by danbiek | Jun 16, 2023
Eugene Oregon holds one of the largest homeless populations within all the cities across the state of Oregon. Throughout Eugene, some designs welcome the homeless, however, some spaces actively designs ‘out’ the unhoused as well. Whether the barriers are built intentionally or not, it holds an impact on the homeless population, as one can see by observing the environment around Tailored Coffee Roasters.
Tailored Coffee Roasters is a coffee shop that is located on 13th Avenue by the campus of the University of Oregon. Many students go to this location to finish their school work in a cafe environment. According to the blog post Tailored Coffee Roaster’s Connection to Modernity and Comfort written by ‘kperrone’, the cafe has a welcoming and warm atmosphere with the help of its open and transparent design. The space was not created with the intention of being exclusive. However, intentionally or not, the space has multiple barriers to those who are not consumers. It is worth noting that many of the blog posts describing Tailored are designing the environment from the inside, but to truly determine whether a space is open to the unhoused, one would need to make observations from the other side. One element noticed was their windows, ironically, as many noted them to be a reason for their welcoming atmosphere. On the inside, one can look out and monitor everything happening around them, however, the glazing located around the majority of the customer’s seating area is tinted. This was probably implemented to create a private space, but this is a built barrier to those on the outside. More implicit hostile design can also be found around the entrance, as the planted bushes around the entrance create a natural barricade and act as a filler for the open space. Those who are not picking apart the logistics of the design may not think twice about the plants, as it integrates nature and the cafe decorated with house plants. Yet, from the perspective of the unhoused looking for places to rest, the building does the most it can to block those who are not visiting the shop. As ‘ayakov’ and ‘kperrone’ have mentioned in their posts, the outside area is only inviting to the following customers.
The Perspective of the Interior of Tailored Coffee Roasters.
Exterior Facade
Large glass facade of Tailored.
Plants surround the entrance of Tailored.
Although Tailored Coffee Roaster is not actively trying to deter its use by the unhoused, unfortunately, it can not be said the same for the surrounding campus area of the University of Oregon. This can be seen in the seats of multiple bus stations and the design choices used by many locations. One example of this is the benches located at the EMX Dad’s Gate Station. It can be said that the seat designs are directly tailored to inhibit the use of other activities that are not sitting, as there are a lot of homeless people that use the bus services. Their methods are to design the seats with separated, waved, and rounded bars that make it uncomfortable for those to stay around for long periods of time. There are also dividing armrests found at the center so those who wanted to use the benches as resting areas are unable to lay down on them. This method is common, as you can see the strategy repeats itself around other bus stations as well by the Lillis Business Complex. This one is a long bench that is divided up into three seats with armrest rails. Another example of hostile design can be found near 13th Avenue, the US Bank, which designs out those who are not wanted, including the homeless population. With its use of a bordering retaining wall outside the bank, it makes it so that there are no loiterers around. The metal railing around the wall makes it clear that they want unsolicited people in the area, ultimately affecting the unhoused population.
One can see that designs all over the Eugene area affect the homeless, whether it was intentional throughout or not. With Tailored Coffee Roasters near campus, the designs just so happened to affect the unhoused from the result of designing for privacy. Yet, it can be seen that the other designs around the area are much more directed toward weeding out a specific user group.
This image shows the surrounding context of the hostile architecture bench.
Close-up of the Benches of the EMX Station.
This image shows the plan view of the bench and how the armrest is located in the middle on the right of the bench. There is no way around the armrest for a sleeping person.
This image shows the section view of the bench clearly indicating the armrest that divides the space.
Benches with dividers to prevent sleeping.
Hostile bench at Lane Transit District
Bus Benches Near Lillis Business Complex Detail.
Railings blocking sitting on a wall in front of U.S. Bank Branch.
Diagram of the Hostile design around US Bank.
Bibliography:
Perrone, K. (2023, May 9). Tailored Coffee Roaster’s connection to Modernity and Comfort. Retrieved from https://blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/09/tailored-coffee-roasters-connection-to-modernity-and-comfort/
Yakov, A. (2023, April 18). Individuality Among The Public Sphere – Tailored Coffee Roasters. Retrieved from https://blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/04/18/individuality-among-the-public-sphere-tailored-coffee-roasters/
Krois, W. (2023, May 10). Humans and their Constant Desire for Personalization. Retrieved from https://blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/10/humans-and-their-constant-desire-for-personalization/
Aslan, C. (2023, May 30). Hostile Architecture, The EMX Dad’s Gate Station. Retrieved from https://blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/30/hostile-architecture-the-emx-dads-gate-station-and-concrete-benches-outside-the-emu/
Baker, S. (2023, May 31). Hostile Design at the University of Oregon: Examining Lillis Business Complex. Retrieved from https://blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/31/hostile-design-at-the-university-of-oregon-examining-lillis-business-complex/
Smith, L. (2023, May 30). Don’t Choose Here: Hostile Architecture in Eugene. Retrieved from https://blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/30/dont-choose-here-hostile-architecture-in-eugene/
by danbiek | May 30, 2023
by danbiek | May 30, 2023
Site One: 5th Street
The first instance of the hostile design was discovered near Fifth Street Market by Sushi Station. I noticed an overhang above the neighboring restaurant’s window intentionally lined with a collection of potted plants. This deliberate choice seems to be aimed at preventing individuals, particularly the homeless seeking shelter, from utilizing the covered area, especially during the rainy season. By using this method, the store effectively excludes a specific user group while maintaining subtlety. Someone who is not actively thinking about the design choice would not think anything of these plants. Additionally, the plants act as aesthetic decor and serve the purpose of blocking the view into the interior, acting as natural blinds so those from the outside cannot watch those who are inside.
Image of the Window Besides Sushi Station.
Illustrated Diagram of Street View.
by danbiek | May 25, 2023
Building Summary:
In the article ‘The London Spikes Controversy: Homelessness, Urban Securitisation and the Question of ‘Hostile Architecture’, Jame Petty writes on how the controversy of June 2014 sparked a major debate about hostile design. In South London, spikes were implemented outside an apartment to deter the homeless to sleep outside the building, and this left people divided.
There had been a rise in intentionally “designing out” targeted identities and certain unwanted behaviors. It is noted by Petty that ‘hostile architecture’ is a more recent term, and other terms include defensive or disciplinary architecture. Those words, however, lean more towards the designer’s justifications for the strategic barriers. One example of hostile design is benches that one is able to only sit on. They are designed to be unusable other than to sit on and discourage skateboards to use structure to do tricks on. There are other ways people are able to apply methods of social control, such as having ultraviolet lights to put off drug use in bathrooms, as well as having no shortage of CCTV cameras, as mentioned in the article.
When talking about hostile architecture, the homeless population is central to the discussion, as they are “unjustly targeted”, according to Petty. While the homeless are not always caused by hostile design, it cannot be ignored that the methods are impacting their quality of life as they can not comfortably sleep where they would like to. With urban planning, it is many times a goal for the city to look as ‘presentable’ as possible in terms of urban aesthetics and to hide its “distasteful” (visible) attributes.
Building Interpretation:
Whole Foods Market as a whole is pretty exclusionary to begin with, as their target consumers are the upper middle class, by having an image of healthy and organic products. Even the classical music as their white noise hints at who they welcome into their store. With their highly marked prices, it is clear that Whole Foods isn’t affordable to the “majority’ demographic. In terms of spatial planning and design of their store physically, the market can be considered private and segregated. The building is located assisted from major complexes and roads, so those who are not explicitly going to Whole Foods do not end up wandering into the area. On top of this, the sidewalks around the store are as minimal and narrow as possible, and this leads directly to the parking lot, so potential loiterers, including those struggling with homelessness, will not idle around the area. Whole Foods maintains a visible aesthetic that allows them to almost cherry-pick who is welcome. As mentioned in this week’s reading, there are ways that people are able to solicit social control, and we see one of these systems in action at the grocery store with plenty of security cameras around the space.
Exterior Façade of Whole Foods.
by danbiek | May 17, 2023
Reading Summary:
The reading “If the Chair Fits: Sexism in American Office Furniture Design” by Jennifer Kaufmann-Buhler examines how office furniture, particularly chairs, serves as a visual representation of hierarchical and gendered differences in the workplace. Kaufmann-Buhler explores how chairs in office plans, such as those found in Roche’s Ford Foundation headquarters, signify human roles through various chair typologies, including lounging, executive, and secretarial furniture.
Kaufmann-Buhler argues that office furniture, rather than being merely symbols of hierarchy and status, reflects underlying standards and norms that have shaped gendered bodies and labor within the office environment. By studying the dimensions of chairs and desks from manufacturers like Knoll, Herman Miller, and Steelcase, the author identifies common patterns and typologies. These designs perpetuated gendered hierarchies and assumptions prevalent during the period studied.
Despite the contemporary shift towards mid-range and ergonomic chairs, gendered assumptions persist. There is a consistent pattern of exaggerated chair forms catering to assumed gender roles. Larger executive chairs with wide and square seats often imply they are intended for male bodies, while smaller secretarial chairs suggest a petite female user. Kaufmann-Buhler notes that many mid-century chairs were designed to showcase women to the “male gaze,” effectively objectifying them.
The author emphasizes the significance of addressing this issue, as chairs embody physical representations of human bodies, including arms, legs, and backs, directly mirroring the user’s body. Moreover, furniture design inadvertently reinforces gendered expectations and perpetuates discrimination and oppression associated with social class, gender, and ability.
Building Interpretation:
I agree with Kaufmann-Buhler’s argument that furniture design reflects and perpetuates discrimination and oppression related to social class, gender, and ability. This theme is evident throughout the University of Oregon campus, and I would like to focus on the Knight Library as an example. While the library’s environment may not exemplify the extreme points discussed in Kaufmann-Buhler’s writing, some underlying principles can be observed.
Upon entering the library, one encounters low-height computer desks equipped with various office task chairs at the front desk. Among them, there is a cushioned swivel chair designed for prolonged use, suggesting an intention to provide comfort. However, there is also a plastic high-top chair that embodies Kaufmann-Buhler’s notion of seats meant to be sat on rather than sat in. This chair appears intentionally uncomfortable, possibly designed to discourage extended use and keep the individuals at the service desk on their feet when assisting others.
This focus on uncomfortable furniture extends beyond the Knight Library and can be seen throughout the campus, particularly in public spaces that seem to target the homeless population. In these areas, the furniture ranges from simply uncomfortable to outright hostile, depending on the level of publicity. This deliberate design choice contributes to an unwelcoming atmosphere that specifically affects marginalized groups.
Front Desk of the Knight Library
