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?
I’m not sure if I want to make major investments right now to build an age-friendly house, but I can consider what I can do now to potentially stay living there despite any limitations (whether I actually do it is another matter). This means I can keep it in mind when planning the floor layout. For example, I choose doors with 1m (39 inches) clear width instead of 90cm (35 inches), which shouldn’t add much to the cost of building a house. I also think about how to make a staircase more accessible later on, or how to manage moving between floors with a mobility impairment (which can occur at any age). This means designing stairs wide enough to possibly install a stairlift or planning in advance to accommodate a home lift.
In new, well-insulated houses, door thresholds can be completely avoided (which used to slow down cold air at floor level, but that’s no longer necessary), making the home barrier-free.
Overall, these are preliminary considerations and small details that don’t add much to the cost but can be very helpful if needed in the future.
In new, well-insulated houses, door thresholds can be completely avoided (which used to slow down cold air at floor level, but that’s no longer necessary), making the home barrier-free.
Overall, these are preliminary considerations and small details that don’t add much to the cost but can be very helpful if needed in the future.
I fully agree with Climbee’s last sentence. In my opinion, if you consider this aspect during the planning of a new build, there are hardly any additional costs. Whether you design a staircase in the middle of the house or near the entrance, there are no extra expenses. However, after 30 years, a staircase near the entrance is easier to separate from a potential ground-floor apartment than a staircase situated in the middle.
The idea is appealing, but unfortunately, it usually doesn’t work out. When a house becomes simply too large in old age, even the relatively small investment in wider doors or stairs is wasted. A lot of property value is lost through unused or inadequately usable living space — most owners don’t realize this, or they don’t care because they are emotionally unable to let go.
It might make sense to consider repurposing or reducing your living area, but then you face the challenge of having to predict your needs 30 to 40 years in advance. In some cases, this can be reasonably anticipated, but in many others, it is much harder.
This is a difficult issue, and it is exactly why the discussion about shortening the actual useful life of private homes arises at all.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
It might make sense to consider repurposing or reducing your living area, but then you face the challenge of having to predict your needs 30 to 40 years in advance. In some cases, this can be reasonably anticipated, but in many others, it is much harder.
This is a difficult issue, and it is exactly why the discussion about shortening the actual useful life of private homes arises at all.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
S
Sebastian7916 Aug 2016 11:58Whatever people have against a house being "too big" – if the house suits me today, why wouldn’t it suit me later? I’m not building large just for the kids – that’s two rooms plus a kids’ bathroom, which would then be considered "too much." Although you could easily use those as a guest room, a sewing room, or – if necessary – another master bedroom.
I close off truly unused rooms and simply don’t use them anymore. The resulting dust is manageable...
As if you’d sit in the house feeling overwhelmed by it. That used to be completely normal; have people today already become so soft looking toward the future?
Putting illness aside – there should still be active retirees around.
If it really becomes too much for me, then I’ll think about it – but not constantly chasing the ever-elusive perfect solution. You’d never be satisfied that way – I’d rather live 20–30 years in my absolute dream home and then spend the last 15–20 years in a compromise (if at all) than start out with a compromise from the beginning.
I close off truly unused rooms and simply don’t use them anymore. The resulting dust is manageable...
As if you’d sit in the house feeling overwhelmed by it. That used to be completely normal; have people today already become so soft looking toward the future?
Putting illness aside – there should still be active retirees around.
If it really becomes too much for me, then I’ll think about it – but not constantly chasing the ever-elusive perfect solution. You’d never be satisfied that way – I’d rather live 20–30 years in my absolute dream home and then spend the last 15–20 years in a compromise (if at all) than start out with a compromise from the beginning.
Sebastian79 schrieb:
As if you’re sitting in the house and feel overwhelmed by it. That used to be completely normal, have people become softer and more future-oriented nowadays? It’s not about becoming softer or feeling overwhelmed, but rather about the mistaken belief that you can generally maintain a house effectively as a form of retirement provision. Many homebuilders have built and thought that way, and still do today.
The attitude "Close the door, a little dust doesn’t bother anyone and costs nothing" precisely describes the number one typical value destroyer. If this refers to just one room—that’s one thing. But in reality, you often see entire floors left unused and, naturally, no longer maintained technically.
This leads to a gradual loss of value that may only become apparent when the heirs capitalize on it. It becomes problematic, however, when the value has to be converted into actual retirement income during the owner’s lifetime. Then the capital loss becomes immediately visible. You can observe this clearly with relevant existing properties—the gap between the owners’ value expectations and actual purchase offers is regularly significant.
Nowadays, there are even interactive maps for Germany that convert property values into the equivalent monthly duration of a certain level of care. In other words, these tools show how long the value of a property can finance a place in a care facility. It’s quite interesting and worth checking out—especially when compared with individual pension statements, it might help some people gain valuable insights.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
S
Sebastian7916 Aug 2016 13:39I can rule out that an entire floor would have to be shut down for us — the house design doesn’t even allow for that 😀.
But one thing I definitely won’t do is calculate any maps with property values based on care levels. That might be interesting if you want to think a lot about something very far in the future. To US, it doesn’t matter at all whether the place sells later for price X or price Y — especially for our heirs.
But you can also overdo it — I can’t plan for every possibility in advance. That includes selling the house for such reasons.
Sometimes you just have bad luck — but with some common sense and action, most problems can be solved. There isn’t insurance that covers everything, where you can just relax and say, “Ah, peace for the next 60 years.”
Of course, you need to look ahead to the future, but you live in the here and now. No one can predict what things will be like in 30 years — not regarding retirement, personal health, living conditions, land value developments, etc. These are all assumptions, and everyone bets on their own assumption being right.
I’d rather stay in the present and enjoy what I’ve built. At least then I can look back with satisfaction later and focus on new challenges.
But one thing I definitely won’t do is calculate any maps with property values based on care levels. That might be interesting if you want to think a lot about something very far in the future. To US, it doesn’t matter at all whether the place sells later for price X or price Y — especially for our heirs.
But you can also overdo it — I can’t plan for every possibility in advance. That includes selling the house for such reasons.
Sometimes you just have bad luck — but with some common sense and action, most problems can be solved. There isn’t insurance that covers everything, where you can just relax and say, “Ah, peace for the next 60 years.”
Of course, you need to look ahead to the future, but you live in the here and now. No one can predict what things will be like in 30 years — not regarding retirement, personal health, living conditions, land value developments, etc. These are all assumptions, and everyone bets on their own assumption being right.
I’d rather stay in the present and enjoy what I’ve built. At least then I can look back with satisfaction later and focus on new challenges.
Similar topics