In the last paragraph, the author discusses “another abode in the same neighbourhood” in order to A) defend the ideals expressed in the project despite the impossibility of fully realizing those ideals
B) suggest that any shortcomings in the project may have been due to inadequate funding
C) argue that the project would have been more pleasing if the workers had been more skillful
D) describe the improvements that could be made in the future to make the project successful
E) concede that a poorly conceived project can still provide a benefit to those involved

E) concede that a poorly conceived project can still provide a benefit to those involved

Explanation:

The author primarily contrasts the gaudiness of the “abode” with the tastefulness of another house nearby in order to advance her line of reasoning about the difficulty of making “improvements” to a rural setting. However, the author concludes by considering a new piece of evidence, the relationship between the project and its workers. In light of this new evidence, the author shifts her line of reasoning: instead of demonstrating that the project was an aesthetic failure, she explains that even though the results of the abode’s “improvements” were ugly, the project nevertheless provided employment and training for the workers involved. By pointing out the project’s benefits to the community, the author softens her criticisms of its aesthetic failures.

its hamilton county on plato.com