You’ve probably noticed that the benches in your downtown area don’t exactly invite you to stretch out and take a nap. If you’ve ever tried, you might have found armrests placed right in the middle, slanted seats, or even metal dividers. You’re not imagining things—these features are often intentionally designed to make sleeping uncomfortable. This practice is known as hostile architecture (or defensive architecture).
The main goal is to deter people, especially those experiencing homelessness, from using public benches as beds. By installing armrests at regular intervals, curving seats, or adding spikes, city planners and property owners hope to keep public spaces “clean” and discourage loitering or overnight stays. While these designs might seem practical for maintaining order, they raise serious ethical questions.
Critics argue that hostile architecture punishes people for being homeless rather than addressing the root causes. It can also make public spaces feel unwelcoming for everyone. After all, a bench that’s uncomfortable for sleeping is often uncomfortable for sitting too. Some cities are now shifting toward more humane approaches, like providing shelter spaces, social services, or designing benches with gentle curves that still allow people to rest without being forced to lie flat.
So yes, there are models designed to be less comfortable for sleeping—and they’re probably in your downtown right now. But the conversation about urban design is evolving. More people are asking: shouldn’t public spaces serve everyone, with dignity?