I design bungalow interiors aimed at what I call a "retirement" market. My typical client is a couple or single person whose children have moved out. They want to downsize but do not have any major mobility issues at present.
Obviously for people with disabilities or who struggle with mobility a wet room is idea with no step to negotiate to access the shower. But many people worry about the drainage, and that wet tiles under-foot might be slippery. But then I know many older people who continue to use a bath.
As the majority of bungalows don't have the space for a wet room and separate bath, a decision has to be made.
Does not having a bath decrease the value? There is something strange still about reading property particulars and reading "shower room" rather than "bath room". Are people thinking forwards to a time when they will need easier access or are they thinking to the present? From viewings that I have hosted, I have often found that buyers who want or need a wet room are willing to accept that they will have to adapt the bathroom at a later date. Other people who maybe don't require the adaptations find them a little intimidating, as if they don't want to think about getting older and less mobile.
The solution I have found so far is to try to squeeze a bath and separate shower into my bungalows. A bath can be 1500mm long rather than the standard 1700mm to save a bit of space, and as I tell my clients, it saves water and heating! An 800X800mm shower is large enough that you don't bang your elbows but slightly larger is always a bonus.
Its amazing how moving the water tanks or boiler into the loft can allow the space for a shower without too much disruption. I find that drawing the whole property in plan can help to show where the space might be found.
I think that if there absolutely wasn't space for both, I would go for a bath with shower over but keep the decor simple so that it feels like it would be easy to convert.
