Scrutinizing Architecture that Says ‘Go Away’
City Council member Christopher Marte is sponsoring a bill that, if enacted, would require various municipal agencies to report on “hostile architecture” in New York public spaces. Although there is no universally accepted definition of the term, hostile architecture (sometimes called “defensive design”) is broadly understood to refer to planning urban spaces as a form of social control—usually to prevent crime, protect property, or maintain order. Critics allege that hostile architecture aims to discourage the use of public space by the people most reliant on it, such as the young, the poor, or the homeless.
Mr. Marte’s bill defines it as “architectural design in which a public space is constructed or altered to guide or restrict public behavior, including, but not limited to, attributes designed or intended to prevent persons from sitting or lying on benches, planters, ledges, steps, platforms, fire hydrants or any other furniture, structure or surface at street level.”
The National Coalition for the Homeless calls hostile architecture “an urban-design strategy that utilizes elements of the built environment to intentionally guide or restrict behavior deemed undesirable by urban leaders,” and says that the policy “is rooted in social control and segregation.” The group asserts that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority spent $74 million on slanted benches (to prevent homeless people from lying down) as part of its “Enhanced Solutions Initiative,” when the same amount of money could have paid for more than 1,700 apartments to house homeless people for a full year.
Examples of hostile architecture prevalent in Lower Manhattan include benches that prevent people from reclining, ledges that have been spiked or serrated to prevent anyone from sitting, flood barriers above subway grates with curved surfaces that discourage sitting or lying down, and parks where concrete surfaces have been implanted with metal obstructions to prevent skateboarding or BMX biking.
Mr. Marte’s bill would not compel the City to stop building hostile architecture, but would require the Department of City Planning, Department of Buildings, Department of Parks and Recreation, and Department of Transportation to conduct studies to determine the extent of its use, with a focus on compliance with City regulations about seating in public plazas.
Simon Kostelanetz, a spokesperson for Mr. Marte, said, “hostile architecture affects the quality of life for all, but it especially targets homeless New Yorkers. That is why the Council member introduced legislation this session, so that the City can study hostile architecture and collect valuable data to see if there are better designs for our public infrastructure.”