An urbanism insight came in 2007, during a
visit to Italy. One evening, I dined in
a trattoria on the Piazza San Toma in Venice.
(Best gnocchi I’ve ever had.) As
I ate, an elderly gentleman entered. He
was in perhaps his late 70s, tall and fit.
His clothes showed wear, but were in good repair and nicely
pressed. He carried a richly decorated pottery
bowl.
My Italian was almost non-existent, but I
could understand that he wanted a double order of a favorite pasta to take back
to his apartment to share with his wife, who was physically unable to join him
at the trattoria.
The proprietor knew the gentleman and
greeted him with warmth and enthusiasm.
Several friends dining in a rear room were advised of his presence. They came forward to sit with him as he
awaited his food. The conversation,
although beyond my ability to follow, was voluble and good-natured.
Even the son of the proprietor, who clearly
wanted to be elsewhere on a warm spring evening, talked familiarly with the
gentleman and smiled for the first time.
I respect the job that senior living facilities
do in allowing senior citizens to end their days in safety and with
companionship. For many senior citizens,
they’re a fine answer.
But when I’m the age of the Venetian
gentlemen, I’ll want to visit my favorite restaurants and to chat with the friends
gathered during my life. It seems a
richer way to end a life. Those opportunities
were still available to the Venetian gentleman.
During the twenty minutes he waited for his pasta, he was reminded by
words and by actions that he was loved and respected in his old age. And that respect came not from people hired
to care for him, but from people he’d known for years.
When I ponder how to give similar
opportunities to American senior citizens, urbanism is usually the answer. Since that evening in Venice, I often measure
urbanist proposals against the standard of that elderly gentleman.
Over the
past ten days, I’ve been forced to take a renewed look at the reality of
growing old in the U.S. It hasn’t been pretty,
especially when judged against that Venetian encounter.
Until days
ago, my wife’s parents had lived in a 55-and-over apartment complex on a busy
arterial. It was a mostly acceptable
solution, but lacked the richness of living within walking distance of a fine
trattoria. (Having a fast-food place
over the side fence didn’t count.) And
it required my father-in-law to continue driving, even after his daughters
expressed concern about his road skills, because a car was the only way to
purchase food.
But
eventually, the apartment situation, mostly because of health and medication
needs, became untenable. My wife and I dealt
with the paperwork of getting them into a senior living facility and helping
them pack up their home after 63 years of independent married life. The new setting meets their needs and they’re
happy with the change, but I think the Venetian gentleman would have been appalled
by the limited options available to my in-laws.
Taking a
break from working with my in-laws, I met with my mother to discuss her
situation. She would like to move from
the now outsized family home into a setting more appropriate for her age and
health. She still gets around well, but
finds the tasks of maintaining a suburban house and yard more than she wants to
bear with my father gone. Also, she sees
the end of her driving days approaching.
Even more than my in-laws, a setting on a plaza with restaurants a short
walk away would be great for her. But
there are few suitable options in her metropolitan area.
Over the
next few weeks, I’ll return frequently to the subject of the senior-living
possibilities of urbanism. To help set
the stage, I suggest this Atlantic Cities article, which reviews a movie
about the downside of retiring to Florida, and the ruminations by Kaid Benfield in
response to the Atlantic Cities article.
Both lay the groundwork for thinking about the American approach to old
age.
Before
closing, I should offer one clarification.
I won’t argue that we should facilitate urbanism because it offers good
setting for senior life. No, I come from
a different perspective. I think we
should facilitate urbanism because there is an unmet market demand, because
municipal balance sheets demand it, and because it is an appropriate response
to the specter of climate change.
The fact
that urbanism is also good for senior living is a bonus. Also, I find that having multiple problems
addressed by a single solution is a sign that the solution, in this case
urbanism, is profoundly correct.
Scheduling Notes and Errata
There are a
couple of meetings this week that may be interest readers:
On Monday
night, September 23, the Petaluma City Council will hold a special session to
discuss land use issues, several of which, such as mixed use and parking
standards, pertain directly to urbanism.
The meeting will in the City Council Chambers at 11 English Street and
will begin at 6:00pm. I’ll be in
attendance. If we haven’t yet met, I
look forward to making your acquaintance.
On Thursday
night, September 26, a group will meet to discuss place-making in the
Oakhill-Brewster neighborhood of Petaluma.
The meeting will be at the Aqus Café at 2nd and H Streets and will be
begin at 5:30pm. I also plan to attend
this meeting.
Looking
further ahead, the next meeting of Petaluma Urban Chat will be Tuesday, October
8. We also meet at the Aqus Café and
begin at 5:30pm. The October meeting
will include a presentation by Petaluma architect A. George Beeler on the
Village Network, a collection of local organizations created to assist senior
citizens with the tasks of daily life and home maintenance.
Also, in my
last post I was wrong about the title of Richard Louv’s book about the
authority that Americans are giving over to homeowners’ associations. The correct title is “America II”.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
I think assisted living for mentally ill is as important as assisted living for elderly people.
ReplyDeleteSidratul, thanks for the comment. I agree that appropriate care of the mentally ill is important. And the failure to provide it can be a drag on urbanism as fear of interactions with the mentally ill is behind some people's reluctance to live an urban lifestyle. But whereas I think many senior living facilities should be located in walkable urban settings, I don't think that's as true of facilities for the mentally ill.
Delete