As a student studying at the University of Oregon, my perspective on the homelessness crisis in Eugene is skewed. I am sheltered behind the walls of university life but observe the struggles of the unhoused population every day I venture into the downtown area. As a method for me to recognize these struggles, I have chosen to observe multiple buildings in upscale areas of town; Bao Bao House, a Chinese dumpling restaurant located in the downtown region, bordering the weekly Saturday Market, Farmhouse Union Coffee Roasters, Whole Foods Market, and 5th Street Public Market. I hope that through the analysis of architectural patterns, and nearby structures and venues, I can express the average experience of an unhoused person attempting to survive in Eugene.

The main gathering spaces of the city are buildings. Bao Bao House is a Chinese dumpling restaurant situated on the corner of West and South Park Street, adjacent to the weekly Saturday Market. The restaurant prioritized the elements of modernism, similar to the ideas of Peter Behrens as described by student Allison Hicks. By presenting the approach with large storefront windows, the restaurant places a strong emphasis on the connection between indoors and outdoors. Secondly, this allows the infiltration of natural lighting into the interior space as well as allowing one to observe from the outside. However, this comfort for the average person is not felt the same for a homeless person as they can gaze inside at the treasure of comfort and shelter which sits tantalizingly out of reach. This disconnect reinforces the idea that these areas in the city are not meant to serve the unhoused equally.

Other Exterior view of Bao Bao House showing the large storefront windows and clear boundary of the store.

The other buildings such as Famers Union Coffee Roasters, 5th Street Market, and Whole Foods are hostile in their own right. Student bekahe connects Farmhouse Union to the reading homelessness in the home stating that the open concept floorplan, with large amounts of glass windows, creates an atmosphere of surveillance, but the interior decoration creates a sense of personalization. Additionally, the porch at the entrance is raised off the ground, isolating the café from the remainder of the city. A lot of the hostile design is psychological in this example like the raised porch signifying the café is above the city. These examples can lead to unhoused people feeling as if they are not welcome in the establishment.

Interior View showing the characteristic of the space.

Whole Foods, as addressed by student Rwyman, has elements of hostile architecture around the element of surveillance. The Modern Movement and Surveillance Society reading dictates the essence of modern architecture is based on streamlined function and optimization, leading to the increase in surveillance. Whole Foods functions the same way, as it is a corporate upscale grocery store chain. Much of the interior follows modern principles regarding corporate surveillance principles with minimal privacy. The front of the store features large storefront windows, the majority of the Whole Foods atmosphere feels open and exclusive, and staff and high-tech security systems monitor patrons and visitors to ensure they are not stealing produce or loitering. This environment can be very invasive to a homeless person. Entering a store can feel like a daunting task as they clearly look like they do not belong with the expected crowd. More importantly, resting outside the store is a nearly impossible feat as security will escort them from the property to maintain appearances.  

This view features the interior of Whole Foods with the orthogonal aisle layout and security system.

Lastly, 5th Street Public Market, as addressed by student ssto2, features elements of hostile architecture deliberately targeting homeless individuals. The London Spikes Controversy… Hostile Architecture reading addresses the implementation of evident aspects of the cityscape targeting homeless people such as anti-homeless spikes found on public grounds and features in London as well as hidden elements of hostile architecture including armrests on benches or public “art” under shelter where cover could be taken. 5th Street Public Market is a high-end outdoor shopping space in Eugene’s downtown area. As such, the space is regularly maintained by the staff. The market also features elements of hostile architecture discussed in the reading such as outdoor dining tables and chairs instead of benches. Additionally, security systems are placed along the outdoor spaces constantly monitoring activity. A homeless person is sure to feel unwelcome as they are faced with subtle but uncomfortable furniture indicating that their needs are unvalued as well as imposition on their privacy from the perpetual recordings of the cameras.

This view shows that this area is not well equipped for homeless people. There is barely any outdoor furniture, and this is a high end shopping center with security, ready to remove loiterers.

Going past these building examples, Eugene’s surrounding urban context is filled with examples of hostile architecture targeting homeless peoples’ comfort. Union on Broadway apartments bench is an example of implicit hostile architecture. At first glance, one would not assume that the armrests on the bench were installed for anything sinister. However, the inclusion of armrests disrupts the continuity of the bench, making laying down a difficult task. Student bekahe, says that by incorporating this strategy, the apartment hopes to discourage homeless people from camping out, making their residents feel safer.

The metal handles breaks up the surface, makes it difficult for the unhoused to nest on it. (bekahe image)

Diagram of bench highlighting elements of hostile design. (bekahe image)

Another type of implicit hostile architecture is potted plants and bike racks. Both of these examples serve the same purpose. They are located near the edge of larger sidewalks, and their main purpose is to take up space on the sidewalk preventing the installation of tents and semi-permanent shelters. Student Jesper Braun describes these examples. He says that the city of Eugene deliberately installed these works in the downtown district to incentivize homeless people from camping near businesses. This example is similar to the hostile bench where the end goal is to make the area more approachable to the average person.

Chains and planters blocking off public areas. (Jesper Braun image)

Bike racks blocking the location where homeless tents could be placed. (Jesper Braun image)

Overall, I do not think that the city of Eugene is a good place for the homeless population. Clearly, businesses and the city invest in methods to influence the decision-making of the unhoused. They are clearly presented with a message that they are unwelcome in most spaces through hostile furniture or blatant security systems and employees that aim to make the place appealing to the non-homeless public.

Biliography:

Hostile Architecture at 5th Street Public Market: https://blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/23/hostile-architecture-at-5th-street-public-market/comment-page-1/#comment-116

Under Surveillance: https://blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/03/under-surveillance/comment-page-1/#comment-114