Your concern is valid and points to a widespread urban phenomenon. Many cities have indeed implemented designs specifically intended to prevent people from lying down and sleeping on public benches. This practice falls under the term "hostile architecture" or "defensive architecture.
You've likely seen these designs without even realizing it. The classic park bench is being replaced or altered in subtle yet effective ways. Common features include individual armrests placed in the middle of a bench, making it impossible to lie down. Other designs incorporate metal dividers, curved or slanted seats that are uncomfortable for prolonged sitting and unusable for sleeping, or even small, isolated perches instead of long, flat surfaces.
The stated goal from municipalities is often to maintain order, promote "proper" use of public furniture, and discourage loitering. However, critics argue that these designs fundamentally solve a social problem—homelessness—with an architectural "solution." Instead of providing housing or support, they make life even more difficult for the most vulnerable by systematically removing potential places for rest in public spaces.
This creates an ethical dilemma. While cities have a responsibility to keep public spaces accessible and safe for all, hostile architecture raises the question: who are these spaces for? By designing discomfort into our benches, we are effectively designing people experiencing homelessness out of the public view, often without addressing the root causes of the issue. It's a silent, physical manifestation of a complex social failure, turning a basic human need—rest—into a nuisance to be engineered away.