Survey: longer recreation centre hours or more street trees

I think the city should choose to plant the street trees. In my opinion this project is better for everyone in the city, not only for some people.

First, trees make our city more beautiful and more green. In my street there is almost no trees, so in summer it is very hot and there is no shade when I walk with my kids to school. If the city plant trees near schools, the children can play outside in the shade. Also trees make the air more clean and this is good for the health.

Second, trees will stay for long time. The recreation centre hours is only for three years, after that the money is finish. But trees can live fifty years or more, and the city will take care of them in first five years. I think this is a good use of money.

Of course, longer hours in recreation centre is good for people who work late. But not many people go to the gym at 11 p.m. Trees are for all people, young and old.

So I vote for option B.

I would choose option A, which is to extend the hours of the recreation centres. I think this option would be more useful for the people in our city.

The main reason for my choice is that many people work during the day and they cannot go to the recreation centres when they are open. For example, I work until 7 p.m. most days, and by the time I get home and eat dinner the recreation centre is already closed. If the centres were open until 11 p.m., I would be able to go swimming or use the gym after work. I think there are many other people in the same situation as me.

Also, having more hours in the weekend mornings would be good for families. Parents could take their kids to the recreation centre early in the morning before doing other activities.

Planting trees is also a good idea, but I think the recreation centres would help more people right now. That is why I prefer option A.

My vote goes to extended recreation centre hours. For households juggling late shifts and childcare, access to existing facilities would be a practical return on the surplus.

My neighbour finishes her warehouse shift at eight, and I sometimes look after her daughter. Last Tuesday she reached the centre shortly before closing, then went home because a hurried swim hardly justified the admission charge. An eleven o'clock closing time would let her eat, change and exercise without treating every minute as a deadline. Across three centres, the proposal could accomodate several different neighbourhoods rather than concentrating the benefit in one location.

Early weekend opening matters to my family too. I could visit while my partner stayed with our daughter, avoiding the need to arrange childcare during the day. Council should check which activities late visitors actually want and schedule staff accordingly.

Our street would certainly welcome shade trees. Nevertheless, a five-year care commitment does not solve our immediate access problem. I favour the three-year extension, with attendance and staffing costs reviewed annually so a useful service can become a sustainable one.