READING SUMMARY

The article The London Spikes Controversy: Homelessness, Urban Securitisation and the Question of ‘Hostile Architecture’ covers the new planning on urban securitisation by using hostile architecture. It explores the controversy surrounding the anti-homeless spikes in private and luxurious places in London, specifically focusing on the issue of homelessness and urban securitization. It discusses the social implications, ethical concerns, and debates surrounding hostile architecture and its impact on marginalized populations. It talks about the new intentional designing out of certain people from urban and public spaces, the so-called hostile architecture.

Hostile architecture, referred to as defensive architecture, disciplinary or exclusionary design, involves designing public spaces and structures to discourage certain activities or behaviors. The intention behind hostile architecture is to manipulate the environment in ways that deter undesired actions such as loitering, sleeping rough, or skateboarding. With this arose the practices of securing public spaces and private property against threats byu people using the street.

Urban securitisation refers to the implementation of security measures and policies in urban spaces to ensure safety and order. These measures aim to protect public and private property. Urban securitisation often involves the design of public spaces to deter criminal behavior (hostile architecture). Hostile architecture perpetuates the marginalization of homeless people, further exacerbating their already difficult circumstances. 

The spikes in London are a new form of exclusion that is coded norm for the capitalist society. Homelessness suddenly broke the idea of urban landscape so hostile architecture came to play and built a new form of urban securitisation. It is a misunderstanding of homelessness in urban landscapes. Now cities are designed for those who can fit in the norms and adhere to social, cultural and political codes. 

BUILDING INTERPRETATION

The Hult Center for the Performing Arts is located in downtown Eugene, it is located in a very urban and public environment. Some of the design aspects of landscape and interiors can feel somehow uninviting and exclusionary. Even though the landscape can bring many opportunities for the city to create community nooks, it feels very lonely and isolated. There is a lack of design approach, it is empty. Lack of seating options and shading devices prevent people from feeling inspired and spending more time in the area. In regard to homeless people, the space can be intimidating. There are a lot of shallow and long stairs where it could be very uncomfortable to lay over or seat. Because of the lack of shading, the only cover area is in the main stairs that lead to the entry and it feels very private and surveilled. The gable roof that creates those cover areas makes the space feel enclosed and only for certain people. 

When it comes to the inside, hostile architecture can be present too. It is a disciplinary design with a tall ceiling and open spaces. The problem with having tall ceilings and open spaces is that someone can feel very small and lost. When there is no event it is very quiet and it is not so public. In a large open space people expect to have seating available but there are not more than 3 benches in the whole lobby. That indicates that is not a very dwelling space it is more transitionary. The Hult Center is built for people that can fit in the idea of transition and not coexistence.

Lobby. Large open space with no seating options.  Landscape. Narrow and long stairs. No seating options, lack of shading devices.