By 2030, one-quarter of all Canadians will be over 65 years of age, which will have profound impacts on Canadian cities, urban life, housing and health services. The City Program of Simon Fraser University hosted a lecture on Friday March 24 on Aging, Design and the City.This well attended lecture was also available on-line and attracted an international contingent of people who joined via the internet.
Director of the City Program Andy Yan brought together a host of speakers from various backgrounds and institutions to commence the conversation of what happens to Metro Vancouverites as they age-do we stay in our houses, or do we go? And where do seniors go to, and what is the housing seniors are looking for?
Elizabeth Tang from CMHC (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation) noted that in focus groups across Canada, people aged 55 to 75 have a lack of concern for planning future housing. Even seniors older than 75 years of age are not thinking of changing from their current dwelling. Factors influencing their choice to age in place included their personal health status, the cost (especially in Vancouver) and the quality of life. Co-housing, where seniors have their own accommodation but share common areas and kitchen facilities appear popular, with Burnaby’s Nikkei Place, Maple Ridge’s Ridge Meadows Seniors Society and Vancouver’s PALS (Performing Arts Lodge Society) being mentioned. PALS also has a children’s daycare on site allowing seniors to have interaction with children and their parents.
Vancouver architect and developer Michael Geller noted that everyone has a different idea of the best place to age, be it in France, a fine hotel, or even on cruise ship. He identified five future trends: People aging in place with supportive governmental programs, more senior friendly duplexes and townhouses; more purpose-built rental and ownership buildings, as well as co-operative and co-housing options; enhanced buildings offering the “continuum of care” with different types of housing and levels of care; and more “alternative tenure” buildings with a mix of ownership and lease housing options.
Architect Eitaro Hirota described the work NSDA architects are undertaking in care facilities, and the importance of sun orientation and the need for communal spaces that can be private, semi-private and public. Simon Fraser University researcher Dr. Habib Chaudhury discussed the parameters needed for age and dementia friendly communities, as well as two assessment tools developed for wayfinding and walkability.
This session provided an introductory discussion on the trends and impacts of aging on the city and on services. There will not be enough age appropriate housing to go around. Just as there is a pinch in the market for young people looking for entry-level housing, there will be a dearth of housing for seniors. The Nikkei Place in Richmond houses 40 seniors with an average age of 89 years. The waiting list to get into the Nikkei Place is already eight years long. We need to adapt our policies, programs, cities and housing to reflect the growing numbers of seniors that will rely on these services in their waning years.
I don’t know of a Nikkei Place in Richmond. I believe it is in Burnaby. The Steveston Buddhist Chruch is planning to develop a seniors independent living residence on their property in Richmond, but they have not yet obtained approval.
There seems to be a focus on public services and various kinds of housing in these discussions. I believe the discussion needs to broaden to the design of cities themselves.
Universally accessible public transit with UA principles used extensively in the design of the associated TOD could become one of the key elements that encourages ageing in place and keeping active in the community. And that TOD should include various levels of elder care, from top-of-the-line subsidized continuing care to seniors retirement market housing mixed in with a wide range of other housing for all ages, public institutions and amenities, and commercial development.
In this country you’ve also got the winter weather. This presents great potential to convert shopping malls to town centres where seniors are an elevator ride away from shops and rapid transit, all indoor-accessed. Snow and malls — are these not two of the most prevalent elements in Canadian cities? I’d also like to see glassed-over streets, but that’s another discussion.
We are still discussing too theoretically about the future. The problems of housing and design for frailer seniors, options and cost, exist …now. http://vancouversun.com/health/seniors/report-cites-privatization-as-reason-for-declining-access-to-care-for-seniors
Most of us probably know enough people personally who don’t want to even contemplate a long term care facility or even stop driving (when they shouldn’t be driving at all) until…the person has a catastrophic fall, etc.
Actually, Jean, I was thinking of my elders, two of whom lived in care facilities, one for 12 years. My mother was subjected to the various inadequacies of the HandiBus in Calgary, a city built for cars before humans, and in the end stayed inside during the last two years of her life. Moving to another facility closer to the core was deemed to onerous, so she was stuck in the suburbs.
In my opinion, nobody can truly understand the value of mobility until they’ve experienced the lack of it and require a wheelchair, or have had love ones struggle in that predicament. This urbanist learned a harsh lesson on the near-absolute depth of city design giving private cars absolute reign in cities like Calgary.
While I agree that privatization of elder care needs to be limited and public funds redirected to closer match our demographics today, redesigning our cities to meet new human standards and to achieve greater sustainability is most definitely on the horizon.
At this time, we’re just left with present choices of where to live that is affordable and within 15 min. walk of amenities and core services. Interestingly I share cubicle work space with a work colleague who is house hunting with his disabled wife (they’re both in their 40’s) and are waiting out for the wonderful bungalow. But he’s aiming for a place where he can still drive his wife to appointments. But he’s not thinking of hmself..one day..
Author
Reblogged this on Sandy James Planner.
And I agree with you that Calgary is still heavily built for cars. There are highly localized new communities that are close to transit.
Most people can’t quite believe me that Toronto has 5 large acute care, teaching hospitals in its downtown core, all close to transit (and cycling routes). Several of my siblings work in them and they live/work close to transit. Of course, Vancouver (my 2nd home) has 3 hospitals (St. P:aul’s, Vancouver General, Children’s Hospital and Women’s a bit further but still reachable).
I’m always intrigued when some people choose to retire in very rural areas. Maybe there’s a limited planned time frame for them. Somehow it’s doubtful, like many of us, have a time facing our own upcoming aging/frailities.