Intergenerational Living: The Biggest Mistake We Are Making

In our last article we asked a simple question. If intergenerational living is such a good idea, why have we built so little of it? The answer isn’t because the evidence is weak. Far from it.

In this article begins to establish a philosophy rather than simply describing a problem. It also starts to introduce wider thinking around Place First Economics and ethical capitalism which we have advocated for many years. We are proposing a new way of delivering real estate that creates commercial returns, measurable societal value and amazing ESG. That is a much bigger and more distinctive position than writing about one housing typology alone.

Developers and local authorities have traditionally advocating investing heavily in the quantity and quality of the building(s). We believe there is competitive advantage in investing in the quality of the community. Good community management is an investment in long-term value rather than an operational cost. This has particular advantage to investors who want to hold their developments and reap the rewards and long-term benefits.

The evidence continues to grow that communities bringing generations together can improve health, reduce loneliness, strengthen neighbourhoods and create places where people are happier and more resilient. The recent APPG report, Creating Intergenerational Communities, reinforces many of these benefits and makes a compelling case for change.

Yet genuine examples remain surprisingly rare. Why?

Because we believe the development / housing industry is making one fundamental mistake. It treats intergenerational living as a housing product, when in reality it is an operating model. That distinction changes everything.

At one end of the perspective luxury, branded apartments, are now making traction in the UK. Which provide central services but this is very much based on the tenant of the residential unit having the resources to pay a premium through services charges but we don’t see that the development industry having established a commercial model to deliver intergenerational living.

As a society, We have become ‘obsessed’ with the gross building numbers and we understand why, when housing is now so difficult to obtain for many.

When a new residential development is proposed, the conversation usually starts with familiar questions.

• How many homes?
• What tenure?
• What density?
• How many parking spaces?
• What is the Gross Development Value?

These questions matter. But they all focus on one thing. The building or units.

Too often very little attention or none at all is given to what happens after the ribbon is cut. The development is sold to a third party (ies). Some key questions we have thought about in creating inter-generational communities:

• Who creates the community?
• Who helps neighbours become friends?
• Who encourages volunteering?
• Who programmes shared spaces?
• Who makes sure the communal kitchen is actually used?
• Who welcomes new residents?
• Who helps an older resident stay connected after losing a partner?
• How do you address safeguarding concerns?

We have previously established the cost of poor health, which includes mental health, has a huge impact on the public sector but there are other impacts for all generations. As people / families migrate for employment to new towns they lack family support. By linking with neighbours it provides a host of opportunities for all the family.

None of the above questions appear on a viability appraisal. Yet they determine whether a development becomes a community or another collection of apartments / houses.

Buildings don’t create communities

Property professionals often assume that if they provide communal facilities, community will somehow emerge naturally. Sometimes it does. Often it doesn’t.

A lounge becomes an empty room. A community garden becomes neglected. Shared workspaces sit unused.

The architecture hasn’t failed. The operating model has.

Successful intergenerational communities don’t simply provide shared spaces. They create reasons for people to use them. The difference is subtle, but profound.

Stewardship matters

Perhaps the biggest lesson from successful examples—whether in the UK or internationally—is that community rarely happens by accident.

It requires stewardship:

• someone has to curate activities;
• someone has to connect residents;
• someone has to help build trust; and,
• someone has to create opportunities for interaction while respecting privacy and personal choice.

That doesn’t necessarily require expensive staffing or intrusive management. In fact, the best communities often feel effortless. Voluntary leadership is critical but some initial enablement may be required and regular facilitation.

But behind that effortless experience is usually a thoughtful operational model.

This is no different to the hospitality sector, which we have spent a lot of time working on. A beautifully designed venue without good management rarely succeeds.

Likewise, a thoughtfully designed neighbourhood without stewardship rarely reaches its potential.

Why this matters commercially

Some people assume this is simply about social value and potential savings to the public purse in social care and health etc. We disagree.

It is also about commercial resilience.

Evidence from the Build to Rent sector suggests that developments offering a high-quality resident experience and strong community management tend to achieve longer resident retention and lower turnover.

Research suggests that neighbourhoods with stronger social connections generate a greater sense of belonging, which is associated with higher resident satisfaction, longer-term attachment to place and greater community resilience.

Healthy, well-designed neighbourhoods / developments can generate wider economic benefits by supporting local businesses, increasing the attractiveness of surrounding property and fostering more stable, engaged communities. Good stewardship may also contribute to improved long-term management outcomes.

Good stewardship is therefore not simply a cost. It can become a commercial advantage and give an investor outstanding ESG returns.

Perhaps we should stop asking whether we can afford to invest in communities. The better question may be whether we can afford not to.

A different way of thinking

This is where we believe the conversation needs to change and we welcome the APPG report for putting this on the national stage and also the Church of England for being a powerful and able advocate.

Rather than designing a residential scheme and then asking how to introduce some intergenerational features, perhaps we should start with a different question. This question may be: what kind of community are we trying to create?

Only then should we decide what buildings, homes, public spaces, operators and management structures are needed to support it.

That turns the traditional development process on its head. But perhaps that is exactly what is needed.

Ethical capitalism in action

At Whatif..., we often talk about ethical capitalism.

Not because we believe commercial success should become secondary. Quite the opposite.

We believe the best developments create lasting value for investors because they create lasting value for society.

Healthier communities reduce pressure on public services. Stronger neighbourhoods support local economies. People who feel connected are more likely to remain active, independent and engaged.

These outcomes have economic value.

The challenge is creating development models capable of recognising that value rather than treating it as an afterthought.

Looking ahead

Intergenerational living is still in its infancy in the UK. For the development industry / housing associations and local authority politicians and planners this should be viewed as an opportunity.

We have the chance to move beyond simply talking about healthier communities and begin designing delivery models that make them commercially viable.

That means bringing together planning, development, finance, investment, stewardship and long-term management from the outset. Because buildings alone do not create communities. People do.

The property industry’s job is to create the conditions in which those communities can flourish.

At Whatif..., that’s exactly the conversation we’re interested in leading and assisting on.