Walking through any city, you'll notice benches. But have you ever stopped to wonder about the armrests? Are they just for comfort, or is there more to the story? The short answer is no, armrests are not a universal standard feature on all urban benches. Their presence or absence is a deliberate design choice with significant implications.
Traditionally, armrests serve a practical purpose: they provide support for individuals, particularly the elderly or those with mobility issues, making it easier to sit down and stand up. They add a element of comfort for longer sitting periods. However, in modern urban design, the function of armrests has evolved. Increasingly, they are used as a tool for what some call "hostile architecture" or "defensive design."
The now-common bench with multiple, dividing armrests serves a primary function: to prevent people from lying down. By segmenting the seating space, cities and property managers aim to deter homeless individuals from using benches as beds. This design raises complex ethical questions about the use of public space, prioritizing order and deterrence over universal rest and accessibility.
From an accessibility standpoint, armrests at the ends of benches are often considered a standard and beneficial feature, aligning with guidelines for inclusive design. They assist a wider range of users. But the central armrests that create individual "seats" are a matter of social policy, not ergonomic necessity.
So, while you might find comfortable, armrest-equipped benches in a tranquil park, you're more likely to encounter segmented seating at bus stops or in main squares. It's a clear example of how urban furniture is never just furniture; it's a reflection of a community's priorities, challenges, and values. The decision to include armrests is less about a fixed standard and more about the intended use—and users—of the public space.