We have no reason to think this would result based on the development plan described at the end of P3. Duany doesn’t advocate the elimination of cars, so there might still be some traffic and traffic flow. Just because various businesses are within walking distance doesn’t imply there will be absolutely zero car traffic of any kind. Saying that the need for zoning laws would be “eliminated” is too strong.

We have no reason to think this would result based on the development plan described at the end of P3. If anything, there might be a greater percentage with two or more apartments, because people would be living in a more urban environment.

Not supported, because if stores and cafes are more spread out, people might spend less time traveling to business districts. We have no reason to think these urban neighborhoods would be further away from central business districts or require more travel time to get to them.

Not supported, because we have no reason to think the need for coordination would be “eliminated.” Maybe there would be less need for it, but that doesn’t imply it would be completely eliminated.

This is the only answer that has at least some support. Duany’s plan would involve grocery stores and small neighborhood schools all within walking distance of residents rather than having a central area with grocery stores and schools. This suggests there would be more grocery stores and schools. If you don’t like this answer, remember that this isn’t a Must Be True question from Logical Reasoning. We just need to pick the most supported out of the five answer choices available.