Hostile architecture and its impact on homelessness

Spikes on the floor. Bars across benches. Railings. Fences under stairs. Sloped seating. CCTV cameras. All designed to prevent someone from sleeping.

Hostile or anti-homeless architecture is the unwelcoming design of public spaces. It aims to prevent certain actions, like resting or sleeping, and to keep away groups like homeless people.

It pushes people sleeping on the street away from support and makes public spaces less welcoming for everyone.

What is hostile architecture?

Hostile architecture can be subtle and hard to spot. But once you know its purpose and look around, you can see it everywhere in our cities.

These design elements are purpose-built for public spaces. They aim to deter “unwelcome behaviour” from the groups that most use outside spaces. This includes rough sleepers, young people, and those on the margins of society.

Some examples are more obvious than others, but they all have the same purpose:

1. Benches are designed to deter rough sleepers by being curved, sloped, or having armrests.
2. Spikes are the most aggressive form of hostile architecture. They are often seen on underpasses and near private buildings. These are made of concrete or metal and are meant to discourage people experiencing homelessness from sleeping or resting.
3. Pavements are deliberately rocky or uneven to stop people from sitting or loitering.
4. Street dividers and decorations, like plants and boulders, serve a purpose. They may not be there to add greenery. Instead, they fill space and deter loitering in the street or doorways.
5. CCTV, fences, anti-climb paint, and other measures deter access to areas where rough sleepers rest.

Why does hostile architecture exist?

Hostile architecture traces its origins to 19th-century European cities and countries with urine deflectors. But its development properly started in the United States to segregate black and white people. Architects like Robert Moses push the development of racist, hostile architecture. One of the earliest examples is a bridge Moses designed to prevent African Americans from accessing the beach. Many black people were poorer and used public transport, like buses. He designed a stretch of Long Island Southern State Parkway with low stone bridges that were too low for buses to pass under. Consequently, many black people couldn’t access the beach. Another well-known example of hostile architecture used to segregate black and white people is the Detroit Eight Mile Wall, a 6-foot wall built in 1941 to separate black and white neighbourhoods.

In the 1980s, hostile architecture gained wider acceptance and pushed rough sleepers out of parts of cities. There were fears that visible homelessness would discourage visitors and investors. Governments and councils continue to justify building hostile architecture by claiming it helps reduce crime and makes public spaces safer by deterring street drinking and begging.

Hostile architecture often exists alongside laws that criminalise rough sleepers, like the Vagrancy Act. Many towns and cities have also ‘moved along’ rough sleepers instead of helping them. For example, the French Government removed thousands of homeless people from Paris before the Olympics. Some people were sent almost 400 miles away, far from services and the areas they knew.

Empathy over exclusion

Rough sleeping is dangerous and isolating, especially at night. Imagine spending every second in fear of being robbed, spat on, or beaten up. These are the real experiences of our clients. It makes it impossible for people on the street to get any shut-eye. Hostile architecture worsens this grim situation, making it even harder to find shelter and denying people the need for sleep.

Hostile architecture treats people on the street like pests, not human beings. It fails to address the root causes of homelessness. Instead, it pushes people away from city centres and support services, often making their situations even worse.

Spaces should work for everyone, not just a few. They should unite people, not ostracise some. And should prioritise empathy and compassion over exclusion and hostility. It is time to rethink our approach to urban design so we empower and uplift communities, not bring them down.

What should our Government do?

The new Labour Government must prioritise ending rough sleeping. But this will take time. The Government and councils can take more immediate steps to combat hostile architecture.

We must implement concrete policies. These include design guidelines, accessibility rules, community involvement, incentives for inclusive design, and laws against hostile architecture.

Be aware of hostile architecture and speak out against it

Homelessness hurts us all. Our shared responsibility is to help people experiencing it and to end it. So, what can you do?

• Be aware of hostile architecture. Speak out against it on social media (@hostiledesign) or community forums. We want our public spaces to be inclusive and inviting for all.
• Look out for hostile architecture and call out those who installed it.
• Pressure councils and city planners to remove hostile architecture that divides people and ask them to focus on creating public spaces that unite us.

All people deserve to be treated with dignity. We need to focus on the underlying causes of homelessness and make the changes needed to end it, not sweep it under the rug.

Our society is stronger when everyone has a place within it. Together, we can end homelessness.