For ANZAC day reading, TRM’s recent post comparing retirement villages to cohousing has generated more interest than ever. Not surprising really. Updated fishing reports were too slow so TRM stepped outside the usual fishy reporting parameters. After a critical Dominion feature article inspired many letters-to-the-editor comments, both NZ Herald and Dominion replied with full-page adverts from the Retirement Village Association signed by 60 residents trying to justify their choice of living in retirement villages. These were referred to us after TRM’s promotion for cohousing apartments. I suspect their overreaction indicated that they were embarrassed by the hard truth in the article which questioned the “LTO” (licence to occupy) tenure terms and loss of future capital gains as being unreasonable. The 60 residents replied that they represented the 50,000 residents of retirement villages was proof they cannot be wrong. We believe they missed the point.

This was important as TRM is waiting for council approval of a resource application for the redevelopment of cohousing apartments. We need to make sure any negative aspects of retirement village tenure arrangements are overcome. So far feedback confirms that cohousing is considered a better option. The following characteristics suggest cohousing has more advantages:

1 Residents have a choice in involvement in the participatory process.

2 Residents manage themselves.

3 Share in future capital gains.

4 No age barriers to qualify.

5 Residents share in communal facilities – i.e. such as in the common house.

6 Residents committee (i.e. not the developers) make their own rules.

The following population statistics provide interesting food for thought for us oldies. About 10% of the NZ population is aged over 70 – i.e. qualifying for retirement village living. To be more precise the population over 65 was 842,100, so the present 50,000 retirement village residents do not even equate to 6%. So who is right? The 6% in villages or the 94% who have avoided them? Mmmm…

Or to focus even more on the older qualifying age group, 14.3% of the over 75-year-old population live in retirement villages. Or expressed another way, 85% of NZ’ers aged 75+ choose not to live in retirement villages. It has also been pointed out to us, how can 60 residents claim to represent 50,000 retirement village residents chosen more sensibly by “voting with their feet”, that they must be right and anyone who questions their decision is wrong? Surely statistics showing 85% chose not to live in retirement villages is the obvious answer.

A revealing worldwide trend is for the elderly to abandon larger cities on retirement, to escape the stress from increased crime and pollution and congestion, etc. to retire properly in dignity in a more relaxed and safer environment provided by smaller towns. Smaller towns will inevitably become “grey” towns. (We have registrations of interest from Jafas who plan to escape ‘brown’ town to swop for ‘grey’ town?) That is why we have decided to measure the demand for cohousing in a new apartment development in Turangi.

The usual ‘special inducement’ needed for other retirement villages is to feature any additional facilities and amenities being offered. At TRM we do not have any as they are all close by within easy level walking distance. These include the local bowling club (see the aerial view at top), a heated indoor pool complex, a well-equipped library, various parks (see the local petanque court only 200m from TRM) and playgrounds, a comprehensive medical centre, a shopping mall with a supermarket, chemist, etc. so there is no need to duplicate what is already available nearby.