ᐅ To what extent do you take aging in place into account when building a home?
Created on: 12 Aug 2016 21:10
M
Mizit
Preliminary remark: we are currently going through a phase where we seriously question all our previous plans. 🙂 I hope this phase is normal.
At the moment, I am concerned about to what extent one should consider living arrangements for old age when planning the floor plan. With the layouts we have favored so far, living in old age with the perhaps typical difficulties would not be easy.
We are currently planning a guest bathroom with a shower on the ground floor, but it will be somewhere between 3.5–5 square meters (38–54 square feet), and a large, barrier-free shower would probably not be possible there, nor would there be enough space to enter the bathroom with a walker, for example. Generally, I have always considered having a bedroom on the ground floor as a practical option for later, but it seems to me that especially these "catalog floor plans" for series-built houses do not provide for a sufficiently large bedroom on the ground floor, nor a sufficiently large bathroom.
It’s not that we only just became aware that we might hopefully live to be 90 and perhaps won’t be able to manage stairs anymore. We simply haven’t prioritized the question of living in the house in old age. Basically, we still see a lot of value in the idea that we might give the single-family home to one of our children in 30 years or rent it out in order to move back to the city ourselves, and so on.
But maybe in 20 years we will see things very differently. Maybe we will be very attached to this place, this house, and perhaps we cannot imagine selling the family home of our children, and so on.
In that case, it wouldn’t be unwise to plan so that it would be possible to live entirely on the ground floor at some point, possibly separate the upper floors as a separate apartment and rent them out. But then it might be necessary to plan some things differently now...
How important has this aspect been for you?
At the moment, I am concerned about to what extent one should consider living arrangements for old age when planning the floor plan. With the layouts we have favored so far, living in old age with the perhaps typical difficulties would not be easy.
We are currently planning a guest bathroom with a shower on the ground floor, but it will be somewhere between 3.5–5 square meters (38–54 square feet), and a large, barrier-free shower would probably not be possible there, nor would there be enough space to enter the bathroom with a walker, for example. Generally, I have always considered having a bedroom on the ground floor as a practical option for later, but it seems to me that especially these "catalog floor plans" for series-built houses do not provide for a sufficiently large bedroom on the ground floor, nor a sufficiently large bathroom.
It’s not that we only just became aware that we might hopefully live to be 90 and perhaps won’t be able to manage stairs anymore. We simply haven’t prioritized the question of living in the house in old age. Basically, we still see a lot of value in the idea that we might give the single-family home to one of our children in 30 years or rent it out in order to move back to the city ourselves, and so on.
But maybe in 20 years we will see things very differently. Maybe we will be very attached to this place, this house, and perhaps we cannot imagine selling the family home of our children, and so on.
In that case, it wouldn’t be unwise to plan so that it would be possible to live entirely on the ground floor at some point, possibly separate the upper floors as a separate apartment and rent them out. But then it might be necessary to plan some things differently now...
How important has this aspect been for you?
Mizit schrieb:
But then we also thought: if we don’t plan any options now, for example having a bedroom on the ground floor or a large barrier-free bathroom there, it’s basically already clear that we will have to move out when we’re older – even if we might not want to 🙁 That is by no means certain. My parents-in-law, both over 80, still live on the second floor. Narrow stairwell, no elevator. My grandmother, also over 80, still rides her bike up hills.
Besides, good health in old age is not just a matter of chance. Depending on the disease, 70–90 percent of cases are preventable ("How Not to Die" – Dr. Greger; "Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease" – Dr. Esselstyn; "The Blue Zones Solution" – Dan Buettner, and a good concise summary: the two books by Dr. Richard Béliveau). And who knows what we will suffer from in 40 to 70 years. Cardiovascular diseases (including stroke) are increasingly well researched, and mortality rates are declining (e.g., -39% for heart attacks over 10 years), even though people generally have not been eating healthier or exercising more in recent years. The assumption is that Alzheimer’s will likely be the biggest issue in the future. Cancer is also increasingly better treated.
And as I said, if I need a barrier-free bathroom and can no longer climb stairs, then I won’t be living in a large house with all those responsibilities anymore.
Grym, on the one hand, 70-90% of people do not have the discipline or patience to live a life without fast food, tobacco, alcohol, and a lot of sausage or meat (exercise is naturally a given). On the other hand, in the end, it sometimes really comes down to luck or chance (the left or right side of the statistics).
Hello
I mentioned the "elevator shaft" in a neighboring thread.
Personally, I am quite certain that I will live in my house until the end. I live in a small village, with a nature reserve directly behind the house, and a few kilometers (miles) away from Düsseldorf. Building plots like this are rare here. When building, I tried to think of everything.
Also, doing sports and watching one’s weight helps. That works out.
In addition, in my family, strokes are the common cause of death. We tend to suddenly collapse. Genetically high cholesterol levels. I keep mine at a reasonable level through sports and diet. I stop taking medication.
Steven
I mentioned the "elevator shaft" in a neighboring thread.
Personally, I am quite certain that I will live in my house until the end. I live in a small village, with a nature reserve directly behind the house, and a few kilometers (miles) away from Düsseldorf. Building plots like this are rare here. When building, I tried to think of everything.
Also, doing sports and watching one’s weight helps. That works out.
In addition, in my family, strokes are the common cause of death. We tend to suddenly collapse. Genetically high cholesterol levels. I keep mine at a reasonable level through sports and diet. I stop taking medication.
Steven
Hello,
we are planning to build soon and are still in the brainstorming phase. What is especially important to us is to build flexibly. It will be a single-family house that can later be easily divided into two living units. Currently, we are planning the ground floor with an office (which can be converted into a bedroom later), a utility room, and a bathroom with a walk-in shower. Additionally, we are designing the stairwell so that it can be easily separated with the insertion of a door or wall. We are also having kitchen connections installed on the upper floor and will prepare for two electric meters, but will initially connect only one.
The goal is to be able to respond flexibly to changing life situations and possibly rent out the upper floor.
In my opinion, the additional costs are manageable.
Best regards
we are planning to build soon and are still in the brainstorming phase. What is especially important to us is to build flexibly. It will be a single-family house that can later be easily divided into two living units. Currently, we are planning the ground floor with an office (which can be converted into a bedroom later), a utility room, and a bathroom with a walk-in shower. Additionally, we are designing the stairwell so that it can be easily separated with the insertion of a door or wall. We are also having kitchen connections installed on the upper floor and will prepare for two electric meters, but will initially connect only one.
The goal is to be able to respond flexibly to changing life situations and possibly rent out the upper floor.
In my opinion, the additional costs are manageable.
Best regards
Hello @Mizit,
I hope I can address your concerns in two ways – firstly as a property appraiser, and secondly as the owner of an older property that would require significant effort to adapt for aging occupants.
Here are some considerations and notes:
1. Private residential properties have usually been valued based on a lifespan of at least 60 years, often 80 years – but this is currently under debate, as changes like energy efficiency regulations and government funding programs are accelerating. Looking ahead from today, one must ask whether a newly built property will still have a meaningful remaining useful life (and thus capitalization value) in 30 or 50 years (the period you are targeting). Thirty years is a very short timeframe, but there are already neighborhoods and properties in economically weak regions where values actually tend toward zero after 30 years.
2. A house built for a family with children is rarely suitable for aging occupants without major modifications. The question is whether the property can realistically be adapted for aging in place when the time comes (and who can really predict 30 years into the future?), or whether it makes more sense to acquire a home for the family phase only and then sell it afterward.
3. Do you actually intend to grow old in the area where the house is located? Different distances matter in old age, and other services become important: the school bus is no longer a priority, but access to the nearest pharmacy is. So it’s important to be aware that it might not be practical to remain in a location where the infrastructure primarily serves families.
4. For comparison, I recommend this calculation: what does a similar property cost to rent in your area? Sum that roughly over 30 years and add 20%. The 20% accounts for the personal added value of ownership, which is naturally higher, so the pure rental cost should be adjusted accordingly. What does that figure look like? Where does the break-even point lie? If renting is more advantageous after 30 years, then renting may be preferable – an indication that properties there are already not attractive as purchase investments for long-term use.
In short: this cannot be fully anticipated today, so you build for the current life phase with children. Once that phase ends, you need to “take stock” and decide whether to sell or to plan to grow old in the property. But this is a question you can realistically only answer in or after 30 years, when all current influencing factors become clear.
Best regards,
Dirk Grafe
I hope I can address your concerns in two ways – firstly as a property appraiser, and secondly as the owner of an older property that would require significant effort to adapt for aging occupants.
Here are some considerations and notes:
1. Private residential properties have usually been valued based on a lifespan of at least 60 years, often 80 years – but this is currently under debate, as changes like energy efficiency regulations and government funding programs are accelerating. Looking ahead from today, one must ask whether a newly built property will still have a meaningful remaining useful life (and thus capitalization value) in 30 or 50 years (the period you are targeting). Thirty years is a very short timeframe, but there are already neighborhoods and properties in economically weak regions where values actually tend toward zero after 30 years.
2. A house built for a family with children is rarely suitable for aging occupants without major modifications. The question is whether the property can realistically be adapted for aging in place when the time comes (and who can really predict 30 years into the future?), or whether it makes more sense to acquire a home for the family phase only and then sell it afterward.
3. Do you actually intend to grow old in the area where the house is located? Different distances matter in old age, and other services become important: the school bus is no longer a priority, but access to the nearest pharmacy is. So it’s important to be aware that it might not be practical to remain in a location where the infrastructure primarily serves families.
4. For comparison, I recommend this calculation: what does a similar property cost to rent in your area? Sum that roughly over 30 years and add 20%. The 20% accounts for the personal added value of ownership, which is naturally higher, so the pure rental cost should be adjusted accordingly. What does that figure look like? Where does the break-even point lie? If renting is more advantageous after 30 years, then renting may be preferable – an indication that properties there are already not attractive as purchase investments for long-term use.
In short: this cannot be fully anticipated today, so you build for the current life phase with children. Once that phase ends, you need to “take stock” and decide whether to sell or to plan to grow old in the property. But this is a question you can realistically only answer in or after 30 years, when all current influencing factors become clear.
Best regards,
Dirk Grafe