Just on 48,746 New Zealanders now live in retirement villages, up more than 1000 in the past year.
Last year, 47,200 residents were estimated to live in villages, according to JLL New Zealand's annual retirement villages and aged care report.
The latest in that study said 37,489 units in 425villages were occupied by an estimated 48,736 people, based on an assumption of 1.3 people for every unit.
Some villages have permanently closed in the last year.
Central Christchurch's Bishopspark Retirement Village by Anglican Living was sold to Ryman Healthcare which plans the new Park Terrace village there.
Lower Hutt's Ropata Lodge applied for cancellation of registration, the study said.
People aged 75-plus are the key retirement village target. Last year, 345,960 New Zealanders were in that age group. By 2048, that is forecast to increase by 486,850 to 832,810 people.
The University of Auckland's dementia economic impact report 2020 estimated 69,713 people or 1.4 per cent of the population had dementia, projected to reach 167,483 or 2.7 per cent by 2050.
Demand for dementia care is therefore projected to vastly increase as well. Dementia-care beds are limited: 103 villages or aged care facilities have them.
Ryman, Metlifecare, Summerset Group, Bupa, Oceania Healthcare and Arvida Group are the big six significant owner-operators, with 47 per cent of villages and 63 per cent of units.
Ryman has the largest villages, with an average 191 units/village. Metlifecare has 157 units/village and Summerset 147 units/village.
Arivda's village size grew the most lately, from 92 units/village in 2020 to 111 units/village in 2021, largely as a result of the Arena Living purchase.
Bupa and Oceania have an average of 52 units/ village, reflecting the age of some properties and more emphasis on hospital-level care. But their newer developments are following the trend of providing larger-scale villages.
Construction of The Foundation Parnell has advanced further since December. Photo / Brett Phibbs
Around 72 per cent of the big six operators have hospital-level care in villages. Ryman has the most, at 89 per cent of hospital-level care in villages.
The Bay of Plenty has the highest retirement village population penetration rate at 19 per cent of those 75-plus living in villages. Auckland and Gisborne are next with 17 per cent penetration rate. Nationally, 14 per cent of people aged 75-plus live in villages.
Auckland has the most retirement villages, accounting for 23 per cent of village stock.
By 2033, around 80,642 people are expected to live in villages, the study said.
Operators plan to expand or refurbish 129 existing villages and develop a further 87 new villages. The big six operators plan 11,259 units, of which 46 per cent are in existing villages and the rest will be developed in new villages.
But Covid, rising construction costs and the cooling housing market were cited as potential obstacles to more places being built.
The study raised the spectre of more Māori, Pacifika and Asian people being interested in retirement villages. More diversity in occupier ethnicity could created further need for more units, it said.
Demand might outstrip supply and factors affecting the sector include rising inflation, labour shortages due to border restrictions and problems getting goods for future developments.
"The sector continues to see expansion with several existing villages being extended and refurbished and new villages coming online. The development pipeline identified would suggest that this trend is continuing and the challenge for the sector is to ensure that the units are delivered, in the right locations to meet future residents' demand and needs," the study concluded.
Last June, Retirement Commissioner Jane Wrightson joined Consumer NZ, the Retirement Village Residents Association, the Law Society and many others in calling for a review of the Retirement Villages Act 2003.
The commissioner released a substantial report listing the shortcomings cited among 3254 submissions. The most widely discussed issues, she said, were operators taking too long to resell the property after a death, no shared capital gains and weekly fees continuing after death or hospital admission.
