# Density, longevity *Talk for Victorian Housing Committee of the Chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects, hosted by the Office of the Victorian Government Architect, September 2025.* By [KB](https://paragraph.com/@kirstenbevin) · 2025-09-22 housing, ageing, density, cities, planning, architecture --- The OVGA kindly invited me to participate in a panel, part of the Institute’s _Density Done Well_ program. This program and the language around density (pragmatic, defused, un-weaponised) is embedding in the State Government's approach to achieving ambitious delivery aims of the _Victorian Housing Statement_. But outside of my capacity as a state employee, I wanted to overlay themes from my research. _1_ **To start with:** All forms of density, and especially suburban infill density, have an important role in supporting ageing in place. Denser neighbourhoods can give older people more options to downsize into housing that’s accessible, low maintenance, more affordable to run, close to the services and public amenity that are (should be) enabled by density, and allows them to stay in neighbourhoods they know. **Diversifying Australia’s historically homogenous suburban built form is essential to support ageing in place. This is density at a neighbourhood level rather than just a building level - also impacting the design and delivery of streets and public realm, and of transport and social infrastructure.** Ageing in place is deeply connected to the Institute’s focus on _density done well_. _2_ But there's another thing from my research I wanted to weave in. I completed my PhD with the supervision of Tony Dalton, a long-time housing researcher. Amongst his research, he investigated how homes actually get built, taking seriously the people, firms, institutions, and working practices involved in production. The housing we end up with is shaped by those industry practices. This is the tricky meso-level in between a technology or design solution _(gestures small)_, and the operation of planning / economic levers in response to macro-economics _(gestures wide)_. If you look at Tony’s publications, he has recently applied this focus to understand housing industry response to [Circular Economy strategies](https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/403). When I met him a decade ago he was studying [volume housebuilding](https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/213), and mapping out its construction through a complex network of contractors that are increasingly fragmented, specialised, repetitive, and how that process leads to longer construction timelines, cost associated with such an enormous list of poorly or well coordinated specialisations, and therefore systemic resistance to design or sustainability or technical change. It’s the practice of **_‘Making housing’_**: ways of doing things that grew from unique historical circumstances and were then incrementally rebuilt over and over. It’s an open system, constantly reproduced through these everyday activities, so change can be slow, bumpy and incremental. _3_ My research built on that way of understanding housing, not simply as a rational response to economic and demand drivers, but a historical, geographical, political, human activity. I developed a case study of the retirement housing industry, talking to providers to understand this sub-sector. Made up of small and large companies, for-profit and not-for-profit, from property development, health and charity backgrounds, a mixture of groups, people, actions, relations, beliefs. All involved in making housing. Not only that, but getting involved in the practices of care, in the business of old age. My central finding was that in doing this they were also shaping **what are accepted as the problems and solutions of old age.** They constructed a vivid image of the ideal resident that fit pre-existing assumptions of what a ‘good’ old age is, and what a ‘good’ or normal pathway from independence to care via housing should look like. _4_ My pitch is: just as that housing sector is shaping beliefs about old age, our wider construction and housing industry is always, daily, involved in shaping beliefs about all life stages. Doing density well requires us to confront our biases about taken-for-granted pathways between housing forms through the life stages. The traditional assumed housing pathway from rental to first home to family home to downsized home, does not acknowledge Australian diversity, affordability pressures, imminent workforce upheaval, climate change upheaval, resultant economic and social upheaval, solo and inter generational living, and the specificities and shape of our cities. We need a collective mindset opening about what normal or good housing pathways are across the spectrum of life stage and affordability. We know what good high density dwelling design looks like (gestures small), we know there are significant economic headwinds (gestures wide), what can change is the meso level, where innovation in financial models, tenure arrangements, construction practices can have real impact on the diversity, longevity, affordability and sustainability of housing and its cities. Diversity, openness to tenure models, but no matter the typology **_quality_** in denser neighbourhoods for the long term. --- *Originally published on [KB](https://paragraph.com/@kirstenbevin/density-longevity)*