We need more apartments for downsizers — but location is crucial

ONE of the key themes in this column over the past couple of years has been the need to get the right kind of homes built over the coming years and decades.

Taking a look at where Ireland’s population is now and where it will go in the future, Ireland has more than enough family homes — houses with three or four bedrooms.

However, it is all the other forms of housing where Ireland is short. Currently, Ireland has — given the age of its population — enough nursing home space.

The country will need, however, to add to this consistently. The number of over85s in the country will treble between 2010 and 2050. Each year, the number of persons aged 65 or over increases by roughly 20,000.

While the country will need more nursing home space, we should not fall into the trap of thinking that the only two types of home needed in the country are family homes and nursing homes.

We hear so much about a right to stay in your home — but there is almost no discussion of the right to downsize.

Three types of housing are almost entirely absent in this country — each of which could play an important role in housing the population of Ireland as the country ages.

Assisted living is the closest substitute to nursing homes, but offers its inhabitants far greater autonomy, albeit with supports as needed.

Independent living housing is related but distinct: it is targeted at those who need far fewer interventions in their day-to-day lives.

It differs from “normal” housing in that independent living complexes typically have a vibrant community life, together with some supports in relation to healthcare.

And the third type of housing our older citizens lack is suburban apartments. If assisted living is for those in their 80s, and independent living for those in their 70s, then apartments are for those in their 60s or, if their children are old enough soon enough, their 50s.

What is key here is location. Together with Lorcan Sirr, Keith Finglass and Amarach Research, I worked on a report in 2016 on the housing needs of Ireland’s older people for the Housing Agency.

One part of this was a survey of those aged over 55. When asked whether they were happy where they lived, the majority said yes.

But looking under the hood, it became clear that was a story of two parts. The things they like least about where they currently lived typically related to the dwelling: it was increasingly unsuited to their evolving needs.

What they liked most, however, was the location. The single most commonly cited reason for not leaving their current home was the need to stay in the local community.

This helps explain a puzzle that was posed to me recently. I gave a talk at a housing conference at which I talked about the need for smaller homes for our smaller households.

Someone who works for one of the larger developers in Ireland approached me at the break, and we started chatting.

They said that while they could see what I was saying, in terms of the raw data, it just didn’t match their day-to-day experience. On one of their major greenfield sites, they were building hundreds of homes and a few dozen apartments. They were having very few issues selling the houses, but were struggling to shift the apartments.

On the face of it, this spells trouble for my theory that we need hundreds of thousands of apartments and next to no homes. But that developer’s experience actually goes to the heart of what we as a country need to build next.

I could have easily predicted that, if you gave a developer a large and empty site half an hour down one of the main motorways out of Dublin and demanded that they build apartments as well as houses, they would struggle.

Who moves to greenfield commuter sites? Certainly not downsizers. And realistically, not students or young professionals either — not least due to their dependence on public transport, they need to be close to work and college.

This leaves the market for new commuter estates restricted to young couples, with or without one or two small children.

If you are a young family, there is little competition when comparing a larger house with a smaller apartment, in a brand new development with little to no pre-existing amenities or community.

The relevant comparison is not a four-bed house and a two-bed apartment on the new-build estate far from the city. The relevant market is not starter families.

Instead, the question planners need to answer is, what kind of new home will tempt those in their 60s to sell and downsize?

As the Housing Agency report shows, the answer is clear. We need to be building apartments — and independent living complexes — in the same communities those people currently live in.

This is why in-fill sites around our main cities are so important. The grounds of the religious community selling up, the extra playing pitch the school can no longer afford, even the corner house with a large site.

If we are serious about having the homes we need, these are far more important than greenfield sites in commuter towns.