Elders Resent Housing That Imprisons

What do retirees really want in housing?

A real estate research firm mailed out 70,000 questionnaires over a period of 10 years to seniors in seven states, and received a staggering response - more than 10,000 replies.

In a further effort to stay abreast, Research West of Kent, Wash., a specialist in marketing and feasibility studies for the senior housing industry, also added the questionnaire to its Web site, which continues to generate large numbers of responses.

“The ongoing survey is not scientific,” company founder and president Terry Fahey readily concedes. “But it convinced me of one thing: Older people in general really hate to be taken for granted and prejudged. They resent developers and planners speaking for them, telling them and telling the public what they themselves, seniors, want.”

Nevertheless, that is the climate in which the vast majority of today’s older retirement facilities were developed. The typical developer in the ‘70s and ‘80s, according to Fahey, cut quality to maximize net return.

“There wasn’t any competition between developers to speak of, and they didn’t offer retirees real choices,” the veteran researcher says. “So, for retirees, it was pretty much a case of take it or leave it.”

Congregate retirement living (living independently in a common building or complex) was incredibly cramped and lacking in amenities, says the expert. Three-fourths of congregate living units were studio apartments ranging in size from just 250 to 350 square feet.

They didn’t have stoves or refrigerators. Residents ate all meals in a group dining room. There were no menu choices. Seniors ate what and when they were told.

“Not surprisingly,” says Fahey, “15 years ago, seniors overwhelmingly hated senior housing.

“The elderly were treated like young children,” he says. “Many were subject to very oppressive rules.”

They had a curfew. Restrictions on visitor were rigid in the extreme.

“Even visits from their children and grandchildren were supervised,” says Fahey. “No drinking. No smoking. No eating in the rooms. And no leaving the building without permission.”

Today’s convicts have it better.

However, retirees and developers also have come a long way. Today’s seniors are much more sophisticated. A developer can’t build a stripped-down studio unit and palm it off on occupants. “People just go down the street,” says Fahey.

Also, today’s seniors don’t have the same preconceived loathing for senior housing. Burgeoning demand for amenities has created far greater choice.”

“There are a lot of good companies looking at what people really want now,” says Fahey. “They are socially responsible. They have a conscience. They care about people - not just faceless shareholders.”

Today, Fahey’s research shows, roughly half (44.9 percent) of retirees live in a single family house.

About a fourth (22.8 percent) live in a rented apartment.

One in five (20.5 percent) lives in a mobile home.

Just 6.1 percent live in a condominium.

Only 5.5 percent live in an age-restricted retirement apartment.

And a tiny two-tenths of 1 percent live in nursing homes. (This figure is sharply at odds with the national average, which, an official of the American Seniors Housing Association informs me, is slightly more than 5 percent.)

Here, by the numbers, are things that, according to Fahey’s research, seniors say they most want:

1) A safe and secure building.

2) Freedom of movement, as much as possible. “Many still regard retirement communities as a place where they are held captive. They strongly resent being treated as ‘incompetents’ and ‘children.”’

3) Access to social and recreational programs.

4) A safe and secure neighborhood.

5) Close proximity to shopping and public transportation.

6) Good building management.

7) And finally, many don’t want to be lumped together with the older people they themselves will become in a few years.

Notes Fahey, “I can relate to that.”

, DataTimes MEMO: Associate Editor Frank Bartel writes on retirement issues each Sunday. He can be reached with ideas for future columns at 459-5467 or fax 459-5482.

The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = Frank Bartel The Spokesman-Review