Although many traditional design solutions were applied to senior living projects submitted to this year’s EFA Design Showcase, communities also delivered an impressive amount of variety in how they were responsive to their specific markets. Among the winners and finalists alone, there’s a range of differentiating characteristics that support initiatives focused on health and wellness, socialization and multigenerational encounters, and affordable and urban housing. “It’s thrilling to see this diversity in design,” says juror Janice Sanada, principal at LRS Architects (Portland, Ore.).
In all, 41 projects were reviewed, with each first evaluated individually by the jury of senior living design professionals appointed by partner associations SAGE (Society for the Advancement of Gerontological Environments), The Center for Health Design, the International Interior Design Association, and the American Society of Interior Designers. In January, the group gathered for an in-person judging of the top-scoring projects, determining which projects rose to the top to earn awards. Five were named as finalists; four awarded an Honorable Mention; and just one project was given our highest honor, the Award of Merit.
During that meeting, held at senior living community Touchmark in the West Hills in Portland, Ore., a 2019 Award of Merit winner, the jury spent hours diving deep into the solutions delivered and how they answer the needs of today’s senior living owners/operators, staff, residents, and families. Those conversations also began the process of teasing out the trends that these projects collectively represent, so Environments for Aging followed up with the jury members to see what stood out to them—highlights and areas for improvement.
From aesthetics to operations
The overall aesthetics of projects represented a complicated picture this year. “The projects that stood out were clearly stepping outside of the boundaries of what we could automatically discern as ‘senior living.’ They maintained a certain timelessness and quality of design that elevated the industry,” says Hillary DeGroff, senior associate at Perkins Eastman (Chicago). Joseph Billig, senior vice president of architecture for Touchmark Development & Construction (Beaverton, Ore.), agrees: “As an industry, it’s exciting to see owners, architects, and interior designers continue to push the envelope with beautiful and sophisticated exteriors and light-filled interior spaces exquisitely detailed. Many projects we reviewed could be resorts or high-end condominiums.”
However, those high notes were tempered by a few related observations. For starters, some jurors felt that hospitality-driven design at times strayed too far. “I struggle a bit with how far we take the hospitality approach in design. While luxury and high-end are things that some are looking for, people don’t want to live in a hotel,” notes Amy Bursey, general manager at Henrik & Co. (Minneapolis). Environmental gerontologist Lorraine Hiatt (New York) observed the same, as well as some settings that went in the opposite direction, already appearing dated. “Interiors inspired by 1990s assisted living and continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs) were prevalent and as jarring as ultra-hospitality,” she says.
Meanwhile, several jurors also noted a disconnect between interior design and architecture. “An interior is only as good as the language it shares with the architecture, and in order to achieve that, the architect and interior designer have to collaborate,” DeGroff says. Billig agrees, pointing to Award of Merit winner Brio, a WesleyLife Community for Healthy Living, as a strong example in its reinforcement of a modern farmhouse aesthetic on numerous levels, from a timber frame structure to light fixtures to art. “The more successful projects this year had a consistent theme and design direction that drove both the exterior and interior design decisions,” he says.
Additionally, jurors noted that efforts to up the ante on aesthetics at times resulted in less innovative approaches to operations and layout. Billig warns that delivering high-end models to appeal to a younger demographic shouldn’t come at the cost of functional floor plans that focus on resident and staff experience. “We can’t lose sight of our end users and the need to balance curb appeal with innovative plans that go beyond the double-loaded corridor,” he says. Hiatt also mentioned seeing numerous race-track designs “where natural light was minimal, staff and resident walking distances were excessive, and the negative impact on memory function was not thoughtfully resolved.”
And while there were several successful standalone skilled nursing and rehab projects in this year’s Showcase, Billig says that CCRC settings, especially, tended to deliver on the independent living side of the coin and miss on their licensed care environments. Issues he observed beyond floor plans include large nurses’ stations, challenging sight lights, and minimal outdoor space. “We have to find a way to address a better healthcare plan and not force it in the same box of an independent footprint,” he
says. “As we see independent living projects becoming more modern and appealing to baby boomers, blurring the lines with urban market-rate condominiums, the licensed care component needs to stand on its own merit and not be second rate.”
New models in action
This year’s Showcase submissions also represented several shifts taking place in the market, most notably in high-rise housing and urban infill projects. “The development industry is preparing for a future where property is more finite. Land will need to be designed smarter with higher density, utilization, and integration,” Sanada says. And jurors identified some areas where that shift could likely translate to several positives for both residents and staff.
For example, DeGroff says she noticed more openness to integrated communities where memory care residents, specifically, aren’t segregated—something she hopes will become a new standard of care. “Perhaps with the spatial challenges of going vertical, the emergence of integrated communities will be a natural progression,” she says.
And as a shortage of land as well as market demand moves more senior living projects into urban sites with smaller footprints, jurors note advantages tied to both boomers’ desires to be integrated within a larger community and the senior living labor shortage. “Communities cannot staff the amenities that residents require, and urban infill allows residents to take advantage of existing infrastructure,” says Keith Stanton, director of design development at Thoma-Holec Design (Phoenix). “The community will not need a bus if the city bus/light rail is conveniently located, food service can be supplemented by local restaurants, fitness classes can be organized at the local gym, art classes at the local park district, hair care at the local salon, doctors’ appointments at the local hospital/medical plaza, etc. Programming and labor costs can be reduced or eliminated to reduce the rent and provide more affordable housing and care,” he says.
Stanton’s comment supports yet another trend emerging this year: affordable housing that answers the needs of the middle market. “The senior living development industry is preparing for the future of baby boomers where they live longer, work longer, and are accustomed to more modest home and material goods in exchange for a higher quality of life experience and community,” Sanada adds. Hiatt also notes that “change is in the air,” as resident stereotypes of decades ago are now being replaced by “a market that’s still defining itself or being identified through various efforts to reach the breadth of income levels and emphasis on aging in local communities,” she says.
And, finally, as owners/operators introduce more projects in urban settings or on tight sites, jurors noted that master planning and landscape architecture emerged as commendable elements on many projects—starting with how designers answered the need to provide outdoor space and views of nature. For example, in high-rise settings, project teams delivered rooftop terraces and gardens and even floor-to-ceiling windows for amazing views. Meanwhile, in projects that worked to integrate communities into the surrounding community context, campus plans focused on walkability and the pedestrian experience. “Connection to the outdoors with thought about how wheelchairs and walkers and mobility-challenged people can participate is really encouraging,” Bursey says.
Additionally, projects also demonstrated proficiency in thinking about how to provide residents with necessary outdoor experiences, even in locales with challenging weather conditions. “Being mindful of the climate in which we’re building may warrant thinking about outdoor space differently—how can climate-controlled spaces still have the feel or experience of being outdoors?” DeGroff says.
Next steps
Looking forward, jurors noted that emerging and future design trends will be guided by goals to further improve the quality of resident and staff experiences. “This drive toward the end-user experience is a notable objective and a natural development in senior living design. As the industry creates differentiators and focuses on specialty experiences, it has the potential to create vibrant and diverse communities for future residents,” Sanada says.
Bursey similarly encourages the industry to further consider design details down to the furniture, fixtures, and equipment, through the lens of the resident, considering what will be successful not just for marketing but to truly support needs as we age. “Any one of us can do beautiful, and many of the projects were very beautiful, but what can we do to provide contrast to the aging eye? What choices are we making on furnishings that do not just look good but are the right scale and heights for seniors? How do we provide spaces for personalization and choice?”
With elements being introduced from urban infills, high-rise projects, and affordable models, Stanton says further innovation will be required moving forward, stressing that the industry must take on a “start-up mentality.” “We need disruptors to navigate the bureaucracy of caregiving. We have an aging population dependent on federal entitlements needing care and a labor shortage about to intersect,” he says. And it won’t just be boomers in the driver’s seat on where we’re all heading, adds DeGroff. “The boomers are hitting the gas pedal in terms of pivotal shifts in marketability; millennials are steering how care is provided and technology is integrated; and our wallets are putting on the brakes to push for a model that works for everyone’s abilities, finances, and expectations,” she says.
Jennifer Kovacs Silvis is editor-in-chief of Environments for Aging magazine. She can be reached at [email protected].
