Image of a hostile architecture (chair) near Times Square taken by Steven
Hostile architecture manifests pervasively throughout New York City, often escaping the notice of its residents and visitors alike. This form of design is epitomized by features such as metal spikes on window ledges, barred street corners, and benches with strategically placed armrests or gaps. These elements are deliberately engineered to deter homeless individuals from loitering, sleeping, or even resting in public outdoor spaces.
The subtlety of exclusionary architecture is such that it appear discreetly hides itself as a modern urban design. For instance, a bike rack or a barred corner might appear innocuous but serves a purpose beyond its utility. Similarly, planters positioned along sidewalks may be perceived as mere enhancements to the urban landscape, yet they are intended to prevent the formation of encampments. Other elements like boulders and curved benches, often mistaken for aesthetic choices, are actually designed to prevent the homeless from finding rest on the sidewalks and park benches. Even grates are sometimes fenced to keep homeless individuals from gathering warmth, highlighting a widespread design strategy that prioritizes exclusion.
This type of hostile design is not unique to New York but is a common feature in major cities worldwide, from Melbourne to London. New York City, notable for having the highest homeless population in the U.S., implements these architectural strategies under the guise of maintaining cleanliness and safety. However, these measures are fundamentally flawed and only exacerbate the marginalization of vulnerable populations. Not only do they make the unhoused feel unwelcome, but they also render public spaces less accessible and hospitable to all, including the disabled and elderly who might need to sit while waiting at places like the Moynihan Train Hall.
Jacquelyn Simone, the policy director of the Coalition for the Homeless, criticizes the underlying assumption of hostile architecture, which is that homeless people should not be present in certain areas, rather than addressing the broader issue of homelessness itself.
Recent statistics paint a grim picture of homelessness in New York City, with rates surpassing those seen during the Great Depression. As of September 2024, nightly shelter counts exceeded 131,000, and total homelessness impacted over 350,000 individuals, including those temporarily housed with others. A significant portion of those affected are families, with children making up over 45,000 of the sheltered population.
The root cause of this crisis is a severe and worsening shortage of affordable housing. Between 1996 and 2017, New York City lost over 1.1 million affordable housing units, with the vacancy rate for such housing now below 1%. This lack of affordable options leads to overcrowded and ineffective shelters that often fail to meet the needs of their residents, particularly those with mental illnesses or disabilities who require special accommodations. The inadequacies of the shelter system, compounded by strict rules and often unsanitary conditions, make street living appear as a comparatively viable option for many.
As temperatures drop with the onset of winter, the challenges for those living on the streets intensify. Subway stations, one of the few refuges offering warmth, are frequented by approximately 50,000 New Yorkers nightly. Yet, rather than addressing the needs of these individuals, recent policies by city officials, including Mayor Eric Adams and Governor Kathy Hochul, have focused merely on removing the homeless from public sight through police enforcement, thereby exacerbating the risks and instability faced by this population.
Ultimately, the approach to homelessness should shift from one that sees it as an aesthetic inconvenience to recognizing it as a profound societal issue. The city’s planning efforts should aim to foster inclusivity and community, rather than exclusion and stigma. True measures to combat homelessness should focus on providing comprehensive long-term care, including mental health services, addiction treatment, and job training, alongside a significant increase in affordable housing options, rather than relying on architectural deterrents like spikes and slants.
I’m not that much of a internet reader to be honest but your blogs really nice, keep it up! I’ll go ahead and bookmark your website to come back in the future. Many thanks
Thank you!
Why are we bullying homeless people? Don’t they already suffer enough especially consider that they literally don’t have a home to live in.
For real. If you don’t have anything good or nice to say, then just don’t say it. The worst you can do is treat them badly
Keep in mind that we’re going out of our way and spending money to create these architecture.
I did not know other cities are also doing the same thing. That’s wild, unacceptable, and cruel
Yeah we should stop this practice. They already suffer enough
It’s disgusting how cities would rather spend money making sure homeless people can’t sit somewhere instead of actually helping them find a home.
I’ve been to London and Australia and they’re doing the same thing with anti-homeless spikes
The point about elderly really hits home because I have a 78 year old grandpa and oftentimes we would go out to stores to eat and when we want to sit somewhere, we can’t because there’s spike on the platforms
it makes public space worse for everyone very sad
I can relate to this too because I’m disabled so seeing how these are intentional makes it difficult for me to use them to move around
Why doesn’t the city just address the homeless problem directly? Spend the money to solve the root of the problem and not the symptoms
They’re not even treating the “symptoms” properly. This is just cruel
Surpassing the Great Depression is absurd. That was all over the textbooks so will the homeless problem in NYC also be in the textbooks?
Keep in mind that private residential property owners can be sued for even a slip and fall on their own property in the US but the government can add spikes to curbs and you cannot sue them.
How much money is wasted on hostile architecture when it could be used to build affordable housing?
Exactly. It’s like they’d rather spend money making the city look “clean” than actually solving the crisis
The perfect definition of “ignoring a problem believing it will disappear”
except it won’t and this is not a long term or ethnical solution
I walk past these benches every day and never thought twice about them. Now I can’t unsee how hostile they really are.
That’s the point. They design these things to look normal so people don’t question them. Meanwhile, they make life even harder for the people who already have nowhere to go.
Genuine question Why don’t they just go to a shelter?
shelters are overcrowded, unsafe, and full of strict rules that make them unlivable for a lot of people. There are many stories where stuff get stolen
Ohh that’s sad. We should invest in those more then
Shelters aren’t a good solution long term. We need permanent housing and to solve why this homeless crisis is a thing
Agree. Instead of all this hostile design nonsense, imagine if we just invested in mental health care, addiction services, and housing programs.
The stat about 350,000 homeless New Yorkers. There’s not enough shelters
Some people act like homelessness is when you fail in life. It’s not. Anyone can become homeless if something bad happens. No one should be treated this way
The irony is that the same people who complain about seeing homeless people sleeping on the street also support policies that make it impossible for them to rest anywhere else. Where do you expect them to go??
they don’t want them to go anywhere, just out of sight
frustrating thing to read we are all human