Addressing concerns about loitering and sleeping on public benches is a complex urban design challenge. Cities and property managers often seek solutions that maintain public access while discouraging prolonged or unintended use. This has led to the development of specific bench designs, often categorized under "hostile architecture" or "defensive design.
The primary goal is to make lying down or sleeping uncomfortable or impossible, without drastically reducing the bench's utility for legitimate short-term sitting. Common design features include:
* Individual Seats with Dividers: Benches are segmented by fixed armrests or partitions, preventing a person from lying flat across the length of the bench.
* Sloped or Curved Surfaces: The seating surface is subtly angled or rounded, making it unstable for extended reclining while still allowing for perched sitting.
* Strategic Armrests: Adding central or multiple armrests breaks up the sleeping surface. Some designs incorporate armrests that are uncomfortably high or shaped.
* Minimalist, Segmented Designs: Instead of a long, flat plank, benches are constructed as a series of individual, small seats with gaps in between.
Proponents argue these designs help ensure benches are available for their intended purpose—brief rest for pedestrians, the elderly, or transit users—and can reduce issues like vandalism or drug use in specific areas. However, this approach is highly controversial. Critics strongly contend that it criminalizes homelessness, treating vulnerable populations as a nuisance to be designed away rather than a social issue to be humanely addressed. They argue it creates exclusionary public spaces that are hostile to everyone, not just those seeking to sleep.
Ultimately, the choice to install such benches involves a significant ethical and social consideration, balancing management of public order with compassion and the fundamental right to use public space. It is a visible manifestation of a deeper societal problem regarding housing and support services.