A neighborhood group plans to protest the closing of the neighborhood's only recreation center on the grounds that to do so would leave the neighborhood without local access to a recreation center. ████ ████████████ ███████ ███ ███ ████ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ████████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ████ ███████ ████ ██████ █████ ████ ███ █████████ ████████████ █████ ██████ ██ ████████████ ██████████ ██ █ █████████ ███ ████ ██████████████
The resident concludes that it would be unacceptable to close the neighborhood's only recreation center. In support, the resident claims that access to recreational facilities is a necessary amenity for the neighborhood, and that this neighborhood already has the city's highest ratio of residents to recreation centers.
The resident assumes that the neighborhood would no longer have access to necessary recreational facilities if the recreation center closed. This means assuming that residents couldn't access recreational facilities elsewhere, like in another neighborhood's center, or outside of a recreation center. The resident also assumes that members of the neighborhood currently use the center's recreational facilities.
Each of the following, if █████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ████████ ███████
A large number ██ ███ ██████████████ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ███████ █████ ████████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ████████████ ███████████
Children, the main █████ ██ ████████████ ███████████ ████ ██ █ ██████████████████ █████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████████ ███████████
Often the recreation ██████ ██ ███ ████████████ ██ ████ ███ ███ █████ █████
Programs that are █████████ ██████ ██ █████ ██████████ ███████ ████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ██████████████ ██████████ ██████ ███ ██ ████ ██ █████████
As people become ████ ████████ ██ █████████ ███ ████████ ██████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████████████ ████ ██████████