Ageing in the City

Ageing in the CBD

In responding to my doubts about the employment assumptions behind Auckland’s plans for a new central rail link and what this means for the CBD, Patrick R cited the example of his 84 year old grandmother who enjoys the CBD lifestyle.  Dan talked about the attractions of town centres in Europe where many older people hang out.

If people are attracted to the CBD for its amenities and lifestyle as they are saying, I am not sure of the relevance of the rail link. But I take their wider point: don’t underestimate the attraction of CBD living, and let’s make sure we make Auckland’s CBD attractive.

Interestingly, the European city argument is most relevant because it refers to people ageing in place.  Many of the people Dan observed in Sardinia (and, indeed most other European towns) are likely to have always lived in and around the centre. 

Seeking a balance

Patrick’s observations about diversity of ages in the CBD are important because they highlight a key planning issue in Auckland, and elsewhere.  How to plan for an ageing population, particularly if reduced residential mobility is a feature of ageing?  I agree with Patrick that we are not talking about an “either-or “ situation here, and that our interest in the well-being of the majority should not blind us to the interests and needs of the minority.

There are plenty of people who will move into the centre in new world cities given the chance, making the most of the revival in street life, the performing arts, cafes and restaurants.  This is a reflection of a growing capacity in post-industrial cities for people to exercise choice about lifestyle and where they will live.  But it’s only part of the story. 

Living in the suburbs

The facts and figures I have cited in other postings indicate that the amenities associated with the CBD are also a growing part of the suburban story, a part that justifies greater attention and perhaps greater favour.[1] 

Suburban centres are becoming more like village centres.  This is entrenched in Europe.  Even in large cities like Paris and London the vast majority of people do not live in the centre, but live suburban lives focused on urban centres and urban villages.  The localisation of amenity and living is reflected in a more intimate system of local government than we are used to, though.  Perhaps one of our problems is having a single super city trying to plan for a diverse region.  But that’s another story.

The New Zealand evidence confirms that people here prefer to age where they have their roots, which is overwhelmingly in the suburbs. [2] This is where they have their financial, social and emotional investment. Even moving out of an outsized family home is a wrench.

The Data

So where might older people prefer to live?  I thought it would be useful to map their living preferences.  So I did this for Auckland using the 1996 and 2006 Censuses, assuming (rather unfairly perhaps) that age 50 qualifies you as an older person.  

I divided Auckland into several zones – the CBD; the inner Isthmus suburbs, (Westmere, through Kingsland, to Newmarket and Parnell); the balance of the Isthmus ; and the suburbs of the north, south, and west.  Among the latter I separated those closest to the CBD – Northcote and Takapuna areas further south on the North Shore; New Lynn in West Auckland; and Otahuhu through to Mangere and areas north in South Auckland. 

The figures tell the story.  The upper part of the bars on the graph below represents the growth in the number of older people (using my definition) between 1996-2006.  The lower part is the growth in those under 50.  The squares show the share in each area aged 50 years or more in 2006.   

Where do the over-50s live?

This 2006 figures show that the outer parts of the city have relatively more older people: 36% on the Hibiscus Coast (the coastal suburbs north of the metropolitan area), 30% in towns, and 29% in rural areas.  Only 12% of the CBD population was 50 years or older.  (The total for the city was 25%).

The city’s population grew 22% over the ten years to 2006.  The number of older persons grew 33%, accounting for 34% of Auckland’s growth, but only 11% in the CBD and 18% in inner Isthmus suburbs.  By contrast, oldies made up over half in rural areas and 35% in the outer suburbs

The gains were biggest in the southern suburbs, but the shares of growth accounted for were highest in the Hibiscus Coast (38%) and the west (40%).

Auckland Population Growth 1996-2006 - by Age and Area

Thinking about the next twenty years

There seems to be a preference for suburban and even outer suburban living among older people.  It’s not absolute, but it does suggest that we should be wary of overstating future demand for CBD living as our population ages.

Current Statistics New Zealand projections indicate that the 50+ age group will account for over half of Auckland’s growth in the next 20 years.  (The figure is much higher elsewhere, over 80% in Christchurch, for example – and that was before the earthquakes).  So we should be clearly reflecting their tastes and preferences in our plans.  And their attachments mean that the majority of that growth will take place in the suburbs.

What does this mean for the CBD?

The point is not that people do not want to live in the central city.  Many do, although most are likely to be in transition.  They include migrants and temporary residents. That’s not surprising: New Zealanders on their OE also favour living close to the centre of the cities they live in overseas.  Many others are young, in education, early in their career, in non-family households, or not in long-standing relationships.  For a majority – not all – the central city is a place of transition, traditionally a place where they dwell before stepping onto the housing ladder.  And interestingly, young people building their careers and their independence, people in transition, will be a smaller share of our growing population, not a larger one. 

So to maintain strong residential growth in the CBD we will need to influence more people’s preferences, and especially the preferences of older people.  While some will come, it’s a big – if not impossible -- ask to get the sorts of numbers current plans project. 

We need to think about the numbers as well as the anecdotes, and bring balance to our thinking about the CBD, its place in our lives, and how much we might be spending to make it something which it is not.

[1]           I have argued this elsewhere, e.g. http://cities-matter.blogspot.com/2011/05/sustaining-suburbs.html, http://cities-matter.blogspot.com/2011/10/central-city-dreaming.html

[2]           See, for example, Davey J (2007) “Ageing in Place: The Views of Older Homeowners on Maintenance, Renovation and Adaptation” Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 27

---

Sustaining the Suburbs

Save our suburbs, save our cities
The proposition is simple, if not overwhelming.  If we want sustainable cities – however you define “sustainable” – we had better put some effort into the quality of suburban life.  We need to get over denigrating suburbs as sprawl.  That simply ducks the issue of where and how most people spend most of their time.  We need to moderate a preoccupation with promoting CBD and big centre lifestyles.  Those are places that people want visit, but not necessarily where they want to live.

Come back Jane, our suburbs need you
It’s fifty years now since Jane Jacobs’ landmark book about saving North American cities from themselves.  She argued against the prevailing push for urban renewal as displacing communities and destroying street life with motorways, car parks, and bland commercial development.  Jacobs’ writing and her activism inspired a resistance credited with saving inner city villages, helping retain the human character of large cities, and inspiring a generation of urban designers and planners. 

There is no doubt that the Jacobs message took hold in New Zealand.  It’s become compelling since the crash of ‘87 slowed down the razing of inner city blocks and marked the beginning of the end of the white collar CBD.  Hanging on to what we've got is one way to stop the hollowing out.

Unfortunately, today’s call for central city mega projects on which to stake a claim to an international presence and the push for large scale CBD residential development on which to stake a claim to environmental stewardship run the risk of reversing the gains to inner city life.  High rise apartments, tracts of high density housing, and grandiose civic plans risk undermining the essence of the central city in the same way as urban renewal and freeways once did.

But that’s not what this posting is about.  The reality is that the bulk of our populations live in the suburbs; the suburbs that are growing the most; and that’s where we need to promote the capacity for people to live fulfilling lives.  That’s where today we need to promote street life and be wary of the threats posed by the new urbanists and their grand plans for intensification.

Most people still live in the suburbs
Its obvious that most people still live a suburban life.  But that doesn't seem to be appreciated by the people who plan our cities today, even as the number of suburban residents keeps growing.

Look at the three metropolitan areas in New Zealand, not big by international standards, but nevertheless reflecting an entrenched trend in the developed world – a move to decentralise.  The numbers say it all. 

Over the last 14 years population growth has been totally dominated by the suburbs.  In Auckland, the inner city accounted for only 6% of a 326,000 person increase.  In other words, 305,000 opted to live in the suburbs and beyond, compared with 21,000 in the central city.  In Christchurch, the CBD accounted for just 1% of population growth and the rest of the inner city 2%.  Wellington, the capital city with a distinctively constrained setting did much better, but a revitalised CBD still accounted for just 10% of population growth. [1]

Population Growth in the Central City: Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, 1996-2010

Source: Statistics New Zealand

And they still favour the outer suburbs

Let’s break this down a little further.  Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Partners (http://www.greaterchristchurch.org.nz/) came up with a plan for consolidating the city.  This includes policies promoting central city living or living around established commercial centres and development contained largely within metropolitan limits.  Well, we can see the warning signs for this sort of thinking from the very small share of recent growth in the inner city.  It seems that the new plan is set to fly in the face of recent experience.   

And if we divide Christchurch's suburbs into three groups (inner, outer, and periphery) we find the decentralising tendency that it is set against is even stronger . [2]

Population Growth in Christchurch Suburbs, 1996-2010

The peripheral suburbs on the city fringes have led growth rates, while the outer suburbs have led absolute growth.  (That’s if we overlook the fact that the small towns in Christchurch’s hinterland left out of this analysis have grown at even faster rates, with the adjoining districts two of the fastest three growth areas in New Zealand).

Does it make sense to stem this pressure?  Not if we want the cities to continue to grow, because the majority of people clearly favour suburban living, and that’s where the greatest capacity for accommodating them lies. 

So while it’s exciting to record rapid growth rates of population gain in our inner cities, policy makers really need to make sure we are doing the right thing by our suburbs. 

Places to live ...
This may mean, for example, ensuring that we don’t sacrifice too many of the green spaces to high density housing: our suburbs also need to breathe.  If we want to lift densities, then terraced units and the occasional low rise apartment may be all we need.  They are probably the most easily achieved forms of intensification in areas where consolidating sites is notoriously difficult and where existing residents will fight to preserve existing character. 

Better still may be judicious development of greenfield sites, where we can boost densities by applying the principles of Smart Growth without destroying what people value about what went before, without overloading existing facilities and infrastructure, creating attractive public and private realms, and potentially enhancing rather than trashing biodiversity, water and air quality.

Places to work ...

We will also need to promote neighbourhood centres to ensure that they can accommodate diverse activities and services, that they are easy to get to and get around, well appointed and vibrant.  They may even become the focus of modest park and ride facilities, the framework around which flexible public transport within and beyond the neighbourhood can best be delivered. 

It may be timely to review what in our planning provisions force people to make regular cross-city journeys to work, and whether this can be changed through more decentralised employment. 

Places to play ...
While local centres are becoming the focus of community and neighbourhood commerce and culture, suburban parks and gardens will also have a role to play.  We need good spaces close to the majority of homes for sport and recreation, and safe local places for families and children to gather.   

We might more actively protect some of the informal spaces in our suburbs, and take a broad view of what constitutes heritage in doing so.  We may have to protect landscapes and structures because they are iconic in local areas, not because we believe they may have national or international significance.  Where they don’t exist, we may even have to create the landmarks, the parks and town belts, and the structures that reinforce local identity and culture.

Strong suburbs for a strong CBD
By allowing more things to happen in the suburbs without overloading them with bland residential development or tracts of mixed use that fall between urban design stools, we have an opportunity to advance the planners’ live-work-play mantra, and to enhance the sustainability of our cities. 

Ultimately, it is the quality of day-to-day life in a city and its capacity to attract and hold skilled and motivated people that will determine its prosperity.  And it is those people and that prosperity that will underwrite the health of the CBD.  Without strong suburbs, we cannot sustain a strong CBD.

---

[1]            For this exercise, the following council areas were counted, Kapiti, Porirua, Upper and Lower Hutt, and Wellington City.

[2]           This classification omits the largely rural Banks Peninsula which is quite separate from the metropolitan area.