, specifically downtown businesses, families, and the environment. The author's purpose is to persuade readers to vote against the extension.
The author presents several arguments to support their point of view. Firstly, they argue that the extension would negatively impact downtown businesses. They claim that by diverting traffic away from downtown, the extension would reduce the number of potential customers, leading to decreased sales and possibly even the closure of some businesses. This, in turn, could harm the local economy and lead to job losses.
Additionally, the author suggests that the extension would negatively affect families. They argue that the increased traffic and noise from the extended highway would reduce the quality of life for families living in the vicinity. They may point out concerns about safety for children, citing the potential for higher accident rates and increased air pollution which could lead to health issues such as respiratory problems.
Moreover, the environmental impact of the extension is also highlighted by the author. They argue that the construction of new roads and the additional traffic would harm the environment by contributing to air and noise pollution. They express concerns about the destruction of natural areas, the disruption of wildlife habitats, and the potential for increased greenhouse gas emissions.
The author's purpose seems clear: to convince readers to vote against the extension of Highway 85. By highlighting the negative consequences they believe would occur, they aim to persuade readers that the extension is not a beneficial plan for the community. The author hopes that by presenting these arguments, readers will be swayed to oppose the project.