Before You Downsize, Decide What Problem You Are Solving
At some point, many people look around their house and realize that it was designed for a life they are no longer living.
The bedrooms that once contained children, clothes, school projects and objects nobody was allowed to touch are now occupied by exercise equipment, unopened boxes and furniture retained largely because nobody knows what else to do with it.
The dining room may be used twice a year. The yard still grows at its accustomed rate, apparently unaware that maintaining it has become less entertaining. The house has not changed very much, but the people living in it have.
That is usually when someone begins looking at smaller houses, condominiums, apartments or retirement communities.
It also may be several steps too early.
Before looking for another place to live, it helps to answer a more basic question:
What problem are we trying to solve?
Similar Decisions for Different Reasons
Two groups often find themselves considering the same housing alternatives.
The first consists of recent empty nesters. Their children have left, at least theoretically, and much of the house is no longer being used for its original purpose. They may want less maintenance, greater freedom to travel, a different location or a home that better reflects how they now live.
The second group consists of retirees and older adults. They may also have unused space, but their concerns can be different. Stairs may become less attractive. Yard work and household repairs may require outside help. Medical services, transportation and proximity to shopping become more important. They may also be wondering whether their present home will still work if one partner’s health changes.
Both groups may use the word “downsizing,” but they may not be solving the same problem.
An empty nester may be asking, “Why are we paying for all this unused space?”
A retiree may be asking, “How long can we – or do I – want to continue managing this place?”
Those questions can lead to the same answer, but they do not always.
The Danger of Starting With Properties
Looking at properties is the enjoyable part. Websites provide attractive photographs, polished kitchens, mountain views and swimming pools occupied by people who apparently never have to clean them.
It is easy to begin imagining life in a new place before deciding what that new place must accomplish.
That reverses the decision process.
A beautiful condominium may still have stairs. An appealing apartment may have no covered parking or useful outdoor space. A retirement community may include meals but serve them at times that do not resemble when you eat. A smaller house may reduce the interior space while retaining all the yard work and maintenance responsibilities you were trying to escape.
The problem is not that these are bad properties. They may simply solve someone else’s situation.
Once people become attracted to a particular place, they also become remarkably talented at explaining why the shortcomings do not matter. The balcony is too small, but the view is nice. The second bedroom will not hold the furniture, but perhaps the furniture is overrated. The location is inconvenient, but surely we will stop going to all the places we currently enjoy.
That is why requirements should be established before the sales presentation and preferably before anyone sees the granite countertops.
Begin With What Has Changed
The first step is to identify what triggered the discussion.
Possibilities include:
- Too much unused space
- Increasing maintenance and repair costs
- Yard work that has become burdensome
- A desire to travel without worrying about the house
- Concerns about stairs, falls or physical limitations
- A change in income
- A wish to live closer to family, friends or medical services
- Watching someone else wait too long before making a change
Sometimes the trigger is less practical. The house may hold memories and familiarity but no longer provide the life its occupants want. A couple may simply be ready for something different.
There is also another possibility: only one person believes there is a problem.
One partner may be studying floor plans and calculating costs while the other is wondering why anybody wants to leave a perfectly good house. Until that difference is acknowledged, additional property research may produce more paper without producing a decision.
The first agreement does not have to be “We should move.” It can simply be:
Our circumstances have changed enough that it is reasonable to examine whether this house remains our best choice.
Present Needs and Future Needs Are Not the Same
One of the hardest parts of the decision is separating what matters now from what might matter later.
Present needs might include less maintenance, fewer expenses, better access to activities or a smaller home with no stairs. Future needs might include transportation when driving becomes difficult, space for a caregiver, meal service, emergency assistance or different levels of care for two partners.
Ignoring the future can result in moving twice. Trying to prepare for every imaginable future can produce a decision based entirely on things that may never happen.
The objective is not to select a home for the worst possible version of old age. It is to choose one that works well now without creating obvious problems later.
A two-story townhouse might be attractive and manageable today, but it deserves closer examination if the bedrooms are upstairs and there is no practical way to add an elevator. An apartment may eliminate maintenance but become isolating if every trip requires driving. Independent living may provide meals, activities and transportation but cost far more than remaining at home and purchasing those services separately.
The future should influence the decision without completely controlling it.
Decide What Is Required—and What Is Merely Preferred
Housing decisions become clearer when requirements are divided into three categories.
Nonnegotiable requirements are conditions without which an alternative should be eliminated. These might include no stairs, a minimum number of bedrooms, an affordable monthly cost or reasonable access to medical care.
Strong preferences materially affect quality of life but might be compromised for an otherwise exceptional alternative. A balcony, covered parking, fitness facilities or a particular neighborhood could fall into this group.
Attractive extras are pleasant but should not control the decision. Swimming pools, elaborate clubhouses and demonstration kitchens are valuable only if they will actually be used.
This sounds obvious. It becomes less obvious when standing inside a beautifully staged model apartment while someone explains that the unit available today will probably not remain available through the weekend.
Staying Is Also an Alternative
Downsizing discussions often assume that moving is the objective. It should not be.
Staying in the existing home may remain the best choice, particularly if it is comfortable, affordable and adaptable. Repairs, yard service, housekeeping, safety modifications and transportation can sometimes make remaining at home easier and less expensive than moving.
But staying should be evaluated as seriously as the other alternatives.
A house without a mortgage payment is not necessarily free. Property taxes, insurance, utilities, maintenance, repairs, yard work and the value of the money tied up in the property all count. So do the less measurable costs of managing unexpected problems.
Conversely, moving has costs that comparison worksheets often miss. Preparing and selling a house, disposing of possessions, moving furniture, paying deposits and changing familiar routines require money, time and emotional energy.
The relevant comparison is not “current mortgage versus new rent.” It is the total financial and practical cost of each way of living.
A Decision Is Not the Same as a Move
After examining the alternatives, the correct conclusion may be “not yet.”
That is a legitimate decision if it includes some understanding of what happens next.
A couple might decide to remain in the house for another two or three years, begin reducing possessions, complete several necessary repairs and reconsider the decision annually. They might identify events that would trigger an earlier review: a significant health change, giving up one car, a major household repair or the increasing difficulty of maintaining the property.
That is different from postponing the discussion indefinitely because it is uncomfortable.
A useful decision does not always produce a moving date. Sometimes it produces an action plan for staying, along with a clearer understanding of when staying may no longer be the best answer.
Downsizing Is Not Really About Size
The word “downsizing” makes the decision sound mathematical. Fewer square feet, fewer possessions and perhaps a lower monthly payment.
But the real decision is broader.
How much responsibility do we want? How much flexibility? Which activities and relationships do we want to preserve? What risks are we willing to accept? How much should we spend to make daily life easier? How much preparation for the future is sensible without sacrificing the present?
Only after answering those questions does it make sense to compare houses, condominiums, apartments and retirement communities.
The best alternative may be smaller. It may be larger in some ways and simpler in others. It may even be the house you already occupy.
Before deciding where to move, decide what needs to improve.
Otherwise, you may successfully downsize the house without solving the problem.
