2011-05-17_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes – Tuesday, April 19, 2011 Page 3 1 Mr. Hamilton attached hereto and made a part provided his presentation as a bench handout; 2 hereof. As an architect concentrating on senior housing, Mr. Hamilton addressed future trends 3 for those over age 60 and their home design preferences found in cooperatively working with 4 senior housing developers; and a lack of consensus yet to be found on the actual building types 5 and trends indicated. Mr. Hamilton provided past precedents and various examples; the trend 6 of baby boomers in availability of amenities for physical care, communal areas, walking areas; 7 and their more active lifestyles, while recognizing that as they age, those needs change and 8 amenities need to change along with them. Mr. Hamilton provided several examples of 9 potential “next step” best designs, such as the “Shaller Family Sholom East Campus” and the 10 appeal of this type of “hotel” type housing and housing for those sharing specific interests, be 11 they religious backgrounds, hobbies, skills, or other common denominators. Mr. Hamilton 12 noted that baby boomers find a comfort and continuity in such a community, increasing 13 sharing opportunities, and creating a richer quality of life. 14 15 Discussion among Ms. Burjold, Mr. Hamilton and HRA Members included: health dictating 16 housing options; housing changes based on two (2) significant events for older residents: 1) 17 when they become empty nesters; 2) and when they have to move due to health issues. 18 19 Further discussion included recognizing that the baby boomer generation has been more 20 mobile and relocated more during their careers, and have traveled more than previous 21 generations who were apt to stay in one home longer; and anticipation that baby boomers may 22 make two to three (2-3) moves from age 55 to 80. 23 24 Mr. Hamilton observed that as a baby boomer, this was the first generation that had choices 25 due to society dictates versus earlier generations who were more about duty and obligation; 26 with boomer markets required to make that psychological shift on what is important to aging 27 baby boomers, given the many choices already experienced throughout their active lives. Mr. 28 Hamilton noted that one of the top cities for senior living is Minneapolis/St. Paul, due to their 29 renown throughout the world for health care (e.g. Mayo Clinics and Hospital; State HMO’s; 30 metropolitan health care options); and the many bicycle trails and other multi-modal 31 transportation options available. In addition to that, Mr. Hamilton noted the State ranked high 32 in disease control, economic and social opportunities, environmental health, spiritual 33 communities, and transportation/housing opportunities. Mr. Hamilton provided other housing 34 examples found successful for an aging baby boomer population around the world, many 35 provided around university communities. 36 37 Mr. Hamilton reviewed research on a person’s four (4) basis needs: safety/security; to be 38 loved/belonging; self-esteem; and physiological – what makes me happy, my joy and pleasure. 39 40 Ms. Burjold opined that those four basic needs, particularly the physiological needs will be a 41 major part of the puzzle in the type of senior community that will attract the baby boomer 42 generation. 43 44 Additional discussion included generational changes specific to baby boomers from moving 45 beyond basic needs to addressing needs and a larger life outside ourselves; housing options 46 within communities that focused around particular opportunities and passions; reinventing 47 ourselves as a generation and giving back to the community; and hesitancy of developers in 48 moving toward untried housing concepts and away from past market trends. 49 50 Chair Maschka noted Mr. Hamilton’s observation about the City of Roseville being developed 51 during the baby boomer generation, and the community’s struggle, since 1976, in attracting 52 young families into the community. Chair Maschka observed that Roseville had the majority 53 of things people were looking for: close proximity to health options and family; while further 54 recognizing that if the community continued to trend toward a more aging population and 55 lower incomes, there would be less money for government to work with. Chair Maschka