Surveys conducted among people aged 60 to 98 in five large housing estates built in the 1960s in Toulouse and Brussels highlighted a series of spatial, social, emotional and symbolic supports used by the people interviewed. Thus, awareness of a village identity, the possibility of getting involved in the community and taking ownership of one's home, the presence of facilities and services, the proximity of shops and transport, the feeling of an extended home thanks to intermediate spaces, contribute to supporting autonomy and contribute to a dual attachment, symbolic and physical, of residents to their habitat. Often built on the outskirts of cities, these large housing estates are now being caught up in the urbanisation and densification of urban centres. They are therefore relatively well connected to the public transport network. Designed as autonomous units, they have a series of premises and collective equipment, both inside and outside (commercial and/or association premises, halls, landings, collective drying rooms, park, etc.) which only need to be adapted and reinvested.
Figure 3: The park as an extension of home
The example of the large housing estate shows us that a form of housing, a priori hostile, or not dedicated to ageing in its design, can, under certain conditions, be inclusive for the elderly. This highlights the challenge of taking care of existing supports and habitats, or even strengthening them. However, to date, we south korea phone number list can only note the low consideration of ageing by managers and governance bodies of co-ownerships. This is particularly hampered by the lack of recognition of an architecture often depreciated by the condominium trustees, the few social landlords who still own housing, and the complexity of governance imposing, for example, the quorum rule in the event of a vote on work. This particular context of co-ownership also tends to make the elderly invisible, as they are not all present at general meetings or involved in the union councils. In the case of social housing, the difficulties inherent in the tensions generated by the under- and over-occupation of certain housing units, the costs of adaptation, but also the cumbersome nature of the systems for identifying needs and making housing units already adapted visible, tend to steer landlords towards an offer of new, rather dedicated housing units [7] . However, these new forms necessarily involve people moving from their homes, or even their neighbourhoods. Why not renovate housing units that already benefit from numerous services, community facilities, proximity to urban amenities and the attachment of their residents? How can the high costs associated with adapting existing housing be reduced?