**9. Conclusions**

In essence, if society is to meet the challenges of housing an ageing population, concerted action needs to be taken that breaks down the silo thinking that currently dogs the planning process, and instead involves all of the stakeholders: local authorities, health trusts, developers, the Government and older people themselves.

Alongside more resources being dedicated to adapt and repair the mainstream housing that many older people currently occupy, the end goal should be a greater choice of more dedicated and/or suitable housing enabling people to age in place – not just in larger developments but in much smaller ones too, that allow more of them to be pepper-potted into our towns, cities and villages and encourage the occupiers to engage with their local communities… a mix of generations living together and supporting each other.

Many older people really do not want to live in what are often labelled as "old people's ghettoes"… not least because most of us have a problem with seeing ourselves as being as old as we actually are! Moreover, the sights and sounds of children playing and the interaction with younger generations is something many of us would miss.

If there is a more holistic approach to add to the mix that would meet the challenges and needs of an ever-ageing society, instead of homogenous developments squeezed into parcels of land aimed at just one part of the market, why not go for a far more mixed approach, and engage with local people to co-design new self-sustaining communities? As I suggested earlier, this overcomes the "either-or" decision we so often see at planning.

These would be integrated and intergenerational developments, with each generation looking out for other, and with the potential for people to transition to larger/smaller/ differently designed houses as their needs changed. It would not cost any more to build, but should cut the cost of care for individuals and the community... and enable people to age in place close to an informal support network.
