Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Number Seven
December 2001
© Copyright 2001 by the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities and Grantmakers in Aging
Page 2
Introduction
American society has a history such that, proportionately and
Through land use of assisting older people in the numerically, society stands to be
planning and form of social security; subsi- overwhelmed by the needs of
dized, low-income housing; deliv- older people. The numbers of
regulations, public ery of meals to shut-ins; and people who are 65 and older in
investments, private medical insurance. We have the United States will more than
financing, and fallen short in one arena, howev- double from 2000 to 2030
dominant societal er, that has a profound impact (34.8 to 70.3 million), ultimately
values, we have cre- on the quality of our experiences representing one out of every
in day-to-day living—the built five people. This means fewer
ated communities environment. Through land use wage earners paying into the
that present signifi- planning and regulations, public social service and retirement
cant obstacles to the investments, private financing, system and more expectations
continued independ- and dominant societal values, of relatively fewer caregivers
ence of older adults. we have created communities (both family members and pro-
that present significant obsta- fessionals). The need for care-
cles to the continued independ- giving is exacerbated by greater
ence of older adults. Our hous- longevity, which increases the
ing stock -- with its preponder- probability of disabilities associ-
ance of single-family homes -- ated with old age. Up to half of
favors healthy households with those aged 85 and above, for
relatively significant incomes. In example, suffer from some form
any given community, affordable of dementia.
housing alternatives are often
severely restricted. The prevail- It is in our collective best inter-
ing land use pattern requires est, as individuals and as a
access to an automobile, creat- society, to aggressively trans-
ing a hostile environment for form our communities so that
pedestrians and limited, if any, they are aging sensitive, thereby
The numbers of peo- transit services. enabling older people to main-
ple who are 65 and tain their independence and
older in the United This situation would not be a ensuring efficiencies in providing
States will more than great concern if families, friends services to lesson the strain on
double from 2000 to and institutions such as church- caregivers. Foundations can
es were able to provide the indi- play a major role in pursuing
2030 (34.8 to 70.3 vidualized support that each per- this goal and Smart Growth
million), ultimately son needs as he or she ages. practices can provide the plan-
representing one out But the reality of the aging of ning framework.
of every five people. the baby boom generation is
Page 3
Planning Alternatives
There are few communities in the core values and preferred
United States that are making sig- futures; and developing means An aging-sensitive
nificant progress in planning for of achieving the preferred community provides
an aging society. There are, nev- futures. Strongly held cultural housing alternatives,
ertheless, some promising efforts values regarding families, social a transportation sys-
underway. State governments, responsibility and environmental
regional planning agencies, munic- quality permeated this process. tem and a land use
ipalities, and not-for-profit groups These values are explicitly pattern that enables
are rising to the challenge, offer- defined in the final document people to maintain
ing creative ways of planning for and reflected in preferred sce- healthful independ-
an aging society. These are narios such as the creation of ence even as their
important initiatives as they family-centered communities
demonstrate how to facilitate pub- with multi-generation family needs change. These
lic dialogue about an issue that houses and compounds or rural are principles that
has not received much attention. villages which combine small speak to the heart of
farming operations and coopera- Smart Growth ini-
State-level Planning tives with community centers. tiatives.
Two good examples of state-
level planning offer models Minnesota’s state government,
worth consideration. In Hawaii, under the direction of the
the Executive Office on Aging Department of Human Services,
completed a strategic plan in sponsored the Aging Initiative:
1998 for preparing for the aging Project 2030, a two-year effort
baby boomer society. Developed to examine the impacts of aging
in consultation with planning on state agencies, local govern-
and public administration faculty ment, businesses and individu-
from the University of Hawaii, als. This initiative had its ori-
the plan is a blueprint for gins in a concern that the
actions that can be undertaken Medicaid program could not be
by individuals, organizations and sustained in light of increasing
government. The recommenda- need for publicly funded long-
tions range from appropriate term care. Intended to identify
services to better housing and ways of reducing the demand for
transportation alternatives and long-term care, the planning
from expanding wellness pro- effort was ultimately expanded
grams to encouraging advocacy. to address a much wider array
The two-year planning effort had of issues, building on publicly
three phases including identify- held values regarding the impor-
ing trends and forces as well as tance of longer-term, compre-
potential scenarios focusing on hensive approaches.
the quality of life in the year
2011 (the first year that baby The Department of Human
boomers reach 65); clarifying Services contracted with the
Page 6
Housing Alternatives
Perhaps one of the most com- Accessory Apartments
mon ways that communities Accessory apartments are sepa- Restrictive definitions
seek to meet the needs of older rate dwellings created out of of what constitutes a
people is through various hous- extra space within, above or on family along with
ing alternatives. Some alterna- the lot of a single-family house
tives are discussed next.
outright limits on the
or garage. Advocates have long number of unrelated
promoted them as helping older
Home Sharing individuals who are
people by providing a source of
One would think that people income, living space for a care- allowed to live togeth-
have a right to live with whomev- giver, and additional security. er as a household can
er they choose, but this is not Opponents fear the degradation present obstacles to
the case in many U.S. communi- of single-family neighborhoods
ties. Restrictive definitions of older people who
because of more cars and an
what constitutes a family along increase in the number of want to share housing.
with outright limits on the num- renters based on the perception
ber of unrelated individuals who that numerous conversions in
are allowed to live together as a any one neighborhood will occur.
household can present obsta- Experience suggests that the
cles to older people who want to demand is not significant
share housing. It took a New although it is definitely greater in
York State Supreme Court areas with high housing prices.
Decision to allow the Harvest
House in the Town of Syosset. Daly City, California, began allow-
Syosset’s zoning ordinance pro- ing accessory apartments in
hibited more than two unrelated 1983. The maximum size of the
persons from living together.14 apartment is 25 percent of the
The zoning ordinance of DuPage principal dwelling unit and owner
County, Illinois, provides for occupancy is required. Permit
Senior Citizen Home Sharing. fees are set at $100, lower than
Five or more people aged 55 the cost of adding a new bed-
and older can live together in a room and applicants are
group home. This is considered ensured of an immediate
a special use and requires a assessment of the feasibility of
permit. Senior Home Sharing, their obtaining a permit. Nearly
Inc., a county-based nonprofit three hundred new units have
corporation has developed five been created, many of them by
such homes.15
Page 10
Conclusion
Smart growth initiatives empha- vative practices covered in this
size compact, walkable cities paper skim the surface of what
with diversity in housing choic- can be done.28
es, a strong sense of community
and a high quality, accessible, Our society will certainly survive
natural environment. These are if we fail to address the nexus
fundamental characteristics of between the built environment
aging-sensitive and elder-friendly and the aging experience. But
communities. An explicit focus the price we will pay is a dimin-
on aging defines a logical con- ished experience with aging; one
stituency of smart growth and that reflects missed opportuni-
provides a sense of urgency ties for maintaining health, inde-
given the pending demographic pendence, and self worth.
changes. The examples of inno-
Endnotes
1. Mean Streets: Pedestrian Safety and Reform of the Nation’s Transportation Law (Environmental Working Group, 1997)
www.ewg.org/pub/home/meanstreets/mean.html.
2. The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Turner Foundation are providing funding support for this type of research. See
www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/aces.htm and L. D. Frank and P. O. Engelke. The Built Environment and Human Activity Patterns:
Exploring the Impacts of Urban Form on Public Health. The Journal of Planning Literature. 2001. 16:2, 202-218.
3. See, for example: D. M. Buchner, S. A. Beresford, E. B. Larson, A. Z. LaCroix, and E. H. Wagner. Effects of Physical Activity
on Health Status in Older Adults. II. Intervention Studies. Annual Review of Public Health 1992, 13:469-88.
4. P. H. Hare. Isolation Zoning in Single Family Suburbs. Expanding Housing Choices for Older People: An AARP White House
Conference on Aging Mini-Conference, Conference Papers and Recommendations. (AARP, January 26-27, 1995) at 113.
5. H. Freshley. Planning for an Aging Society: Examples from the Twin Cities. Expanding Housing Choices for Older People: An AARP
White House Conference on Aging Mini-Conference, Conference Papers and Recommendations. (AARP, January 26-27, 1995) at
27-41.
Endnotes, continued
6. Some of these same goals are being pursued by the Metro Regional Government in Portland, Oregon although without the
explicit attention to aging. A strong public commitment to maintaining the regional urban growth boundary (established in 1979)
means that new development has to be accommodated through redevelopment and increased densities. This involves promot-
ing high-density, mixed-use developments along transit corridors, mandating the inclusion of accessory dwellings in each munici-
pality, and promoting row housing development. Like the Twin Cities’ lifecycle concept, these policies encourage housing
diversity and transportation alternatives. (See Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (Metro, 1996)).
7. Economic Development Strategic Plan (City of St. Lewis Park, 1997).
8. Approved and Adopted Master Plan for the Communities of Kensington-Wheaton, as Amended, Maryland. (The Maryland-
National Capital Park and Planning Commission, 1989).
9. Graying of Suburbia: Policy Implications for Local Officials (U.S. Conference of Mayors and National Association of Counties, 1988)
10. Another example of municipal planning for aging used community meetings with outside experts as speakers and focus groups.
Communities for All Ages: Planning for and Responding to the Needs and Opportunities of an Aging Population, prepared for the
Cities of Richfield and Edina by the Hennepin South Services Collaborative (October 2000) is available at www.shfsc.org.
11. P. Stafford. The Healthy Community Works for All Ages. Community Potentials. (1998, 1:3, 8-9).
12. M. McCall. Is Anybody Out There Listening? A Survey of Senior Housing Concerns for the City of Pleasant Hill, California (1994).
13. Effectively involving older adults in community planning efforts requires special attention to their needs and preferences. Issues
such as meeting location and timing, signage, acoustics, and seating comfort are addressed in D. A. Howe, N. J. Chapman, and
S. A. Baggett (eds.) Planning for an Aging Society: Planning Advisory Service Report Number 451. (American Planning
Association, 1994), 47-50.
14. Linking Housing and Health Services for Older Persons (American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging and Milbank
Memorial Fund, 1997)
15. D. Leach, K. F. Clarkson, and G. Gaberlavage. Making Your Community Livable: Zoning Case Studies: Helping Older People
Remain in Their Communities. (American Association of Retired Persons, 1997). For an overview of shared housing concepts
and an assessment of formal programs designed to match participants in shared housing see Shared Housing in New York: A
Qualitative Evaluation of Programs, A Citizens Housing and Planning Council Research Report (December 2000) available at
www.chpcny.org. This report was funded by the Lavanburg Foundation.
16. R. L. Cobb. Zoning for Accessory Dwelling Units. Zoning News. January 1997.
17. D. A. Howe. The Flexible House: Designing for Changing Needs. Journal of the American Planning Association. 1990. 69:1, 69-77.
18. N. J. Chapman, and D. A. Howe. Accessory Apartments: Are They a Realistic Alternative for Aging in Place? Housing Studies.
2001. 16:5, 637-650.
19. D. E. Altus, R. M. Mathews, and K. D. Kosloski. Examining Attitudes Toward the Homecare Suite: A New Housing Alternative for
Elders. The Journal of Applied Gerontology. 1997. 16:4, 459-476.
20. R. L. Mace, and R. H. Phillips. Echo Housing: Recommended Construction and Installation Standards. (AARP, 1984) and Despite
Disappointing Demonstration, ECHO Still Has a Future, Say Advocates. AARP Housing Report. (AARP, Winter 1998).
21. The zoning regulations can be found at www.fortkent.org/fkzoneord.htm
22. www.planning.ci.portland.or.us/zoning/ZCTest/200/205_acc_rent.pdf
23. Howe, Chapman and Baggett (eds.), 35-41 and D. Y. Carstens. Site Planning and Design for the Elderly: Issues, Guidelines, and
Alternatives. (Van Nostrand, 1987).
24. Howe, Chapman and Baggett (eds.), 29-33.
25. A Wrinkle in Time. (Ariel Books, 1962).
26. For further information contact John Warner, Finance Coordinator, Portland Development Commission, at 503-823-3240.
27. Hare, 107-132.
28. For additional suggestions about community-level planning for aging see Howe, Chapman and Baggett; V. Parker, S. Edmonds,
and V. Robinson. 1991. A Change for the Better: How to Make Communities More Responsive to Older Adults. (AARP,
1991);Retrofitting Communities: Accommodating Aging in Place: A Best Practice Catalogue. (Partners for Livable Communities,
1995); and Assessing Elderly Housing. (U.S. Conference of Mayors and American Association of Retired Persons, 1986).