Translation PaperNumber SevenDecember 2001

© Copyright 2001 by the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities and Grantmakers in Aging

Aging and Smart Growth: Building Aging-Sensitive Communities

This paper was written by Deborah Howe, Ph.D., FAICP, with the Schoolof Urban Studies and Planning at Portland State University, in collabora-tion with the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and LivableCommunities and Grantmakers in Aging. It is the seventh in the seriesof translation papers published by the Funders’ Network to translate theimpact of suburban sprawl and urban disinvestment on issues of impor-tance to America’s communities and to suggest opportunities forprogress that would be created by smarter growth policies and prac-tices. Other issues addressed in the series of translation papers includesocial equity, workforce development, parks and open space, civicengagement, agriculture, transportation, education, health, children andfamilies, housing and the environment, and community organizing.The Funders' Network for

Smart Growth and LivableCommunities works to informand strengthen philanthropicfunders' individual and collec-tive abilities to support andconnect organizations workingto advance social equity, createbetter economies, build livablecommunities, and protect andpreserve natural resources. Formore information, visitwww.fundersnetwork.org.

Grantmakers in Aging is theonly national professionalorganization of grantmakersactive in the field of aging.For more information, visitwww.giaging.org.

Abstract

The sprawling, automobile-dominatedlandscape so prevalent throughout theUnited States seriously limits the con-tinued mobility and independence ofolder people. This reality is of enor-mous consequence to the aging expe-rience. Family members, friends, andthe social service system are facedwith the challenge of helping seniorsovercome the environmental obstaclescreated by existing development. Inthe years ahead, the growing numberof seniors, a result of the aging ofbaby boomers, stands to overwhelmthis system. This underscores theimportance of transforming our com-

munities so that they are aging-sensi-tive, making it possible for people tomaintain their health and independ-ence even as needs change.

Leadership is needed to support plan-ning processes and implementationefforts that improve the interfacebetween the aging experience and thebuilt environment. Public education,training, research and investment arenecessary components of the actionagenda that must be put into place ifelders are to be full participants in –and not cut off from – our society inthe coming decades.

Page 2

Introduction

American society has a historyof assisting older people in theform of social security; subsi-dized, low-income housing; deliv-ery of meals to shut-ins; andmedical insurance. We havefallen short in one arena, howev-er, that has a profound impacton the quality of our experiencesin day-to-day living—the builtenvironment. Through land useplanning and regulations, publicinvestments, private financing,and dominant societal values,we have created communitiesthat present significant obsta-cles to the continued independ-ence of older adults. Our hous-ing stock -- with its preponder-ance of single-family homes --favors healthy households withrelatively significant incomes. Inany given community, affordablehousing alternatives are oftenseverely restricted. The prevail-ing land use pattern requiresaccess to an automobile, creat-ing a hostile environment forpedestrians and limited, if any,transit services.

This situation would not be agreat concern if families, friendsand institutions such as church-es were able to provide the indi-vidualized support that each per-son needs as he or she ages.But the reality of the aging ofthe baby boom generation is

such that, proportionately andnumerically, society stands to beoverwhelmed by the needs ofolder people. The numbers ofpeople who are 65 and older inthe United States will more thandouble from 2000 to 2030(34.8 to 70.3 million), ultimatelyrepresenting one out of everyfive people. This means fewerwage earners paying into thesocial service and retirementsystem and more expectationsof relatively fewer caregivers(both family members and pro-fessionals). The need for care-giving is exacerbated by greaterlongevity, which increases theprobability of disabilities associ-ated with old age. Up to half ofthose aged 85 and above, forexample, suffer from some formof dementia.

It is in our collective best inter-est, as individuals and as asociety, to aggressively trans-form our communities so thatthey are aging sensitive, therebyenabling older people to main-tain their independence andensuring efficiencies in providingservices to lesson the strain oncaregivers. Foundations canplay a major role in pursuingthis goal and Smart Growthpractices can provide the plan-ning framework.

Through land useplanning and regulations, publicinvestments, privatefinancing, and dominant societalvalues, we have cre-ated communitiesthat present signifi-cant obstacles to thecontinued independ-ence of older adults.

The numbers of peo-ple who are 65 andolder in the UnitedStates will more thandouble from 2000 to2030 (34.8 to 70.3million), ultimatelyrepresenting one outof every five people.

Page 3

The State of American Communities

The explosion of growth in U.S.suburbs following World War Twochanged the prevailing land usepatterns in metropolitan regions.Fueled by federally insured mort-gages, the development of theinterstate highway system, andcheap gasoline, returning veter-ans were able to pursue theAmerican dream of owning a sin-gle-family house with acreage.They were often leaving behinddensely developed cities withover-crowded, deteriorated hous-ing, and severe air and waterpollution.

The relatively low densities inthe suburbs and the absence ofindustrial development stood asa counterpoint to the cities.Residents sought to preservethese amenities through landuse zoning that ensured the pro-tection of personal investmentsin single-family houses throughseparation of land uses, require-ments for large lots, and prohibi-tion of housing alternatives.Suburban developments pro-ceeded at a scale previouslyunknown that reinforced homo-geneity and stood in stark con-trast to relatively small subdivi-sions that characterized the evo-lution of most inner-city neigh-borhoods.

The suburbs were developedfirst and foremost to meet hous-ing needs, with residents initiallytraveling to cities for employ-ment and retail services. Thus,

from the start, virtually everyonehad to have access to a car.Eventually jobs and retail movedto the suburbs. This has typical-ly happened in an opportunisticmanner (on land that is not nec-essarily in the best location tomeet the needs of the immedi-ate community) and in accor-dance with corporate standards(such as location on main high-ways and the provision of visibleand ample parking). Whilethese developments represent adiversification in suburban landuses and have enabled certainsuburbs to grow to the pointwhere they compete effectivelywith the traditional downtown interms of office space andemployment, continued relianceon cars is mandatory. Low den-sities and divergent directions ofpreferred travel limit options foroffering public transit.

The bias toward the automobilehas also contributed to environ-ments that are especially unsafefor pedestrians. The highest ratesof pedestrian fatalities are foundin the more recently developed,sprawling communities in west-ern and southern United States.An analysis conducted by theEnvironmental Working Grouprevealed that pedestrians in Ft.Lauderdale face risks that areeleven times higher than those inPittsburgh. Senior citizens areparticularly vulnerable as pedes-trians with a death rate almosttwice that of the general public.1

The bias toward theautomobile has alsocontributed to envi-ronments that areespecially unsafe forpedestrians. The high-est rates of pedestrianfatalities are found inthe more recentlydeveloped, sprawlingcommunities in west-ern and southernUnited States.

Page 4

The proportion ofpopulation aged 75and above (the age atwhich frailty begins toincrease) is correlatedwith when the sub-urbs were settled,declining with dis-tance from the city.

There is a growing interest inexamining the relationshipbetween urban form and health.2

At issue is whether a pedestrianunfriendly environment con-tributes to poor health. This isan important consideration inhealthy aging as researchreveals the relationship betweenphysical exercise and health ofolder adults.3

In the 1970s and earlier, thehighest concentration of olderpeople could be found in inner-city neighborhoods. This is notsurprising given that youngerpeople were settling in the sub-urbs. Now residents who movedto the suburbs as young adultsin the 1950s and 1960s areaging. The proportion of popula-tion aged 75 and above (the ageat which frailty begins toincrease) is correlated withwhen the suburbs were settled,declining with distance from thecity. These more distant com-munities will also experience the"rolling wave of frail elderly" inthe relatively near future.4

All of this is a recipe for seriousproblems. As of yet, however,there has not been much publicdemand that planners and policymakers pay attention to theseissues. Many people are indenial about the realities ofgrowing old. It is difficult per-

sonally to plan for the unknown,even more so when such plan-ning is delayed to the point atwhich an individual’s energylevel, physical ability and mentalcapacity are in decline. The ten-dency is to want to stay as longas possible in one’s own homeuntil a crisis forces a change.At this point, caregivers, be theyfamily, friends or agencies, seekout and use available options,even if they are less than ideal.This is not the time when peo-ple advocate for changes in landuse patterns or improvements tothe transit system, sidewalks orother aspects of the built environ-ment. When the crisis is over,the survivors get on with their lifewithout acting on what they havelearned so as to make the com-munity better for others.

Communities need to develop abetter understanding of locallyspecific aging experiences withparticular attention to the obsta-cles and constraints presentedby the built environment. Anaging-sensitive community pro-vides housing alternatives, atransportation system and aland use pattern that enablespeople to maintain healthfulindependence even as theirneeds change. These are princi-ples that speak to the heart ofSmart Growth initiatives.

Page 5

Planning Alternatives

There are few communities in theUnited States that are making sig-nificant progress in planning foran aging society. There are, nev-ertheless, some promising effortsunderway. State governments,regional planning agencies, munic-ipalities, and not-for-profit groupsare rising to the challenge, offer-ing creative ways of planning foran aging society. These areimportant initiatives as theydemonstrate how to facilitate pub-lic dialogue about an issue thathas not received much attention.

State-level PlanningTwo good examples of state-level planning offer modelsworth consideration. In Hawaii,the Executive Office on Agingcompleted a strategic plan in1998 for preparing for the agingbaby boomer society. Developedin consultation with planningand public administration facultyfrom the University of Hawaii,the plan is a blueprint foractions that can be undertakenby individuals, organizations andgovernment. The recommenda-tions range from appropriateservices to better housing andtransportation alternatives andfrom expanding wellness pro-grams to encouraging advocacy.The two-year planning effort hadthree phases including identify-ing trends and forces as well aspotential scenarios focusing onthe quality of life in the year2011 (the first year that babyboomers reach 65); clarifying

core values and preferredfutures; and developing meansof achieving the preferredfutures. Strongly held culturalvalues regarding families, socialresponsibility and environmentalquality permeated this process.These values are explicitlydefined in the final documentand reflected in preferred sce-narios such as the creation offamily-centered communitieswith multi-generation familyhouses and compounds or ruralvillages which combine smallfarming operations and coopera-tives with community centers.

Minnesota’s state government,under the direction of theDepartment of Human Services,sponsored the Aging Initiative:Project 2030, a two-year effortto examine the impacts of agingon state agencies, local govern-ment, businesses and individu-als. This initiative had its ori-gins in a concern that theMedicaid program could not besustained in light of increasingneed for publicly funded long-term care. Intended to identifyways of reducing the demand forlong-term care, the planningeffort was ultimately expandedto address a much wider arrayof issues, building on publiclyheld values regarding the impor-tance of longer-term, compre-hensive approaches.

The Department of HumanServices contracted with the

An aging-sensitivecommunity provideshousing alternatives,a transportation sys-tem and a land usepattern that enablespeople to maintainhealthful independ-ence even as theirneeds change. Theseare principles thatspeak to the heart ofSmart Growth ini-tiatives.

Page 6

Citizens League, a respectedregional think tank, to convene astudy committee and prepare areport identifying public policyalternatives. Under the gover-nor’s signature, all state depart-ments were asked to appoint aliaison to provide information onwhich Project 2030 issues wererelevant to their department andwhat actions were currentlybeing taken or should be taken.

The planning efforts inMinnesota were led by a socialservice agency. Nevertheless, astrong emphasis was placed onissues of land use and the builtenvironment as an integral as-pect of quality living environ-ments for older people. It is aperspective that is viewed, notin isolation, but as it relates toissues of service provision, aviable economy and mentalhealth.

Regional PlanningThe Metropolitan PlanningCouncil for the Twin Cities(Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN)has established regional poli-cies that build on the concept of"lifecycle communities."5 Thisapproach acknowledges thatland use patterns and housingalternatives vary according towhen a community was devel-oped. These differences have abearing on the extent to which aperson can live his or her wholelife in one area. What is need-ed to transform a community sothat it supports the entire lifecy-cle of individuals will vary by

community type. An inner-cityneighborhood may already havea supportive physical environ-ment, but crime and povertyrequire investments in socialservices. An older suburb mayneed public subsidies for theconstruction of new senior hous-ing and the development ofexpanded transit services. Anewer suburban community mayneed changes in zoning regula-tions to facilitate neighborhoodcommercial development.

Most American communitieshave evolved in a manner thateither requires people to moveaway when needs change orforces them to make less thandesirable adaptations. Fromthis perspective, the lifecyclecommunity concept is nothingshort of revolutionary, fosteringdiversity as a means of provid-ing alternatives. This policyunderscores that people matterand that place is important.6

Municipal PlanningMunicipal planning efforts thatfocus on aging, while limited innumber, vary widely in how theyapproach the issue. The City ofSt. Louis Park, Minnesota, apost-World War Two suburb tothe west of Minneapolis, spon-sored a visioning exercise in1994 in response to theexpressed interests of grass-roots groups representing resi-dents, the business community,school district and social serv-ice agencies. What emergedwas a commitment to create a

Most American com-munities have evolvedin a manner thateither requires peopleto move away whenneeds change or forcesthem to make lessthan desirable adap-tations.

Page 7

town center that integrates amedical campus tied to the hos-pital, an array of assisted livingalternatives for older people, acommunity recreation center,employment opportunities andretail services. The goal is to"create a community so specialthat people will consciouslychoose to make St. Louis Parktheir lifelong home."7 Inresponse, the city has revisedits comprehensive plan to incor-porate long-range policies thatsupport the desired land usechanges and public works invest-ments. Zoning and develop-ment standards were amendedto allow higher densities andmixed uses and to require side-walks and improvements that fa-cilitate walking and bicycle riding.

St. Louis Park’s planning effortreflects a dynamism that buildson strong grassroots interestand commitment and a politicalculture that is not adverse torisk. Most municipal planninginitiatives that speak to theissue of aging tend to be moremodest in that they have a nar-rower range of focus. In otherwords, unlike St. Louis Park,they are not seeking to trans-form the whole community.

The Kensington-Wheaton (K-W)master plan (prepared by TheMaryland-National Capital Parkand Planning Commission)includes a section on elderlyhousing and facilities within achapter on community facilities.8

The focus on elderly is unusual

in a municipal master plan.Policies include developing sub-sidized housing, supporting theinclusion of compatible mixeduses such as retail and adult daycare in apartment buildings thathave high concentrations of eld-erly, promoting the developmentof group housing, and adaptingpublic facilities in neighborhoodswith high concentrations of elderly.

In the K-W plan, aging is one ofmany issues considered. In con-trast, the city of Richmond andHenrico County, Virginia undertooka six-month planning process con-centrating solely on aging. Byintegrally involving service provi-ders in a task force and as sour-ces of information, it was feasibleto identify the priority needs ofolder people including transporta-tion services, housing options,quality of life issues, and healthcare.9 What is unusual aboutthis effort is the emphasis on cityand county cooperation and theoutreach to service providers whooften shun the more traditionalcommunity planning processesthat tend to focus almost exclu-sively on physical planning.10

Civic PlanningSometimes effective communityplanning initiatives originate out-side a government. Some ofthese involve partnerships withthe public sector either initiallyor as they evolve. Here are twoexamples under the broad cate-gory of civic planning.

The EvergreenInstitute on ElderEnvironments inBloomington, Indiana... has derived designprinciples for a healthyenvironment: neigh-borliness; an environ-ment for growth,learning, and autono-my; a positive image;diverse and affordablehousing options; andan intergenerationalcommunity.

Page 8

These initiatives havein common the notionthat it is possible todefine public goalsand actions forimproving the lives of older adults.

The Evergreen Institute on ElderEnvironments in Bloomington,Indiana has involved over 1,000citizens of all ages in a discus-sion of what constitutes ahealthy neighborhood for olderpeople.11 Using household sur-veys, ethnographic fieldwork byproject anthropologists and cre-ative writing projects involvingyouth and elders, the institutehas derived design principles fora healthy environment: neighbor-liness; an environment forgrowth, learning, and autonomy;a positive image; diverse andaffordable housing options; andan intergenerational community.These principles ground a seriesof community initiatives includ-ing: reverse mortgage and homemodification programs; ECHOhousing (defined below); amixed-use, mixed-income seniorhousing project; sidewalk andother urban amenity improve-ments; and a health cooperativecombining preventive care andvoluntarism.

The Evergreen Institute works inpartnership with BloomingtonHospital, the city, and IndianaUniversity along with otherorganizations. The RetirementResearch Foundation of Chicagoprovided start-up funds.

The Evergreen Institute has culti-vated a constituency for changecreating a level of energy amongcitizens for pursuing specificgoals. The city as a partner isreceptive to these initiatives.More often than not, a local gov-

ernment has to be pressured tomeet the needs of particularinterest groups. Such groupswill be more effective if they canprovide credible data to supporttheir cause. In 1994, theContra Costa County AdvisoryCouncil on Aging sponsored asurvey in the City of PleasantHill that was spurred by olderresidents who wanted a say inlocal planning for housing andrelated services.12 Retired vol-unteers and middle-aged work-ing people took ownership of thesurvey and interviewed threehundred residents. The resultsprovide a picture of the city’solder residents revealing that 70percent want to stay, many needaccess to transportation, andwomen are particularly con-cerned with issues of safety.None of this would come as asurprise to those familiar withthe field of aging, but the impor-tance of the survey is that it iscommunity specific and it helpscitizens, planners, and policymakers appreciate these issuesat their local level.

These initiatives have in com-mon the notion that it is possi-ble to define public goals andactions for improving the lives ofolder adults. The predominatethemes include the recognitionthat healthy environments forolder people are good for allages; credible, locally-specificinformation is essential; valuesare important in defining pre-ferred alternatives and appropri-ate courses of action; and it is

Page 9

necessary to bring together rele-vant stakeholders.13 These plan-ning efforts represent essentialfirst steps in making publicly

based decisions about how com-munities intend to provide forthe needs of older people.

Perhaps one of the most com-mon ways that communitiesseek to meet the needs of olderpeople is through various hous-ing alternatives. Some alterna-tives are discussed next.

Home Sharing One would think that peoplehave a right to live with whomev-er they choose, but this is notthe case in many U.S. communi-ties. Restrictive definitions ofwhat constitutes a family alongwith outright limits on the num-ber of unrelated individuals whoare allowed to live together as ahousehold can present obsta-cles to older people who want toshare housing. It took a NewYork State Supreme CourtDecision to allow the HarvestHouse in the Town of Syosset.Syosset’s zoning ordinance pro-hibited more than two unrelatedpersons from living together.14

The zoning ordinance of DuPageCounty, Illinois, provides forSenior Citizen Home Sharing.Five or more people aged 55and older can live together in agroup home. This is considereda special use and requires apermit. Senior Home Sharing,Inc., a county-based nonprofitcorporation has developed fivesuch homes.15

Accessory ApartmentsAccessory apartments are sepa-rate dwellings created out ofextra space within, above or onthe lot of a single-family houseor garage. Advocates have longpromoted them as helping olderpeople by providing a source ofincome, living space for a care-giver, and additional security.Opponents fear the degradationof single-family neighborhoodsbecause of more cars and anincrease in the number ofrenters based on the perceptionthat numerous conversions inany one neighborhood will occur.Experience suggests that thedemand is not significantalthough it is definitely greater inareas with high housing prices.

Daly City, California, began allow-ing accessory apartments in1983. The maximum size of theapartment is 25 percent of theprincipal dwelling unit and owneroccupancy is required. Permitfees are set at $100, lower thanthe cost of adding a new bed-room and applicants areensured of an immediateassessment of the feasibility oftheir obtaining a permit. Nearlythree hundred new units havebeen created, many of them by

Housing Alternatives

Restrictive definitionsof what constitutes afamily along withoutright limits on thenumber of unrelatedindividuals who areallowed to live togeth-er as a household canpresent obstacles toolder people whowant to share housing.

senior citizens and emptynesters on fixed incomes. OneAlzheimer patient and homeown-er was able to trade housing formedical services.16

Officials in the Town of HydePark, New York, were willing toallow accessory apartments, butthey wanted initially to restrictthem to older people.17 Afterhearing arguments about therole that accessory apartmentscould play in making housingaffordable for young people, thetown adopted a liberal set ofregulations allowing the units inall residential zones, in new con-struction, and in relatively smallhouses. Despite these provi-sions, only one or two permitswere sought per year. Thisunderscores that these units willnot overrun a community. Italso suggests that restrictingthem to older people is unwar-ranted. It is quite possible thattheir value to aging in place willbe more evident if homeownerswere to create them when theyare middle-aged, before theirincome is restricted and beforethey are experiencing healthchallenges.18

Another accessory apartmentalternative is the HomecareSuite manufactured by MobileCare, Inc. of Lawrence, Kansas.19

This modular, fully accessible unitis inserted within an attachedgarage. Installation takes sevento ten days, removal only 48hours. The unit retails for

$30,000 or it can be rented.Units are available either with orwithout a kitchen. The absenceof a kitchen may ensure theacceptance of this alternative inthose municipalities that do notallow accessory apartments.

ECHO HousingECHO stands for Elder CottageHousing Opportunity. These areportable, fully accessible cot-tages that are placed on the lotof a single-family house to pro-vide accommodations for anolder person. Despite their pop-ularity in Australia and Canadaand strong promotion by theAmerican Association of RetiredPersons, they have not caughton as a housing alternative.20

Nevertheless, they are allowablein communities such as FortKent, Maine.21

An ECHO house, by design, is tobe removed once an older per-son no longer needs it. Propo-nents have considered this tobe one of the selling features ofthis alternative in that it is not apermanent addition to the hous-ing stock. Some would argue,however, that permanence is nota problem; the additional densi-ty has benefits that enhance acommunity including increasingthe feasibility of transit alterna-tives and the viability of neigh-borhood stores. This is thebasis for an amendment to thePortland, Oregon zoning ordi-nance.22 In response to theregional government’s mandate

Page 10

Page 11

Another importanthousing alternative isthe conversion ofbuildings that areoften in the heart ofcommunities.

to increase density by allowingaccessory units, the city revisedtheir overly restrictive "Add aRental" program and now per-mits freestanding units on exist-ing lots. These are permanentstructures; unlike an ECHO unit,they do not need to be removed.The impetus for this policy wasnot an explicit concern withmeeting the needs of older peo-ple although the potential bene-fit is obvious.

Senior Housing Developments:

The private sector is challenginglocal governments by developingnew forms of senior housingthat do not conform to what zon-ing ordinances have allowed.Twenty years ago, nursinghomes were the primary alterna-tive when older people’s careneeds increased to the pointthat they could no longer remainin their home. Today the grow-ing list of options includes adultcare foster homes, congregatehousing and assisted housing.Many of these alternatives areintended as a counterpoint tothe institutional nature of tradi-tional nursing homes and assuch merit inclusion in more tra-ditional neighborhoods. Zoningordinances, however, treat themas multi-family rental housing ormedical institutions. An aging-sensitive community will seek tointegrate this housing form

through zoning and site planningstandards that relate the hous-ing to the surrounding neighbor-hood and transportation system.23

Some municipalities provideincentives for the constructionof housing for older adults. SanDiego offers developers theopportunity to build at a 50 per-cent increase in density with theadditional units required to meetcity low-income and affordabilitycriteria. Projects are also subjectto location criteria that ensurelevel terrain and access to stores,services and transit. Lincoln,Nebraska, uses density bonusesto encourage developers to meetbarrier-free design criteria.Clackamas County, Oregon, usesa point system that rewards thesiting of elderly housing in closeproximity to various services.24

Another important housing alter-native is the conversion of build-ings that are often in the heart ofcommunities. Examples includethe conversions of an elementaryschool in Wallace, Idaho, a for-mer municipal hall in WappingersFalls, New York, and a highschool in Ypisilanti, Michigan.These conversions effectivelyinsert a housing alternative with-in a neighborhood at the sametime taking advantage of existingpublic infrastructure and in somecases removing a public eyesore.

Page 12

According to Madeleine L’Engle,a science fiction author, theshortest distance between twopoints is a "wrinkle," a meansof inter-galactic travel made pos-sible by bringing two points to-gether.25 The same concept canbe applied in our communities.By bringing land uses together,we reduce the time, distanceand effort of travel. This givesolder people alternatives to driv-ing and eases the demand fortransportation services.

Mixed land uses can occur with-in a building. The StarkMetropolitan Housing Authorityin Canton, Ohio, for example,operates a medical clinic withina senior high rise. The IonePlaza, a high rise with a prepon-derance of seniors on thePortland State University cam-pus in Oregon, has a bankbranch and restaurant on themain floor. Mixed uses mayalso be within a given parcel.When Safeway, Inc. developed agrocery superstore by consoli-dating two blocks in Portland,Oregon, they had to request achange from residential to com-mercial zoning with the intentionof demolishing a block of hous-ing. Since the city has a no nethousing loss requirement forzoning changes, Safeway con-structed a four-story housingcomplex for seniors adjacent tothe grocery store. The samehousing policy was the impetusfor a senior-housing complex

built in conjunction with anotherSafeway and a Target store neara light rail stop in the easternpart of the city.26

The benefits of mixing land usescan also be achieved by theclose proximity of compatibledevelopments. Conveniencestores next to suburban develop-ments serve this purpose, as dotraditional neighborhood com-mercial districts. Historicaldevelopment patterns andappropriate zoning are factors inensuring the feasibility of suchareas to serve local needs. Thecity of Forest Grove, Oregon,allows neighborhood stores as aconditional use in all residentialzones. An example of proximateland uses involved the construc-tion of two senior housing proj-ects next to the Senior Center inEverett, Washington. The hous-ing is physically tied to the cen-ter. Pharmacies, grocery storesand retail shopping are withinwalking distance and medicalservices including two hospitalsare within a 12-block radius.

One of the challenges of a freemarket economy, however, isthat businesses have the rightto move. This can be particular-ly problematic for place-boundseniors who have come todepend on a local service suchas a grocery store. Sometimesthe closures are a result of cor-porate preferences for fewer butlarger stores that are centrally

The Transportation/Land Use Connection

One of the challengesof a free market econ-omy, however, is thatbusinesses have theright to move. Thiscan be particularlyproblematic for place-bound seniors whohave come to dependon a local service suchas a grocery store.

Community planning for aging isan issue that needs champions.Public dialogue about aging hastended to focus on health care,social security, and the availabili-ty of competent, affordable long-term care staff. What has beenmissing is a consideration ofwhat can and should be done atthe community level to supporthealthy aging and to removeobstacles to the provision ofcare.

Funders could provide leader-ship in this arena by facilitatingdialogue between service

providers and those with respon-sibility for guiding the physicaldevelopment of a communitysuch as planners, architects,builders and investors. The goalwould be an infusion of a socialperspective in the planningprocess and associated policiessuch as site planning standards,land use plans, and infrastruc-ture improvements. Minnesota’sAging Initiative: Project 2030,the City of St. Louis’ planningeffort, and the EvergreenInstitute’s work in Bloomington,Indiana offer ways of addressingthis challenge. These and other

Opportunities for Funders

located. This means that servic-es may still be available in anygiven city but that transportationmust now be provided. Onealternative is property and/orbusiness ownership by a non-profit group. For example, achurch in northeast Portlandoperates a grocery store in aneighborhood that has longbeen under-served. In the1970s, after extensive publicdiscussion, the town of GarrettPark, Maryland, bought the build-ing that housed the local postoffice and general store. Thetown leases and manages thebuilding in order to serve localneeds. Tenants at the end of1994 included town offices, thepost office, a town store andcafé, a beauty salon, a fish mar-ket, a real estate office, andother uses.27

A well-designed land use patternwill lose its impact if focusedattention is not given to issuesof linkages within the trans-portation system. A ramp to asenior center will be of limitedvalue if the parking lot is pavedwith gravel, which is difficult totraverse in a wheel chair. Anearby grocery store can beinaccessible if one must crossat an intersection with a lightcycle that does not reflect theslower walking speed of seniors.A sidewalk that is not main-tained, the absence of comfort-able benches, the lack of shadeand no public restrooms cancreate significant obstacles foreven healthy seniors. Appre-ciating this level of detailrequires understanding how anolder person experiences thebuilt environment.

Page 13

The lack of attentionto the aging/environ-ment interface under-scores the need forpublic education.

planning models need to bewidely disseminated so theycould be applied in other locales.

The lack of attention to theaging/environment interfaceunderscores the need for publiceducation. Since we all experi-ence aging individually, it isimperative that educationalefforts target individual respon-sibility. If people make moreinformed choices as they facethe prospect of growing old,then they will begin to demandthe necessary community trans-formation. Funders can providesupport by underwriting thedevelopment of educationalmaterials such as the housingalternatives publications spon-sored by AARP. Often, however,more tangible examples areneeded to transcend precon-ceived ideas. Some home-builders associations regularlysponsor "Street of Dreams"developments showcasing con-tractors, designers and innova-tive housing concepts. Thesedevelopments draw thousandsof people over the course of amonth or so after which thehouses are sold. Demonstra-tion houses with accessoryapartments and barrier-freedesign elements and designergrab bars can go a long way infacilitating acceptance by con-sumers, developers and policymakers. Funders can supportsuch initiatives.

Funders could sponsor local col-leges and universities in con-

ducting assessments of variouscommunities and neighborhoodsto identify what would be need-ed to transform these placesinto lifecycle communities. Thistype of analysis could also beconducted by a team of peersfrom around the country who areinvited into the community foran intensive multi-day designcharrette. The resulting ideascould serve as a basis forplanned changes in the hostcommunity.

Both applied and traditional aca-demic research is needed to fur-ther understanding about aging.The Andrus Foundation has along history of supporting univer-sity research. The TurnerFoundation and Robert WoodJohnson Foundation are support-ing research on the relationshipbetween health and urban form.Both the Lavanburg Foundationand Milbank Fund have support-ed the development of policyanalyses (see the descriptions inendnotes 14 and 15) for directuse in public decision-making. Research needs are extensive,ranging from gaining a betterunderstanding of how older peo-ple negotiate their environmentas their capabilities change toassessing the effectiveness ofsite development features in var-ious assisted care housingforms. To the extent possible,research should be directedtoward actual applications, suchas providing the justification forimproved site-planning standards.

Page 14

Funders can providesupport by underwrit-ing the developmentof educational materi-als such as the housingalternatives publica-tions sponsored byAARP.

... national trans-portation legislationknown as TEA21 (theTransportation EquityAct for the 21stCentury) will be re-authorized byCongress in 2003with hearings to beginin 2002. This repre-sents an importantopportunity to influ-ence transportationlegislation to advanceaging-sensitive policiesand programs.

Conclusion

Smart growth initiatives empha-size compact, walkable citieswith diversity in housing choic-es, a strong sense of communityand a high quality, accessible,natural environment. These arefundamental characteristics ofaging-sensitive and elder-friendlycommunities. An explicit focuson aging defines a logical con-stituency of smart growth andprovides a sense of urgencygiven the pending demographicchanges. The examples of inno-

vative practices covered in thispaper skim the surface of whatcan be done.28

Our society will certainly surviveif we fail to address the nexusbetween the built environmentand the aging experience. Butthe price we will pay is a dimin-ished experience with aging; onethat reflects missed opportuni-ties for maintaining health, inde-pendence, and self worth.

Funders could serve as a pro-gram sponsor to promote hous-ing alternatives or could supporttraining to enable transitproviders to be more aware ofthe needs of older people.Funders could also providedevelopment support for innova-tive land uses and infrastructureimprovements.

The effectiveness of these vari-ous initiatives could be further

enhanced by advocacy effortsaimed at policies and programsat national and state levels. Forexample, national transportationlegislation known as TEA21 (theTransportation Equity Act for the21st Century) will be re-author-ized by Congress in 2003 withhearings to begin in 2002. Thisrepresents an important oppor-tunity to influence transportationlegislation to advance aging-sen-sitive policies and programs.

1. Mean Streets: Pedestrian Safety and Reform of the Nation’s Transportation Law (Environmental Working Group, 1997) www.ewg.org/pub/home/meanstreets/mean.html.

2. The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Turner Foundation are providing funding support for this type of research. Seewww.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/aces.htm and L. D. Frank and P. O. Engelke. The Built Environment and Human Activity Patterns: Exploring the Impacts of Urban Form on Public Health. The Journal of Planning Literature. 2001. 16:2, 202-218.

3. See, for example: D. M. Buchner, S. A. Beresford, E. B. Larson, A. Z. LaCroix, and E. H. Wagner. Effects of Physical Activity on Health Status in Older Adults. II. Intervention Studies. Annual Review of Public Health 1992, 13:469-88.

4. P. H. Hare. Isolation Zoning in Single Family Suburbs. Expanding Housing Choices for Older People: An AARP White House Conference on Aging Mini-Conference, Conference Papers and Recommendations. (AARP, January 26-27, 1995) at 113.

5. H. Freshley. Planning for an Aging Society: Examples from the Twin Cities. Expanding Housing Choices for Older People: An AARP White House Conference on Aging Mini-Conference, Conference Papers and Recommendations. (AARP, January 26-27, 1995) at 27-41.

Endnotes

Page 15

6. Some of these same goals are being pursued by the Metro Regional Government in Portland, Oregon although without the explicit attention to aging. A strong public commitment to maintaining the regional urban growth boundary (established in 1979) means that new development has to be accommodated through redevelopment and increased densities. This involves promot-ing high-density, mixed-use developments along transit corridors, mandating the inclusion of accessory dwellings in each munici-pality, and promoting row housing development. Like the Twin Cities’ lifecycle concept, these policies encourage housing diversity and transportation alternatives. (See Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (Metro, 1996)).

7. Economic Development Strategic Plan (City of St. Lewis Park, 1997). 8. Approved and Adopted Master Plan for the Communities of Kensington-Wheaton, as Amended, Maryland. (The Maryland-

National Capital Park and Planning Commission, 1989).9. Graying of Suburbia: Policy Implications for Local Officials (U.S. Conference of Mayors and National Association of Counties, 1988)10. Another example of municipal planning for aging used community meetings with outside experts as speakers and focus groups.

Communities for All Ages: Planning for and Responding to the Needs and Opportunities of an Aging Population, prepared for the Cities of Richfield and Edina by the Hennepin South Services Collaborative (October 2000) is available at www.shfsc.org.

11. P. Stafford. The Healthy Community Works for All Ages. Community Potentials. (1998, 1:3, 8-9).12. M. McCall. Is Anybody Out There Listening? A Survey of Senior Housing Concerns for the City of Pleasant Hill, California (1994).13. Effectively involving older adults in community planning efforts requires special attention to their needs and preferences. Issues

such as meeting location and timing, signage, acoustics, and seating comfort are addressed in D. A. Howe, N. J. Chapman, and S. A. Baggett (eds.) Planning for an Aging Society: Planning Advisory Service Report Number 451. (American Planning Association, 1994), 47-50.

14. Linking Housing and Health Services for Older Persons (American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging and Milbank Memorial Fund, 1997)

15. D. Leach, K. F. Clarkson, and G. Gaberlavage. Making Your Community Livable: Zoning Case Studies: Helping Older People Remain in Their Communities. (American Association of Retired Persons, 1997). For an overview of shared housing concepts and an assessment of formal programs designed to match participants in shared housing see Shared Housing in New York: A Qualitative Evaluation of Programs, A Citizens Housing and Planning Council Research Report (December 2000) available at www.chpcny.org. This report was funded by the Lavanburg Foundation.

16. R. L. Cobb. Zoning for Accessory Dwelling Units. Zoning News. January 1997. 17. D. A. Howe. The Flexible House: Designing for Changing Needs. Journal of the American Planning Association. 1990. 69:1, 69-77.18. N. J. Chapman, and D. A. Howe. Accessory Apartments: Are They a Realistic Alternative for Aging in Place? Housing Studies.

2001. 16:5, 637-650.19. D. E. Altus, R. M. Mathews, and K. D. Kosloski. Examining Attitudes Toward the Homecare Suite: A New Housing Alternative for

Elders. The Journal of Applied Gerontology. 1997. 16:4, 459-476.20. R. L. Mace, and R. H. Phillips. Echo Housing: Recommended Construction and Installation Standards. (AARP, 1984) and Despite

Disappointing Demonstration, ECHO Still Has a Future, Say Advocates. AARP Housing Report. (AARP, Winter 1998).21. The zoning regulations can be found at www.fortkent.org/fkzoneord.htm22. www.planning.ci.portland.or.us/zoning/ZCTest/200/205_acc_rent.pdf23. Howe, Chapman and Baggett (eds.), 35-41 and D. Y. Carstens. Site Planning and Design for the Elderly: Issues, Guidelines, and

Alternatives. (Van Nostrand, 1987).24. Howe, Chapman and Baggett (eds.), 29-33.25. A Wrinkle in Time. (Ariel Books, 1962).26. For further information contact John Warner, Finance Coordinator, Portland Development Commission, at 503-823-3240. 27. Hare, 107-132.28. For additional suggestions about community-level planning for aging see Howe, Chapman and Baggett; V. Parker, S. Edmonds,

and V. Robinson. 1991. A Change for the Better: How to Make Communities More Responsive to Older Adults. (AARP,1991);Retrofitting Communities: Accommodating Aging in Place: A Best Practice Catalogue. (Partners for Livable Communities,1995); and Assessing Elderly Housing. (U.S. Conference of Mayors and American Association of Retired Persons, 1986).

Endnotes, continued

Hooper Brooks, Chair L. Benjamin Starrett, Executive Director

Working to strengthen funders’ individual and collective abilities to support organizations promoting smartgrowth and creating livable communities

Collins Center for Public Policy, Inc. 150 SE 2nd Avenue, Suite 709 Miami, Florida 33131Phone: 305-377-4484, ext. 15Fax: 305-377-4485Email: bstarrett@collinscenter.orgwww.fundersnetwork.org