Hostile architecture is a term so new that many have yet to come across the phrase. It’s an issue garnering national attention and slowly making its way to Vancouver.
Hostile architecture is intentional design to discourage or prevent homeless people from occupying a space. Perhaps the most common example is arm rests in the center of public benches to prevent someone from lying down. More controversial examples include spikes in doorways and storefronts. Most of Vancouver’s benches feature a form of hostile architecture and have done so long before the phrase was coined.
“I think it’s just one of our standards now,” said Chad Eiken, Vancouver’s Community and Economic Development director.
Other than the bench design, though, Vancouver has no formal policy in place. But there is at least one new example the city is considering.
As part of a renovation effort, the city has proposed a new entryway at Sixth and C streets. That entryway will likely feature a curved rock wall. Behind that rock wall would be uneven rocks to make it uncomfortable for anyone to camp or sleep.
“We wanted to make sure whatever improvements are made didn’t invite pedestrians to come and hang out there,” Eiken said during a presentation on the proposal.
He considers the city’s implementation of hostile architecture relatively minimal.
“It’s not like we’re putting angular rock in all of our planter areas to push (people experiencing homelessness) a mile outside of the city,” Eiken said. “There’s no wholesale effort to move them from an area.”
Homeless service providers agree Vancouver hasn’t yet instituted a focus on intentionally pushing campers out of an area. But if the notion becomes a trend, it could further harm the homeless population.
“I think sometimes we discount the mental aspect of it,” said Andy Silver, executive director of Council for the Homeless. “One of the worst parts about experiencing homelessness is this feeling of other and being different and disconnected from society and left behind. When the community does things like puts bars so people can’t lie down on benches, and hostile architecture just reinforces that they’re not part of the community, they’re not wanted here. We want them to go somewhere else even though we can’t articulate where that somewhere else is.”
The underpass near the waterfront has become a focus. Eiken said it’s possible the city will install some form of hostile architecture to prevent people from sleeping or camping on the sidewalks.
“They tend to spill out onto the sidewalks,” he said. “It makes it uncomfortable for people to walk onto that space. If there’s a way to discourage camping there altogether through design, I think that’s probably one area we’d be looking at.”
Diane McWithey, executive director of Share Vancouver, said she understands the issue. They have a similar problem at Share with campers making it difficult for employees to do their jobs by camping in front of the building.
“What (the city) should be doing is finding a solution for the people who are on the street,” McWithey said. “We need more beds and housing and people not to be making it impossible for people to be in the few places available.”
Silver said the specific issue near the waterfront has only become worse as development ramps up.
“That used to be an area where people slept and nobody cared that much about it because nothing was happening there,” he said.
What the city should do instead of install a new design feature, Silver said, is focus on enforcement.
“For whatever reason there is uneven enforcement going on depending on where you are in the city,” he said.
Campers aren’t allowed on sidewalks during the day. Camping on public property is only legal between 9:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Enforcement of that rule could eliminate the problem.
“It seems like it would get to absurdity really quickly,” Silver said of hostile architecture. Bumps in the sidewalk, for example, are intended to make sleeping uncomfortable. But campers could just place a mat over the bumps and stay in place.
McWithey said she’s disappointed the city is considering any form of hostile architecture.
“It’s too bad because I’d like to think we live in a community that’s caring, compassionate and welcoming,” she said. “That’s what we should be concentrating on.”
Silver added that there’s still the community misperception that homeless people have chosen to do so or moved to Vancouver from Portland. Most are members of the community and will not leave the area they’re connected to no matter how many areas are designed to keep people away, he said.
“To me, so much of this comes down to an understanding, or lack of understanding of why people are homeless,” Silver added. “For us, we look at data, we take an evidence-based approach to this and it’s clear that there are people who are from our community who are losing housing and need help. When you have that perspective, the solutions look a lot different.”
