How Legacy Cities Can Profit from Aging Baby Boomers

The population of older people in our country is now becoming so large that strategies of improving existing homes, of incorporating universally useful features in new homes, of building thoughtful new communities, and of retooling existing neighborhoods must be broadly integrated into our community building strategies at the local level across the United States. 

(Henry Cisneros, former HUD Secretary, Independent for Life)

As a baby boomer I am used to a marketplace that cares what I want. Now those darn Millennials (my own kids) have taken over as the largest cohort and dictate the market. Cities are competing to get them. What about the boomers?

Even though there is a lot of talk about aging boomers, as their numbers begin to diminish the products out there seem to pay less and less attention attention to what they need.

America’s older population is in the midst of unprecedented growth. With the
aging of the large baby-boom generation and increased longevity, the 50-andover population is projected to increase about 20 percent by 2030, to 132 million. In just 15 years, one in five people will be at least aged 65. (Harvard Study Housing America's Older Adults)

For example:  Appliances and the car dashboards with their digital displays are no good for folks with bad eyesight, which afflicts predominantly the "elderly".  Nothing can be felt and all needs to be seen, since physical knobs and buttons are so yesterday and touch screens and flat multi-surface surfaces are in. I am not even asking to consider old fuddy-duddieswho can't keep up with technology. I am evoking design thinking which is supposed to be human based and functional. To require full focus on a display and the precise aim of a digit instead of being able to just grope one's way to a control (while the eyes remain on the road, for example), is just not functional as the rising accident rates from distracted driving prove. 

The finger can't find the control without they eye

I am getting a bit off topic, but I like to bring this up because everybody would benefit from controls that have a tactile property from which one can feel its position and how it (the temperature, the fan, the volume, the dishwasher program, etc.) is set. And the dictum that what benefits the elderly ultimately benefits all (similar to the American with Disabilities Act) is especially true when it comes to living accommodations.

Of course the real issue is where the "elderly" are supposed to do live. More precisely, what are the offerings?  I was reminded about this question again when I read an article about the Baltimore-area based Erickson Company, which is to elderly living what GM is to automobiles. Both are big entities recovering from spectacular bankruptcies but still setting the tone in the industry without full comprehension of the paradigm shifts. Which nicely ties the dysfunctional dashboards to the prevailing dysfunctional elderly living facilities.

"When looking at new markets there has to be a large number of age- and income-qualified residents, there must also be a good piece of land within 20 miles of an urban center.
We aren't just going to take a piece of property in a rural area where there is nothing nearby."...(Erickson Living CEO Alan Butler in the BBJ)
In the past six years, Butler said, the company has also become more versatile instead of using the cookie-cutter approach the previous leadership used. Erickson's communities all hold about 1,500 units, but Butler said Erickson's communities now range from 400 to 1,500 units. (BBJ)

AARP list of desired amenities 

This isn't exactly a revolution in what is offered to the elderly, it still sounds cookie cutter to me. It surely doesn't seem to be human-centered design. If one would start with what this rapidly growing cohort of elderly want, the offerings would look drastically different.

For all the talk about the renaissance of cities, if anybody would enjoy and benefit from urban living where everything one needs is close at hand once one walks out the front door, it would be the elderly.

 Instead of aging in place with a yard to take care of, a car to navigate and park, there would be an apartment in an elevator building in an urban setting. Not an elevator building in one of those assisted living "communities" up to 20 miles from a city. Unlike in the Erickson model, there would be real life outside, a real city and not just more of the elderly and lots of parking.

Why are cities not jumping on this market? Why are the Ericksons of the world not building truly urban facilities instead of just campus facilities that are somewhere in the outer periphery? The answer isn't obvious.

The elderly vote with their feet, or with their cars: Facing the choice of institutionalization in one of those age stratified facilities or staying put in their house in the suburbs, most prefer the latter.

[...]even among individuals aged 80 and over, more than three-quarters live in their own homes. Indeed, “aging in place” is the preference of most people. In its recent survey of 1,600 people aged 45 and older, AARP found that 73 percent
strongly agreed that they would like to stay in their current residences as long as possible, while 67 percent strongly agreed that they would like to remain in their communities as long as possible. (Harvard Study)

And so far we haven't even mentioned affordability which looms large in this context. Assisted living facilities are usually quite expensive and not everybody owns a house in the suburbs that's paid off.

So the elderly wind up in unfortunate conditions. There are many horror stories about abuse in circulation in which elderly don't get the treatment they deserve and descend to the status of objects in some kind of care machinery. The more older people are objectified in this manner, the more they become dependent, a vicious cycle that is neither affordable nor humane and likely particularly egregious where folks don't have the resources to pay premium. Once driving isn't an option anymore or disability makes the stairs an insurmountable barrier, life in one's house can become quite unbearable as well. Horror stories about lonely elders without help in their sprawling houses are galore as well. So, what are good solutions from a building and urban design perspective?

Elderly campus amidst traditional neighborhoods in Baltimore

“Large parts of this country have a housing stock that is increasingly out of sync with demand in the market today and really out of sync going forward.” (David Dixon, Urban Designer)

Just placing those sprawling elderly campus arrangements into a city isn't the solution. Baltimore replaced its old Memorial Stadium with a massive complex of elderly housing that some twenty years after it was conceived still looks as foreign in the setting of the surrounding communities as if a spaceship had landed. Those poor folks can't even take a short walk into one of the traditional tree lined neighborhood streets without first having to traverse the vast car oriented maze of driveways, parking lots, drop offs and setbacks. The online advertising for the place sounds like its own parody, as if mini blinds and carpeted floors would really be what old people most aspire to:

affordable apartments designed for ages 62+. Located in Baltimore, Maryland, you’ll find spacious one and two bedroom apartments that feature fully-equipped kitchens complete with a frost-free refrigerator, dishwasher and microwave oven, individually controlled heat and air conditioning, wall-to-wall carpeting and mini blinds. (website)

Parking and uninspiring green spaces don't invite walking

Instead of the spaceship approach accessible housing that is suitable for the elderly should be fully integrated into communities and downtown. Same principle as with affordable housing: One shouldn't be able to tell from the outside what is what. Assistance should be mobile and on-demand as long as that is possible. Providing mobile assistance in an urban setting is way more cost effective than assisted living in a facility, by a factor 1:3, in fact:

The costs of providing long-term care in the home are generally much less than in institutions. The Senate, in its deliberations on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, noted that the costs to Medicaid of supporting three older adults with home and community-based services are roughly the same as those for nursing home care for one individual. (Harvard Study)

Most importantly, the mental and physical health outcomes of living mostly independent in an age diverse setting with real life unfolding all around and everyday will be vastly better than those of folks who are imprisoned into system in which frail old people and care givers are the only events being encountered all day.

Mixed age facility in Munich, Germany, The school (left)
and the multi-generation building (right) share a common
garden (center). Photo: Philipsen

Interestingly, the bifurcation of legacy cities in the rustbelt and new cities in the sunbelt also neatly divides how attractive cities are for the elderly, or at least how many live there. In rustbelt cities the proportion of folks 65 and older is actually declining in spite of their growing proportion in the overall population. Only in sunbelt cities is the growth in elderly similar in the core cities and in their regions. Other beneficiaries of the in migration of the aging are smaller college towns.

Another reason why housing for seniors near colleges and universities often succeeds is that people are moving there to be near children and grandchildren who are living in the area. (ULI paper)

The rapidly growing segment of older adults are the perfect fit for legacy cities. The older US cities in the rustbelt usually have excellent universities, great libraries, parks, famous hospitals and a very walkable layout with relatively decent public transport.  The elderly won't take issue with the fact that urban schools are not always on par, they won't crowd any classrooms either, nor will they be as  concerned that the urban streets are not always as smooth as in the suburbs.

This presents a huge opportunity for legacy cities which typically still suffer from a general population decline and are grasping for ways they can convince immigrants, refugees, and millennials to live in their burgs. Independent living, assisted living, co-housing, affordable and market rate, all good for old people and for urbanity! A win-win that should be shouted from the rooftops.

Legacy cities losing elderly residents, sunbelt cities gaining them

Klaus Philipsen, FAIA

Housing America's Aging Adults (Harvard)
Residential Futures, ULI
The Baby Boomers turn 65, ULI
Next City: How Cities Can design for aging baby boomers
How Will Boomers Reshape U.S. Cities? (Governing)

What is Livable? Community Preferences of Older Adults (AARP)