►
From YouTube: Imagine Boston 2030 Forums of the Future "The History and Future of Planning in Boston"
Description
As part of Imagine Boston 2030's ongoing engagement efforts, a series of panel discussions titled "Forums of the Future" are being held to engage local planning experts and community members on how Boston has changed as a city, the role planning has played in shaping it's evolution and how residents can help shape the City's future. This particular forum was held at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute in Dorchester and is tilted "The History and Future of Planning in Boston."
A
A
A
Good
evening,
it's
nice
to
the
Edward
M
Kennedy
Institute,
the
United
States
Senate.
My
name
is
Gina
Perl
and
I'm.
The
Institute's
chief
strategy
officer
we're
really
honored
to
host
the
city's
first
forum
on
the
future
and
particularly
excited
because
it's
taking
place
during
civic
engagement
week
in
the
city
of
Boston.
A
Senator
Kennedy
strongly
believed
that
successful
democracy
depends
on
Japan
ground
participation.
He
was
a
constant
advocate
for
empowering
people
to
take
an
active
role
in
their
community
and
we
envision
this
Institute
as
a
place
where
that
notion
would
be
fostered.
Earlier.
This
month,
the
Institute
released
our
latest
national
civic
engagement
poll
and
I
wanted
to
show
just
a
couple
of
the
results
with
you.
It's
a
play
that
measures
Americans
level
of
civic
engagement,
their
knowledge
of
government
and
their
knowledge
specifically
about
the
United
States
Senate.
A
We
did
find
that
a
majority
of
Americans
just
this
year
have
taken
personal
action
to
engage
with
the
government.
That's
a
very
inspiring
number
and
a
real
testament
to
civic
action.
Even
more
impressive
90%
of
Americans
agree
that
educating
young
people
about
our
government
leads
to
better
democracy
and
ninety-one
percent
agree
that
ordinary
citizens
need
to
become
more
active
to
safeguard
our
democracy.
A
So
you're
all
here
tonight,
because
you
know
the
value
of
active
civic
participation
and
how
that
helps
make
our
democracy
work.
So
I
I
do
tip
my
cap
to
you
on
behalf
of
the
Institute,
but
that
commitment
to
civic
engagement
is
really
why
we're
so
proud
to
have
to
host
this
forum.
So
thank
you
for
being
this
evening
and
thank
you
to
the
city
of
Boston
and
to
imagine
Boston
2030
for
bringing
important
discussions
like
this
to
the
Institute.
A
Please
do
come
back
and
visit
us
come
take
in
the
full
experience
of
our
exhibits
and
programs.
You
are
always
always
welcome
here.
So
now
it's
my
honor
to
introduce
the
next
speaker.
Joyce
Linehan
serves
as
the
chief
of
policy
for
Boston
mayor
Martin,
J
Walsh.
She
is
a
cherished
Dorchester
resident
and
a
genuine
asset
to
the
city.
Please
welcome
Joyce
Linehan.
B
Cherished
asset
I
feel
like
I'm
at
my
weak
or
something
hi.
Everyone
on
behalf
of
Mayor
Walsh
I'd,
like
to
welcome
you
here
to
the
first
forums
on
the
future
that
we're
holding
as
part
of
the
imagine,
Boston
2030
engagement
process
really
really
pleased
to
be
here
at
the
Edward
M
Kennedy
Institute
in
my
hometown
of
Dorchester,
Massachusetts,
I'm.
Sure
I'm,
not
the
only
one
at
this
moment
in
time
who
misses
senator
Kennedy
dreadfully,
so
I
really
do
imagine.
Boston
2030
is
a
comprehensive
plan.
B
B
B
So
we
hope
that
you'll
consider
joining
us
for
those.
At
this
time,
I'd
like
to
introduce
our
moderator
for
this
evening.
Renee
law
Renee
has
long
suffered
politics
in
public
policy
as
a
Boston
Globe
columnist,
and
she
was
the
newspapers
top
editor
of
the
editorial
page
for
nine
years.
She's
been
active,
an
active
thought
leader
in
American
politics,
media
and
public
policy
at
the
local
and
national
levels.
B
Currently
she
is
the
editor
of
architecture,
Boston,
magazine
and
I
think
there
are
copies
of
that
around
here
tonight:
the
quarterly
Ideas
publication
of
the
Boston
society
of
architects,
who
are
a
valued
partner
of
the
city.
She
also
covers
politics
and
architecture
for
W,
B,
urs,
cognoscenti
and
occasionally
contributes
to
the
globe's
op-ed
page.
So
please
welcome
Renee
law.
C
Well,
hi
welcome,
as
you
just
heard,
my
name
is
Renee
loss,
I'm,
a
occasional
columnist
for
the
Boston
Globe
and
editor
of
architecture,
Boston
magazine,
while
our
esteemed
panel
is
filing
in
I,
just
wanted
to
say
hello
and
welcome,
and
thank
you
for
having
us
here
tonight.
It
is
such
a
beautiful
space
to
be
having
this
kind
of
conversation
in
the
perfect
really
sight
for
a
sort
of
civic
dialogue
that
we
hope
to
happen
tonight.
C
I've
lived
in
Boston
for
47
years,
which
makes
me
a
newcomer
on
this
stage
and
kind
of
a
carpetbagger
but
I
hope
you'll
bear
with
me.
My
role
here
is
to
introduce
our
panelists
and
then
to
facilitate
a
conversation
for
about
45
minutes,
after
which
time
we'll
be
hearing
from
you.
We
really
want
to
have
this,
be
a
conversation
and
I'll
be
trying
to
facilitate
questions
from
the
floor.
I
think
there
will
be
people
with
roving
mics
for
you
at
that
time.
So
why
don't
I
just
start
with
head
wrestle
bougie.
C
He
is
a
you
know.
Of
course,
everybody
on
this
panel
is
well-known
to
everybody
in
the
audience,
so
I'm
going
to
make
this
very
brief.
Fred
is
a
civil
engineer
and
professor
at
MIT,
who
was
the
state
secretary
of
transportation
for
three
terms.
He
was
an
advisor
also
to
former
mayor
Kevin
white,
which
is
where
I
first
met
him
when
he
was
the
director
of
the
East
Boston
little
City
Hall.
Next,
we
have
Chris
grimly.
He
is
a
partner
in
the
design.
C
Next
we
have
Ted
Ted
Lance
mark
is
the
new
director
of
the
Dukakis
Center
for
Urban
and
Regional
Planning
at
Northeastern
University,
a
fairly
new
position
for
him
and
he's
also
former
president
of
the
Boston
Architectural
College
and
an
architect.
Tony
Lee
is
an
urban
planner
who
served
as
chief
planner
for
the
VRA
and
head
of
the
school
of
planning
and
design
at
MIT,
and
he
was
on
the
original
team
and
I
guess.
C
Fred
was
as
well
on
the
original
team
that
devised
the
last
comprehensive
plan
we
had
for
the
city
of
Boston
back
in
1965
and
then
of
course,
Mel
Mel
King
needs.
No
introduction
in
this
audience
is
an
activist
and
educator
who
is
also
a
former
state
representative
from
Boston
and
a
finalist
for
mayor
in
1983
I.
Just
wanted
welcome
everybody
here.
C
Okay,
so
let's
get
started,
everybody
can
hear
okay
good.
There
were
a
lot
of
people
up
here
and
there
is
a
great
amount
of
history
and
wisdom
and
experience
represented
on
this
panel.
So
I
want
to
urge
everybody
to
try
to
keep
your
responses
brief
and
really
listen
to
each
other.
So
we
can
make
this
more
of
a
conversation
instead
of
a
you
know,
cereal
cereal
remarks.
C
C
For
many
years,
people
felt
that
the
development
system
in
Boston
was
kind
of
ad
hoc
and
one-off
and
opaque,
and
nobody
really
understood
the
rules
and
or
maybe
there
weren't
any
rules,
and
so
I
wanted
to
I
was
going
to
start
with
Ted
yeah
start
with
Ted
right
in
the
middle
I.
Just
wanted
to
ask
you
and
anybody
else,
you've
all
been
here
a
long
time
in
the
city,
but
was
starting
with
Ted.
How
does
this
plan
I
mean
Joyce
mentioned
learning
about
the
mistakes
learning
from
our
mistakes
of
the
past?
D
For
starters,
when
Mayor
Walsh
was
elected,
he
and
Joyce
and
I
think
a
number
of
other
senior
advisors
knew
from
the
outset
in
part,
because
the
electoral
process
which
they
had
come
through
after
a
mayor
who
had
been
in
place
for
20
years,
that
the
city
was
a
very
different
place
than
it
had
been
20
years
before
the
demographics
were
different.
The
financial
model
of
the
city
was
different.
D
In
a
way
that
was
more
consistent
with
both
the
perception
that
we
had
in
the
global
economy,
but
also
in
relation
to
the
fact
that
we
were
just
a
very
different
city
and
was
clear
that
the
old
top-down
model,
driven
by
a
handful
of
planners,
that
one
or
two
very
distinguished
universities
in
town
or
the
the
bottom
up
model.
It
seemed
to
be
driven
by
just
a
lot
of
Community
Planning
and
meetings.
That
often
ended
up
in
a
kind
of
inertia
and
stasis
needed
to
be
looked
at
differently.
D
D
That
could
more
inclusively,
engage
people
in
thinking
about
how
the
culture
of
the
city
had
changed,
and
it
wasn't
just
a
matter
of
changing
street
grids
or
responding
to
all
of
the
new
land
that
had
come
into
being
on
the
waterfront
and
that
a
new
way
of
thinking
about
how
cities,
envision
and
plan
themselves
into
the
future
was
necessary.
And
this
process
was
the
result
of
that.
You.
C
In
fact,
between
1965
and
today.
In
fact,
the
sort
of
branding
for
the
city
of
Boston
at
that
point
back
in
1965,
was
Boston
City
of
ideas.
And
you
know
this
is
what
we
think
of
ourselves
as
today
as
well,
and
so
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
just
talk
a
little
bit
about
yes,
some
of
the
changes
in
the
city
over
that
long
period
of
time,
and
also
maybe
some
of
the
similarities.
E
Positive
place
and
as
was
even
water
for
1913
and
I,
think
appearantly
speak
operation
in
a
thousand
more
severe
water
shortages
and
wrong
pressure
and
CBN
fell
apart,
and
what
happened
was
that
private
and
problem
of
solution
for
starters
and
no
softness
back
and
the
because
it
was
bring
people
back
your
mass
accuracy,
something
that
reminded
with
us
I
was
on
walkways
anything
what
God
was
already
having
received
and
I
think
the
p.m.
and
so
when
I
eat
Austin
was
so
in
a
pond.
E
Positive
magic,
Island,
Club
and
have
stopped
because
actually
have
a
building
to
live
is
finite.
Finances
are
endowed
with
the
music
cities.
Are
we
humans
will
be
between
God
campuses
or
plan
for
binary,
and
they
recognize
that
context
and
can't
have
a
master
time
that
extra
part
of
the
memory
of
that
time
economy.
The
working.
E
E
E
B
E
Way,
communities
reacted
to
the
Congress,
create
awesome,
so
Lapidus
merged
to
use
of
Apple
time's
up
Andrew
Lewis
versus
what
was
the
one
held
by
his
a
whole
CDC
woman
in
Boston
substandard
that
the
huge
part
in
creating
a
theory
of
this
for
insulting
or
roughly
causing
a
lot
of
my
partner
and
I.
Think
apostle
created
an
agronomist
involved
taking
one
of
the
plan
here,
then
blood
and
I
are
removed
and
are
in.
F
Bring
also
sort
of
focus
the
discussion
on
the
planning
process
itself,
imagine
Boston,
2030
and
and
I
think
you
know.
Certainly
a
master
plan
like
that
you
know
is
an
opportunity
to
frame
sort
of
the
future
of
the
city
in
so
many
ways,
as
this
plan
has
been
doing.
But
I
also
think
that
you
know
there
has
been
in.
F
Then
how
do
we
really
assess
and
learn
if
you
are
really
incorporating
the
voice
of
the
people?
And
you
know,
I
say
this,
both
as
somebody
who's
really
a
champion
for
this
plan,
as
well
as
somebody
who
has
a
healthy,
skepticism
and
I.
Think
that
is
my
role.
You
know,
as
as
a
citizen
as
well
as
an
academic
for
who
practices
in
this
field.
So
really
I
am
waiting
to
see
when
the
you
know,
parts
of
the
plan
actually
start
to
take.
F
You
know
take
shape
what
the
reaction
of
the
city
is
going
to
be
because
as
much
as
we
can
predict
sort
of
and
try
for
the
optimal
outcomes
the
pro.
If
the
process
is
right
or
not,
and
if
it
really
lives
in
the
spirit
of
which
it
is
being
sort
of
citizen
engaged
and
we'll
only
know
when
we
can
assess
that
and
and
I
think
I
am
skeptical
about
sort
of
as
much
as
I
appreciate.
C
Know
I
want
to
turn
to
Mel
for
a
second,
because
we
heard
a
second
ago
about
how
Boston
is
growing.
Population
is
growing
and
we're
coming
back
from
years
of
Boston
being
kind
of
a
backwater
in
the
60s
and
Johnny
brought
us
back
to
the
60s,
but
I'm.
You
know,
I
think
about
growth
in
the
city
of
Boston
is
both
a
blessing
and
a
curse
right.
You
know
it's
great
that
the
city
is
growing.
C
We
have
low
unemployment
rates
in
most
of
the
city,
and
yet
the
growth
is
also
creating
a
lot
of
pressure
on
neighborhoods
and
I.
Guess
I'm
wondering
what
you
think
about
that
you
know
how
do
we
manage?
How
can
planning
or
the
city
plans
help
manage
the
growth
of
the
city
so
that
people
are
not
displaced
and
so
that
the
city
is
not
just
for
the
wealthy,
which
is
a
concern
I
know
of
yours
and
of
mine?
How
can
a
plan
help
us
there.
G
G
Seems
to
me
that
the
first
question
is
in
whose
interest
are
we
operating
and
until
we
are
clear
about
that,
this
conversation
and
others
like
it?
I
was
charade,
okay
and
so
I
start
that,
because,
in
terms
of
you
know
even
the
state
government
another,
the
thing
that
want
to
know
is
in
who's
interested.
Now
let
me
just
back
up
I'm
a
student
at
Clapton
College
in
Orangeburg,
South
Carolina
I
get
a
letter
with
a
clipping
of
The
Herald
newspaper,
which
describes
my
neighborhood
as
a
slum
Skid,
Row,
I'll
open
it
say.
G
G
The
hello
traveler
newspaper
and
guess
where
it
was
like
on
the
block
where
I
grew
up
a
little
Side
Story
I'm
in
the
head
of
the
herald,
travelers
office.
Several
years
later
and
I'm
asking
some
questions
and
I
said
you
know
we're
neighbors
and
he
said.
Oh,
you
live
in
Danvers
I
said
no,
you
sitting
on
a
place
where
I
grew
up
right,
and
so
we
could
try
to
get
them
to
understand
that
part
of
the
DB.
G
The
way
together
in
renewal
was
to
devalue
the
people
to
the
values
area,
and
so
we
had
to
work
to
over
over
overcome
that.
And
so,
when
you
ask
the
question
in
whose
interest?
Because
that
to
me
is
the
first
critical
piece
in
terms
of
what
we're
trying
to
do
to
improve
the
situation
and
it
turns
out
that
the
redevelop
so
T
was
not
operating
under
the
urban
renewal
laws
and
yeah.
We
had
that
demonstration,
which
shows
now
ten
city.
G
But
what
happened
is
that
when
we
found
out
that
the
law
required
the
urban
renewal
districts
to
be
led
by
an
elected
body
from
that
area,
and
it
was
Tom
Atkins,
Joel,
Timothy
and
those
folks
who
are
on
the
City
Council,
once
we
went
back
and
saw
what
the
law
required,
who
made
the
BR
a
change
so
that
we
were
able
to
ultimately
make
the
decisions.
And
one
reason
why
can
city
exist?
G
And
some
of
the
other
things
is
because
that's
the
approach
and
I
need
to
say
that
the
fact
is
that
we
still
operating
in
a
way
that
the
PRA
still
believes
it
has
absolute
power
about
the
decisions
that
are
to
be
made
about
what's
happening
on
the
land
and
every
time.
There's
something
that
comes
up.
I
try
to
get
the
folks
there
to
say
we
need
to
have
a
vote
in
the
neighborhood
one,
that's
an
official
representative
of
the
people
and
we
can't
get
that
to
happen.
G
H
H
H
H
Accident
that
is
this
type
of
way
of
eating
that
incredibly,
her
feel
bad.
We
look
for
you
in
fact.
The
worst
appeals
that
come
up
that
are
making
you.
What
is
this
Martin,
a
needlepoint
that
was
going
to
was
then
destroyed
in
our
streets
within
two
neighborhoods
to
build
highways
Turnpike,
it
was
what
was
pretty
good
and
apparently
the
crooked
Nam
reaction.
I
H
Seven
defendants
appoint
about
the
action
and
reaction.
It's
a
very
important
part
of
what
happened.
People
now
on
Ted
come
on,
so
this
loss
processes
good
in
within
product
and
that's
an
exciting
period,
was
busted
rivet.
You
know
often
wonder
if
you
were
part
of
something
important,
but
this
total
pieces
that
has
to
be
emphasized,
which
is
as
important
as
was
some
people
like
now
and
said
not
entirely
to
be
making
the
case
that
this
is
not
acceptable.
How
to
change.
H
If
we
have
done
much
enough,
have
people
like
Alan
option
and
crying
soft
really
simple
things,
but
there
is
something
to
listen.
There
was
a
a
process,
and
now,
finally,
in
Ted
Nelson
as
they
are
on
mention
we're
going
to
replace
the
board
of
hope
and
a
firm
in
the
industry
in
the
city
we
must
elect,
because
shortly
this
assignment
is
not
moving
destroyers.
H
H
Responsive
and
responsible
of
the
agency
is
an
essential
products
and
plan.
Given
they
see
too
much
layin
on
earth,
their
own
mental
or
reasonable
place,
the
customer
is
still
he
may
look
and
not
or
not,
and
that
requires
quite
as
money
which
requires
taxes
somewhat
cumbersome,
because
you
know
yeah
you're
getting
milk
without
money
and
while
interplay
was
going
on
and
God,
it
went
up
resistance
led
by
people
like
milk
to
get
the
government
to
change.
They
are
all
sold
as
a
very
farsighted
processes.
H
Hooded
voice,
like
in
that
case,
before
we
end
ETA
it
without
mannequin
pump,
was
operated
in
order
to
evolve
over
pigmentation
to
grow
not
to
the
same
amount
of
seriously
inadequate
sirs.
We
had
last
week
next
week,
excise
model.
It
was
the
first
a
lot
of
money.
A
lot
of
people
are
divided
more
so,
in
fact,
he
kind
of
just
well.
A
selfless
call
right
into
existence
requires
a
process
to
think
about
what
you
want
and
required
to
process
is
done.
H
H
H
H
H
It's
what
if
the
process
is
good
and
there
are
melts
and
days
to
be
speaking
out
and
also
how
children
transactions
listening?
What
comes
out
of
that
may
be
a
very
different
plan,
but
one
created
people,
the
society.
Where
are
we
trying
to
go?
Which
direction
we
trying
to
go?
It's
going
over?
This
have
important
otherwise,
until
some
important
role,
some
people
watch
movies.
Other
things
go
to
plan
B.
H
Catherine's
recently,
heaven
we
had
not
with
a
sharing
of
the
jobs
from
Versailles
instruction
in
street,
immediately
I
think
we
as
food
from
the
rivers
work
on
a
construction
job
today,
races
woman
is
a
very
different
process.
Ability
graduate
is
very
essential.
It's
important,
sir
Henry.
The
widen
bill
is
important.
So
now
we'll
look
an
order
called
house.
It's
a
housing,
the
people
who
have
way
more
money.
He
is
not
happy
and
we're
asking.
Is
it
for
you
having
some
jobs
away
in
satisfied
and
that
you
have
come
to
comprehend
and
sports.
H
Because
this
happened
in
sports
philosophy,
with
a
small
version
of
these
super
popular
and
getting
butchered
construction
workers
and
new
jobs
coming
to
shell
first
through
the
glennd74
little.
So
yes
right
people
to
sustain
construction
processes,
sherry,
but
what
he
Belton
does.
That
does
that
you
know.
J
I
J
Our
book
heroic
really
examines
this
Karen
and
I
kind
of
want
to
go
out
a
few
canards,
maybe
and
sort
of
cut
down
or
tilt
at
windmills
in
a
way
and
go
against
like
easy
binaries
of
Moses
versus
Jacobs
and
West
End
and
New
York
streets,
and
to
really
encourage
a
more
nuanced
understanding
of
what
needed
to
happen
in
the
city.
From
a
Canadian
who
moved
here
in
1999
and
never
thought
he
would
stay
and
now
is
fully
embedded
in
the
culture
of
the
city
and
I.
I
J
It
goes,
it
goes
back
to
something
that
Ted
was
talking
about,
and
it
is
the
brand
of
the
city
and
the
city
of
ideas
really
comes
from
the
globe
insert
from
1957,
which
was
illustrated
by
Muriel
Cooper
and
put
out
by
the
globe
in
the
PRA,
which
laid
out
a
vision
to
transform
what
was
then
quite
literally
quoted
in
the
globe,
a
city
in
danger
of
becoming
something
in
the
backwaters
of
history.
Writing
everything
that
that
it
that
that
we've
talked
about
on
this
in
the
panel
since
would
not
have
happened.
J
There
could
not
have
been
a
reaction
because
the
city
would
have
died
on
the
vine
and
I.
It's
very
difficult
for
me
to
be
here
like
defending
that,
because
the
I
respect
to
the
ends
of
the
earth.
The
people
who
are
on
this
panel
I
was
barely
born
and
I
wasn't,
born
and
and
yet
like
coming
here
and
really
like,
like
getting
fully
vested
in
the
history
of
City
and
in
the
cultural
history
City
in
the
political
history
of
the
city.
J
You
know
you,
you
have
to
divorce
the
West
End
from
Government
Center.
You
have
to
divorce
New
York
streets
from
some
of
the
other
projects
that
happened
during
that
time
and
I
think
and
I
wish.
I
was
Elizabeth.
Cohen
was
here
to
talk
more
about
the
world
at
load
played
in
all
this
and
I.
Really
really.
She
wrote
a
very
eloquent
chapter
in
our
book
and
she's
coming
out
with,
like
a
long
form,
sort
of
macro
history
of
loads
involvement,
both
in
New
Haven,
New,
Boston
in
New,
York
and
I.
D
D
We
could
build
more
units,
for
example,
of
private
housing
if
they
were
not
incorporated
into
the
high-end
housing,
that's
being
developed.
We
could
do
a
lot
more
that
in
the
neighborhoods,
and
everyone
would
agree
that
having
more
units
is
a
wonderful
thing,
but
then
that
also
increases
economic
isolation
within
the
neighborhoods
and
perpetuates
some
of
the
income
disparities
that
exist
so
that
we've
got
an
issue
that
lots
of
people
are
debating
now,
and
these
are
choices
that
have
to
be
made.
D
D
So
we've
got
to
ask
ourselves
as
I
know
that
this
is
the
underlying
question
in
the
2030
process.
What
do
we
really
want
to
be,
and
who
do
we
want
to
be,
and
who
do
we
think
we
want
to
be
in
2030?
Do
we
want
the
waterfront,
for
example,
to
just
be
about
jobs
and
economic
development,
or
do
we
want
it
to
be
a
place
where
families
feel
that
they
can
take
their
kids
so
that
you
know
kids
in
Boston
can
have
the
experience
of
getting
on
a
boat?
D
C
C
C
How
do
we
want
to
go
into
the
shadows?
I
mean
I,
think
Ted
and
I
just
agree
about
the
shadows
actually,
but
so
talk
about
how
what
you'd,
like
the
city
to
be
in
2030,
you
know
we
haven't
talked
about
resilience,
that's
a
big
issue.
I
know
that
that
values
worked
on
that
we
have.
You
know.
Climate
change
is
coming
talk
about
planning
for
a
changing
future.
C
E
Possibly
actively
Latin
countries
we
had
brought
over
the
car
exactly
that
is
I.
Wanted
people
there's
a
lot
in
all
the
awesomeness
we
were
in
the
middle
class.
There
is
no
almond
milk,
Watson
Lawson,
those
are
manufacturers
or
construction
drugs.
People
consumption
in
Rome
in
the
Boston
I
know
I
think
that
somehow
all
those
concepts
even
be
more
active
in
a
statement,
but
a
continuous
source
of
Asian,
mind
race,
but
also
by
can
come
in.
E
E
E
F
It
seems
to
me
that
you
know
I'm
I
get
up
every
morning
and
I'm
delighted
about
the
progress
in
the
city
and,
at
the
same
time,
I'm
always
impatient
to
know
what
next,
what
new
and
if
I
may
have
thought
about
it.
A
lot
because
I've
been
engaged
in
this
process
since
its
inception
in
many
different
ways.
But
it
seems
to
me
that
the
old
arguments,
the
old
challenges,
are
still
there
from
when
the
first
planning
was
done
in
the
60s
and
before,
and
not
only
are
the
old
challenges
there.
F
But
the
way
we
are
trying
to
solve
them
somehow
don't
seem
to
be
new
in
the
sense
they're
new,
because
there's
a
lot
of
sort
of
technological
advancement,
a
lot
of
resources,
a
lot
of
different
ways
of
thinking
about
planning,
a
city,
engagement
and
so
on.
But
but
you
know
we
have
to
remember
that
we
are
in
this
extraordinary
sort
of
geolocation
if.
B
F
Will
where
there
is
this
concentration
of
just
pure
genius
and
resources
and
people
and
activists
and
and
everybody
who
wants
to
make
the
city
better?
So
you
know,
speaking
from
a
person
who
deeply
sort
of
is
invested
in
climate
change,
adaptation
and
an
overall
sustainability
I
think
that
we
are
being
progressive,
but
not
revolutionary.
F
I
feel
like
we
are
at
a
point
where
we
are
set
to
make
great
change,
but
I
think
we
are
almost
afraid
to
get
to
those
ideas
which
are
going
to
drastically
change
the
way
we
think
and
live
and
I
think
we
are
at
the
point
where
the
next
step
of
imagine
Boston.
If
there
is
a
next
phase,
we
really
need
to
think
of
our
city
differently
and
we
need
to
capitalize
I,
don't
know
what
it
is.
Is
it
you
know
some
kind
of
high-speed
transit
system
that
the
world
has
never
seen.
F
Is
it
like
super
towers
where
somehow
we
make
vertical
living?
You
know
very
community
oriented
I,
don't
know
what
it
is,
but
I
think
we
still
have
to
really
push
for
those
new
models
which
we
are.
We
don't
know
what
they
are
and
therefore
we
kind
of
you
know
are
trying
to
do
many
things
well,
but
but
I
don't
know
if
you've
stepped
out
of
our
way,
always
of
thinking
in
certain
ways.
J
The
project
that
you're
alluding
to
without
knowing
about
it,
is
Jan
wampler,
bicentennial
celebration
city
of
which
this
this
campus
is
the
only
residual
result
of
which
posited
a
new
city
for
twenty
to
sixty
thousand
people
out
in
the
bay
floating
prescient
right,
adding
new
transportation,
adding
new
modes
of
connection
between
South
Boston
and
Dorchester,
adding
a
number
of
cultural
and
artistic
facilities.
That
would
would
result
from
such
a
such
an
investment,
and
it
was
almost
a
reality.
You
know
and
realism.
C
H
Worked
on
that
plan
with
Jim
and
I,
wouldn't
say
that
it
was
racism,
a
parochial
ism
that
stopped
it.
There
were
a
lot
of
exciting
ideas
in
it,
but
it
didn't
have
a
compelling
reason
to
happen
and
I
like
gin
and
I,
had
a
lot
of
fun
working
on
that
with
him.
I
would
point
to
Antonia
de
Monroe
was
in
the
front
row
here
that
gave
us
a
reason
to
do
that
back
in
the
1980s
and
Nolan
listened
and
they're,
not
listening.
Still.
H
The
the
climate
change
challenge
is
a
result
of
a
couple
of
hundred
years.
It's
not
a
recent
thing
and
it's
not
going
to
turn
around
as
quickly
as
we
would
all
like
and
Antonio's
position,
which
I
support
was.
If
we
love
the
city,
we
better
build
some
kind
of
dam
system
now,
if
Michael
ethnics
in
Venice
could
get
their
act
together.
H
Why
have
we
not
even
talked
about
it
in
since
the
1980s,
when
Antonio
put
the
idea
on
the
table
and
Antonio's
vision
had
a
reason
for
being
in
that
it
or
something
like
it,
is
key
to
the
protection
of
an
incredible
amount
of
investment
that
we're
all
celebrating
you.
This
nice
city
is
all
going
to
be
under
water.
If
we
don't
take
some
physical
actions
to
protect
it,
and
that
could
provide
the
impetus
because
in
Antonio's
basic
idea
was,
let's
do
the
infrastructure
and
then
use
that
to
hang
the
Wampler
esque.
H
You
know
loo
floaty
city
on
to
it,
but
but
you
have
to
have
the
cake
before
you
worry
about
the
frosting
and
Antonio,
provided
the
cake
and
no
one's
been
willing
to
talk
about
it
until
just
recently,
people
have
started
again,
but
it
may
make
mistakes
in
Venice,
but
they're
doing
it.
And
you
know
my
Co
nationals
are
not
noted
for
their
effectiveness
of
getting
their
act
together.
So
what
does
it
say
about
us?
H
In
this
city,
the
Athens
of
America,
some
of
the
elements
of
the
Venice
Dan,
were
designed
at
MIT
by
Professor
Holloman
and
in
professor
brass.
So
it's
not
the
lack
of
smart
people,
but
we
lots
of
people
want
a
lot
of
things,
but
they
want
it
to
be
cheap
and
they
don't
want
to
think
about
anything
that
requires
paying
for
it.
B
H
Build
those
nicer
trains
without
which
they
can't
happen.
Well,
one
tax
cut
at
a
time.
The
MBTA
is
a
basket
case.
It
doesn't
have
the
money
to
do
it.
If
we
don't
deal
with
the
fact
that
we
need
to
pay
thing
pay
for
things.
If
we
want
them,
then
we
can
have
nice
visions
but
they're
never
going
to
be
implemented
because
it
takes
money,
not
I,
agree
totally
with
Tony
about
equity
being
the
center
of
what
we
ought
to
be
talking
about,
but
I
would
disagree
slightly.
H
I
think
it's
real
important
for
kids
from
Chinatown
or
rocks
Ares
Boston
to
become
a
physicist,
and
what
have
you
but
I
think
it's
essential
that
the
kids
who
don't
become
physicists
have
a
shot
at
a
decent
life
too,
because
there's
only
so
many
brain
surgeon
jobs
there
and
if
we
just
changed,
who
gets
that
small
number
of
jobs
we
haven't?
We
always
done
is
rearranging
the
deckchairs.
We
haven't
really
made
progress
unless
everyone
gets
a
shot
at
a
better
life,
including
the
people
who
don't
finish
in
the
highest
colleges.
H
H
Start
talking
about
it,
maybe
we'll
figure
out
how
to
do
it.
Let's
talk
seriously
about
equity
and
maybe
we'll
figure
out
what
it
takes
to
do,
but
we
need
to
recognize
it
is
going
to
cost
money,
and
all
of
this
do
more
with
less
nonsense
that
you
hear
from
these.
You
know
business
experts
that
you
get
less
with
less.
If
you
want
more,
you
need
more
and
and
if
we
want
a
better
city,
we're
going
to
have
to
support
means
to
pay
for
that
better
city
and
a
bit
when
I
see
a
better
city.
H
I
don't
mean
a
more
beautiful
city.
Although
that's
nice
I
mean
a
more
equitable
city,
that's
going
to
cost
money.
If
you
can't
live
in
this
city
with
the
housing
prices
where
they're
going
and
when
we
get
through
talking
about
it,
it'll
still
be
even
more
impossible
to
average
people
to
live
in
the
city.
Unless
we
build
huge.
I
H
Of
housing
and
a
lot
of
transit
so
that
people
can
live
outside
of
Boston
and
access
these
jobs,
that's
an
essential
part
of
dealing
with
gentrification.
It's
both
a
lot
of
housing
and
a
lot
of
transportation.
While
we're
condemning
this
city
to
the
Future
youdescribe
of
the
worst
income
distribution
in
the
country.
G
35%
of
folks
in
the
city
whose
incomes
below
would
be
moved
out
in
the
next
15
20
years,
you
hear
that
that's
the
prediction
based
on
what
we're
doing
right
now.
Ok,
so
where
are
we
on
that?
Ok,
if
we
know
that
what
we're
doing
is
pushing
people
out
because
their
incomes
are
low?
How
do
we
change
that
right?
Are
we
saying
that
in
the
30
years
we
just
want
a
city
where
only
the
people
with
money
in
higher
education
live,
and
so,
when
you're,
asking
whose
interest
try
to
figure
out?
G
Ok,
so
governor,
when
we
were
having
the
issue
about
the
charter,
schools
made
an
incredible
statement
about
the
20%
who
would
be
left
behind
almost
jumped
through
the
TV
set
for
the
governor,
say
we're
going
to
own
the
fact
that
we
are
going
to
support
a
program
where
we
know
that
20%
of
the
children
would
be
in
fail
in
schools.
I
think
that's
a
direct
quote.
G
Okay,
now
there's
a
group
called
the
right
to
the
city,
you
say
organize
you're,
trying
to
get
things
moving
that
allow
the
people
who
are
here
to
be
able
to
to
remain,
and
so
one
of
the
things
that
they
push
making
sure
that
the
resources
for
people
whose
incomes
are
low
to
be
able
to
remain
are
there
with
housing
that
meets
their
needs.
Now
we
go
to
the
mayor
and
we
say:
okay,
can
we
get
a
commitment
for
35
35
35.
G
Percent
of
the
land
that
the
city-owned
warehousing
at
that
level
would
be
built
so
that
at
each
point
at
least
a
third
of
the
units
would
be
for
people
who
need
to
be
in
for
them
portable
income
right
now,
one
of
the
things
that
we
did
at
tent
city
was
yeah.
We've
got
25
for
a
public
housing
eligible
50
for
moderate
25
market,
okay
and
it
works.
G
So
if
we're
going
to
talk
about,
what's
going
to
be
around
30
years,
are
we
looking
for
ways
to
make
sure
that
the
folks
whose
incomes
are
low
the
folks
who
those
that
the
governor
says
will
be
in
failing
schools?
Can
we
do
something
about
that?
If
not,
what
are
we
having
this
conversation?
Are
you
saying
that
we
don't
care
about
those
folks?
G
The
things
that
you
know
make
a
difference:
yeah
we
had
to
get
the
blossom
residents
jobs
program
in
order
to
make
sure
that
folks
could
get
jobs
in
construction,
and
at
one
point
when
we
were
talking
about
it,
I
said
to
one
of
the
city.
Councillors
said:
why
are
you
not
supporting
something
like
this
right?
Well,
his
thought
was
that
his
constituents
were
white
and
that
you
have
to
worry.
G
I
said
you
go
look
at
the
license
plates
on
those
white
people's
guys
who
are
working
in
the
construction,
and
maybe
you
have
a
different
view
and
I
said
well,
maybe
I'll
go
into
your
neighborhood
and
tell
them
that
you
are
looking
out
for
them
you're
looking
out
for
these
people
from
out
there
change
his
vote.
Okay,
no.
B
G
C
K
K
C
D
D
D
D
If
the
attitude
is
there
that
in
fact,
we're
not
necessarily
designing
for
26
year
olds
fit
individuals
who
are
going
to
be
out
skiing
in
Aspen
every
summer,
but
in
fact,
for
individuals
in
the
real
world,
then
that
earlier
access
to
sites
and
to
plans
and
the
way
we
think
about
planning
can
happen.
You're
the
first
person
I've
heard
raised
that
issue.
I.
Think
it's
a
very
salient
one.
D
I
think
it's
something
we
can
look
at,
certainly
within
the
agency,
particularly
around
how
we
make
the
planning
process
and
the
results
of
that
planning
process
more
readily
accessible
to
a
wider
range
of
people
and
I
know.
Folks
have
worked
on
that
with
the
way
information
is
posted
and
the
way
meetings
are
held
in
those
kinds
of
things,
but
there
are
improvements
we
can
make
in
that
regard,
sure.
C
M
I,
wonder
what
tools
would
you
advise
the
city
of
Boston
to
adopt
or
change?
You
know.
One
thing
I
think
about
is
article
80
came
about
20
years
ago,
and
we've
all
talked
about
how
the
city's
changed
every
decade,
and
it's
about
time
that
you
know
it
only
took
52
years
to
revisit
doing
a
master
plan,
but
thinking
about
article
80,
which
has
more
of
an
inclusive
process
for
small
and
large
projects.
You
know
how
come
that's
not
something
on
the
table
with
this
plan
to
reevaluate.
M
C
Where
the
rubber
meets
the
road
right
and
zoning
in
actual
implementation
of
this
plan,
what
are
the
tools
that
we
can
use
to
make
sure
that
this
city
doesn't
become
just
like
the
home
for
hipsters
and
empty
nesters?
You
know
that
it
can
be
a
city
that
that
we
can
all
afford
to
live
in
I
mean
if
I
was
trying
to
buy
my
own
home
in
Brighton
in
oak
square
today,
I
don't
think
afford
it.
H
H
Somewhere
around
50%
of
the
living
units
in
Austin
and
Brighton
are
people
who
don't
have
automobiles.
Yet
we
insist
on
building
parking,
which
is
real,
expensive
and
chews
up
a
lot
of
land
and
a
lot
of
very
decent
people
say
well:
everybody's
got
a
car,
meaning
I
have
a
car,
so
everyone
should
be
like
me.
Well,
no,
not
everyone
has
a
car
and
the
insistence
on
really
outdated
requirement
on
parking
drives
up
the
cost
of
that
housing
and
makes
it
less
affordable
and
that
pushes
the
demand
into
the
older
housing.
That
is
no
longer
football.
H
So
that's
one
piece,
a
second
set
of
hipsters
I
would
build.
I
would
force
to
be
built
directly
for
our
other
students.
I
mean
it
is
absurd.
Let
me
speak
about
my
employer
MIT.
They
just
got
the
rights
to
develop
Volpe
there's
at
least
5,000
dwelling
units
of
graduate
students
at
MIT
not
housed
at
MIT.
That's
a
big
chunk
of
the
overcrowding
on
the
red
line,
5,000
people
in
the
peak
hour,
because
the
graduate
students
are
forced
to
live
all
over
the
city.
They
can't
afford
Cambridge
anymore
because
it's
gone
through
the
roof.
H
It's
terrible
for
the
graduate
students,
but
it's
also
an
engine
of
gentrification
if
MIT
were
forced
to
build
affordable
housing
for
its
graduate
students
and
its
undergraduates.
That
would
relieve
some
of
the
pressure
in
Cambridge
now
multiply.
Mit
talk
about
BCE
our
neighbor.
It
is
one
game
after
another
to
not
bill,
they
got
the
land,
they
got
the
money
and
they
prefer
to
gentrify
the
neighborhood,
because
it's
cheap
before
them.
H
Let
me
talk
about
Copley
Place.
Some
people
may
know
that
theory,
where
that
strange
little
sculpture
is
some
people
like
it
some
people,
don't
that
is
legally
a
park.
It
was
a
you
die
grant
your
tax
dollars
paid
money
to
that
developer.
For
that
to
be
clear
at
the
park,
I
don't
see
any
kids
rollerskating
in
the
park,
but
it's
it's
open
space
at
least
so
the
developer
says
that
was
then
now
is
now
I
want
to
build
a
high-rise
luxury
of
poppenhouse
and
Mel
says.
H
If
you're
going
to
do
that,
can't
we
at
least
have
I
forget
what
percentage
you
were
looking
for,
35%
affordable.
It
should
have
been
50%,
affordable
there,
they're
working
on
land.
They
have
no
right
to
build
on
the
United.
States
government
sent
them
a
check
to
make
that
Epoque.
If
you're
going
to
change
that
deal
and
that
should
be
not
automatic.
H
If
it's
an
important
part,
you
shouldn't
just
be
selling
it,
but
if
that
really
is
kind
of
an
one
double
pack,
and
that
was
just
an
excuse
to
give
that
developer
money,
which
I
think
is
what
it
was
and
it's
okay
to
think
about
a
high-rise
building
there.
Then,
let's
talk
about
who's
in
the
high-rise
building,
as
Mel
attempted
to
do,
and
these
these
things
happen
one
project
at
a
time,
so
broad
policy
is
important,
but
we've
got
to
have
the
connection.
H
The
actual
action
MIT
shouldn't
be
allowed
to
do
what
they're
trying
to
do
with
Volpe.
They
ought
to
be
forced
to
build
enough
housing
for
their
own
students
and
enough
housing.
That's
affordable
for
neighborhood
people
to
recognize
the
amount
of
gentrification
they've
driven
over
the
past
30
years.
It
shouldn't
be,
let
bygones
be
bygones.
They've
done
a
lot
of
damage.
There
are
to
be
some
rectification
for
it.
H
Well,
I'm,
hoping
that
some
of
the
students
at
MIT
will
put
some
pressure
on
the
Institute
to
demand
that
the
Institute
pay
attention
to
their
housing
needs.
I've
showed
up
that
city
council
hearings
by
the
way
the
land
in
question
MIT
bought
that
land,
not
the
Volpe
land,
but
the
land
adjacent
to
it.
They
bought
it
and
pledged
that
it
would
be
used
only
for
academic
purposes.
That
was
then
now
is
now
they
went
to
the
City
Council
and
City
Council
agreed
that
they
could,
you
know,
build
for
Google
and
Microsoft.
H
Instead,
it
requires
local
elected
officials
to
hold
the
line
a
deal's,
a
deal.
Academic
housing
would
be
a
valid
academic
purpose
which
they
promised
when
they
bought
that
land
they
should
be
forced
to
deliver.
So
the
city
of
Cambridge
ought
to
be
doing
it
and
the
Institute
ought
to
be
doing
they're
an
important
institution.
They
got
to
pay
attention
to
the
neighborhood
there
and
not
just
be
a
global
entity.
C
D
Just
say
that
in
Boston
there
is
a
requirement
that
universities
commit
to
building
housing.
I.
Remember
correctly,
it's
something
like
19,000
units,
which
has
a
major
positive
impact
on
communities
where
students
have
been
living
in
JP,
for
example,
latest
data
shows
that
there
was
actually
a
4%
decline
in
rental
rates
over
the
course
of
the
past
year
in
part,
because
more
students
are
being
drawn
into
student,
housing
and
out
of
the
communities,
but
it
comes
in
part
from
regulations
within
development
agencies
and
in
part,
from
a
formal
commitment
on
the
part
of
administration.
D
To
make
that
happen.
Boston
has
a
kind
of
anomalous
housing
market
because
of
the
huge
numbers
of
students
who
not
only
come
in
that
can
afford
very
high
rentals
and
you're.
Looking
at
$3,500
a
month
is
the
latest
number
I've
seen
that
is,
is
the
cost
of
a
new
unit
rental
unit
in
the
city
and,
of
course,
that
has
devastating
impacts
on
the
people
who
live
around
that,
but
an
administration
can
short
of
rent
stabilization,
have
an
impact
on
on
those
kinds
of
trends.
L
C
E
E
E
It
may
come
all
of
a
sudden,
but
the
impact
right
now
is
not
felt
yes,
so
to
be
able
to
invest
the
kind
of
money
in
relocation
or
a
dam
or
is
it
is
a
great
difficult
of
people
to
make
those
investments,
and
that's
something
planning
cannot
deal
with
this
as
I
can
see
it's
like
food
who
who
leads
the
way
who
gets
displaced
in
the
rural
areas
so
that
other
urban
people
can
move
there,
but
the
implementation
cover
of
a
good
policy
are
almost
insurmountable.
It's
like
it's
damn
is
much
easier.
F
Well,
you
know
I
completely
agree
with
you
regarding
the
implementation
aspect
and
sort
of
going
back
to
the
original
question
of
policy
and
sort
of
looking
at
it
more
birdseye.
You
know,
policy
is
always
playing
catch-up
with
reality.
I
mean
no
matter
what
you're
not
going
to
have
the
perfect
policy
at
the
perfect
moment
and
have
the
perfect
solution.
F
So
there
are
other
and-
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
need
to
know
and
understand,
is
that
I
think
there
is
a
disconnect
between
sort
of
the
policy
that
is
there
and
implementation
and
I
think
one
of
the
sort
of
big
factors
for
that
is
there's
a
hegemony
of
you
know.
The
elite
of
economic
development,
sort
of
you
know,
takes
precedence
over
everything
in
the
city
and
that's
true
of
the
waterfront
when
it
was
developed.
F
And
yet
you
know
three
years
later
we
go
back
and
the
buildings
have
come
up
with
all
the
mechanical,
not
where
it's
supposed
to
be
so
so
I
think
you
know,
there's
policy,
this
plan,
there's
you
know
developers
but
I,
don't
think
we
should
underestimate
the
power
of
champions
in
the
system
and
particularly
when
there
are
new
things
to
be
done
and
not
everybody's
on
board
and
I.
Think
we
have
a
lot
of
champions
here
for
different
causes
and
I.
J
I'm
just
saying,
if
you
wanted
to,
if
you
want
to
mitigate
environmental
catastrophe,
it's
going
to
have
to
be
a
very
top-heavy
and
and
very
expensive
solution,
and
that
solution
is
not
going
to
come
from
private
development.
That
solution
is
going
to
have
to
come
from
the
government
right
and
as
a
dyed-in-the-wool
Canadian
socialist
I'm
entirely
in
favor
of
higher
taxation
and
more
payments
from
universities
and
more
payments
from
developers
and
those
payments
to
go
to
city
coffers,
to
pay
for
the
public
good
right.
B
J
There
is
this
real,
thank
you
so
there's
this
there's
this
real
kind
of
tension
between
we
don't
want
top-heavy
planning,
and/or
top-heavy
decision-making
going
on
at
the
same
time
that
we
need
that
top-heavy
decision
making
and
that
top-heavy
investment
to
literally
save
the
city
from
drowning
right.
And
so
what
do
you
get?
You
get
the
Seaport
and
you
get
three
architecture
firms
doing
75
of
the
buildings
as
fees
which
are
horrific
to
the
people
that
are
working
for
those
firms
and
they're.
Perpetuating
as
like
you
know,
it's
like
you
can
just
it's.
C
C
D
D
And
it's
having
major
impacts
on
residential
and
tourism
and
and
commercial
impacts,
and
all
we
need
is
the
one
wrong
storm
here
and
a
big
chunk
of
Logan
Airport
will
be
under
water,
and
it's
at
that
moment
that
we
may
then
start
to
think
about
some
of
the
local
impacts,
but
there's
always
resistance
to
implementing
those
kinds
of
top-down
rules.
That
might,
in
fact,
have
a
positive,
long-term
impact
on
how
we
manage
water
and
how
we
protect
our
waterfront.
D
N
O
There's
been
a
discussion
about
implementation
and
as
I
look
at
Boston
2030.
This
is
Boston
as
part
of
a
greater
area
and
I've
heard
people
talk
about
MIT
students
at
MIT
or
transportation
that
that
goes
through
many
different
cities.
How
can
a
plan
like
Boston
2030
be
successful
or
what
needs
to
be
done
if
Boston
is
creating
a
plan,
but
that
might
not
match
up
with
what
Brookline
does
or
Newton
does
or
Cambridge
does
or
Somerville
does?
O
C
D
There
is
work
that
the
city's
doing
to
tie
together
at
a
variety
of
levels,
transportation
and
housing
and
and
other
aspects
of
planning
and
when
you
do
a
project,
the
process
of
this
scope
with
the
kind
of
engagement
and
technical
work,
that's
been
done
by
many
people.
Many
of
the
smaller
surrounding
communities
start
to
buy
into
that
because
they
view
it
as
legitimate
and
credible,
and
so
part
of
the
deal
always
is
to
engage
those
folks
through
MAPC
and
other
kinds
of
planning
entities.
I
I
N
How
many
people
are
we
going
to
be
in
this
in
50
years?
Are
we
going
to
be?
We
are
now
4
million?
Are
we
going
to
be
5
million
four-and-a-half
4.2?
It's
a
big
difference.
It
defines
the
level
of
infrastructure
changes
the
level
of
housing
that
you
need
to
build
the
level
schools,
etc,
etc.
We
don't
ask
this
question
and
we
focus
on
other
things
and
I
beg
you
to
really
begin
to
focus
about
the
city
in
that
way.
N
N
What
are
the
infrastructure
that
we
need
to
a
to
make
a
better
city,
a
more
manageable,
a
more
equitable
city
in
a
in
addition
to
the
issue
of
the
sea
level
rise,
there
are
thousand
other
infrastructure
investments
that
we
need
to
make.
Don't
tell
me,
we
don't
have
money.
That
is
not
way.
This
city
has
dealt
with
its
future
for
200
years.
We
cannot
abandon
the
part
that
the
founders
of
the
city
has
said.
They
were
not
scared
to
do
what
they
have
done
in
1900.
N
N
Our
good
city
should
be,
let's
make
sure
that
those
attributes
are
enriched,
but
let's
think
creatively
about
the
infrastructure
that
we
need
to
set
in
place
and
remember
the
infrastructure
that
we
will
need
for
the
city
of
the
future
are
going
to
be
30
to
40
years
to
plan,
to
discuss
to
fight
to
finance,
to
implement
40
years
50
years.
That
is,
we
need
to
discuss
about
our
city.