by tinao | Jun 13, 2023
Interior of T4. The path to use the restroom is by the right of the stairs.
T4 Eugene, a Taiwanese cafe, located a few blocks away from the campus of the University of Oregon. The store has been popular for what they can provide, which is boba. Boba stores like T4 have become popular gathering places for socializing and enjoying the trendy beverage among the younger generation. However, it is essential to critically examine the inclusivity and accessibility of these establishments, particularly in relation to unhoused individuals. Even though T4 is a public space that should be open to all, is often unwelcoming to unhoused people, and the surrounding hostile designs in the urban environment further highlight this exclusionary nature.
Showing the organzied counter and the overall work station.
As a college student who lives around campus, seeing some unpredictable crazy actions, it is understandable why vendors don’t want to be inclusive. Even though the unhoused in Eugene are much nicer than the ones in other cities, people’s impression of them may not be as positive. Many students also studied the T4 indoor and nearby hostile element, around town before the conclusion was reached. Not all the elements were necessary targeting the unhoused, but most of the design did prevent the unhoused from long term access.
Shows T4 is embbed at the corner of Patterson social.
T4 is a Taiwanese version of a cafe that is located at the first floor corner of Patterson Social, an apartment complex. And the special product that this cafe can provide is Bubble tea. It’s been a popular beverage for many. Because it is part of a new apartment complex, its facade is a continuum of the overall building design, an expression of modernity. The store is entirely glazed with glass panels for visual access. Both insider and outsider can ‘watch’ what is going on on the other side. A few students who have studied the place have noticed the feeling of surveillance with the amount of openings (ethacker, Kperrone). Though, The positive side of having many openings can help attract new customers, and for sunlight penetration, which saves electricity for most of the time during summer.
The social space, on the other side of the counter.
As a few student researchers have noticed, T4 itself may be neutral to the unhoused because their design is generally simple and focused on fast and accessible. The layout and color is simple with fewer implications of exclusion. Though, on the previous visit, one researcher has noticed that the placement of the restroom in the store, on the other side of the counter, away from the social space, may imply some ‘customer use only’ limitation. Its placement, and path to access is also under the staff surveillance, which may prevent some unwanted access.
The surrounding urban environment also incorporates hostile designs intended to deter unhoused individuals from public spaces, further exacerbating their exclusion from T4. Anti-homeless architecture, such as uncomfortable benches, metal installations, or other deterrents, sends a clear message that unhoused individuals are not welcome in the vicinity of these establishments.
Shows the uncomfortable texture, and the handle in between to break the length to prevent the unhoused from laying on it. (Caslan: Hostile Architecture, The EMX Dad’s Gate Station)
Excessive bike racks that’s been barely used were the barrier to prevent the unwanted activity that can the perform by the unhoused next to the education building. (Faithw: Hostile Architecture: Bike Rack Placement in the Education Annex Parking Lot)
This feature located outside of Lawrence Hall, mainly used to prevent skater from sliding across the surface. But the little bumps also limit how one can lay across the surface if it was occupied in that way. (wkrois: Hostile Design In Lawrence Hall Commons)
The metal handles breaks up the surface, makes it difficult for the unhoused to nest on it. (bekahe: Hostile Design Furniture Targeting the Unhoused)
Railing added to the concrete block for safety and to prevent the unhoused from lingering by because there is not enough room to provide comfortable seating. (lsmith21: Don’t Choose Here: Hostile Architecture in Eugene)
Using level to form individual seats to prevent one person, most likely the unhoused, from comfortably taking up the while space across. (jzhou9: Hostile designs in campus)
Boba stores, with their emphasis on aesthetics, socializing, and consumer culture, can inadvertently create an unwelcoming environment for unhoused individuals. The presence of hostile designs in the surrounding area reinforce this exclusionary nature. Recognizing and addressing these issues is crucial for promoting inclusivity and fostering a sense of belonging for all members of the community, including unhoused individuals.
Bibliography
Cmoten. “History of Interior Archtiecture.” History of Interior Architecture, 10 May 2023, blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/10/tomorrows-home/.
Ethacker. “History of Interior Archtiecture.” History of Interior Architecture, 9 May 2023, blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/09/the-traces-of-t4/.
Kperrone. “History of Interior Archtiecture.” History of Interior Architecture, 3 May 2023, blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/03/surveillance-expressed-through-the-design-of-t4/.
Sbaker8. “History of Interior Archtiecture.” History of Interior Architecture, 24 May 2023, blogs.uoregon.edu/h3s23/2023/05/24/from-boba-to-spikes-traversing-t4s-london-odyssey-in-the-shadows-of-hostile-architecture/.
Surrounding Research Referenced
Hostile Architecture, The EMX Dad’s Gate Station
Hostile Architecture: Bike Rack Placement in the Education Annex Parking Lot
Hostile Design In Lawrence Hall Commons
Hostile Design Furniture Targeting the Unhoused
Don’t Choose Here: Hostile Architecture in Eugene
Hostile designs in campus
by tinao | May 30, 2023
It doesn’t look uncomfortable in this close up image, but when one comes to close contact with the surface, they can feel the ‘unevenness’
This hostile design is surrounding a tree by the Knight Library. Surfaces like this are usually occupiable if they are flat. They are especially welcoming during summer when branches can provide shade and soft winds can blow by to cool people off. But the angled surface that makes it a triangle makes it hard for people to sit for a long period of time. For unhoused people, the down slope on both sides makes it easy to slide off from the surface. The tip of the slope can also make resters feel poking their spine or any points of contact to the surface.
Highlights the point of obstruction.
44.04381, -123.07835
by tinao | May 30, 2023
A bench with hostile design outside of the Science Library.
This bench is located in the open, outside of Allan Price Library, which is the science library on the University of Oregon campus. Is it a long bench made up of wooden planks and every 2 to 3 feets there is a metal piece about 6 inches long, embedded into the bench. Though, the surface of the metal is offsetted, higher than the wood surfaces. The intention of that is to prevent homeless people from resting on it for long and comfortably. The little metal bumps are far enough for people to sit in between, but close enough to become obstacles for people to lay across on.
Metal bumps limits one’s movement while laying on the bench.
44.0463, -123.07316
by tinao | May 24, 2023
In the article “The London Spikes Controversy: Homelessness, Urban Securitisation and the Question of ‘Hostile Architecture’,” the author, James Petty discussed the issue of hostile architecture. He studied it in the context of homelessness and urban securitization, referencing both sides’ opinions. The article begins with the installation of anti-homeless spikes in public spaces in London and the public’s reaction to the incident, which quickly led to the removal of the spikes. The spikes are metal with flat edges but installed throughout. The hardness of those ‘bumps’ and the amount of them prevents the homeless from resting or sleeping right at the ‘popular chosen spot’. There was a viral discussion about the ethics and effectiveness of the spike installation.
The author examines the broader implications of hostile architecture, which was invented to prevent or restrict certain groups or activities. He believes that hostile architecture is rooted in some of the city planning, prioritizing security and commercial interests over inclusion and accessibility. The article mentioned the use of hostile architecture supports social exclusion, targets homelessness, and reinforces inequality treatment in urban environments.
Through analyzing the London spikes controversy, the author zoomed in on the complex interplay between homelessness, city planning, and social organization. He argues for a revision of urban policies and practices to establish inclusive and supportive environments for all, including the group they tried to exclude as previously discussed.
Building Interpretation:
One of the hostile elements in T4 is the location of their restroom and the sign that says no public restroom. This limits the access to the store restroom to customers and staff only. Besides that, the access to the restroom is to the left of the store which is not the route to the sitting area. In a way, it ‘tries to hide the restroom’ instead of installing them by the social area. It is in the opposite direction of the social space. The other hostile design in there is the chains that were hung between the two railings of the stairs. They indicate limited access. Limited to staff, not even the customers.
The exterior or the surrounding has fewer visible signs of hostile designs. Because T4 is at the corner of the building. The south side of the store is the alley. Cars drive through from time to time. And the storefront, the west side, is the sidewalk, but they don’t have niches or awkward connor for the homeless to stay. Even the greeneries for the sidewalk is fake grass, which is ‘not welcoming’ to dogs. Additionally, the spaces by the sidewalk are for parallel parking, there are cars of customers every hour, and it does not support long-term temporary housing for the homeless.
The pathway to the restroom is opposite of the social area. Additionally, the stairs are blocked to prevent any public or customer to access.
Reference:
Petty, James. 2016. “The London Spikes Controversy: Homelessness, Urban Securitisation and the Question of ‘Hostile Architecture.’ Download The London Spikes Controversy: Homelessness, Urban Securitisation and the Question of ‘Hostile Architecture.’” International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy 5 (March): 67.
by tinao | May 17, 2023
In the article, “If the Chair Fits: Sexism in American Office Furniture Design,” the author, Jennifer Kaufmann-Bufmann-Buhler brought up the problem in office furniture. She found that there are stereotypes in office furniture related to gender and class. While most of the chair references are typical, the so-called ‘average’, male users as their sample for design. Forgetting the needs of female users and ignoring their valuable user experience. Besides the fact that chairs were usually for average male users, within the office space, there are hierarchies for the chairs. One’s position in the office dictates their chair’s quality, and comfortability. Here it shows the role of power. No matter how much time the user may spend with the chair, their social standing in the office assigns how ergonomically engineered their chair could be.
Based on the observation, the author believes that there are biases in the office furniture. Some may notice the difference, but many people accept the fact that it is the establishment of the chairs. In a way, this silence reinforced the situation, accepting the ‘existing social structure’. In the end, the author advocates changing the situation, beginning with being more inclusive in design, such as design by considering female users and putting more attention to office furniture by offering diversity.
Building interpretation:
In this place, Day and night, there are fewer gender, and class divisions in seating. Even the owner who sits at the counter only used a round stool. However, the customers were provided with a few options for sitting, such as the swings with cushions, tall counter chairs for window seating, and normal-height basic cafe chairs. But the placement of the chairs does illustrate the movement of the space. The work counter only has one chair behind the order station, while the rest of the working area is free from obstacles because the spaces are for movements during drink preparation. Each table with its set of chairs shows more group interaction compared to window sitting with tall stools, where the maximum interaction would be the people who sit on the two sides.
Most of the chairs in the place have low awareness of ergonomics because the place is more for temporary stays than permanent workstations for visitors. The options for seating seem more generic than genderized. However, it does have a limitation on human size. If visitors are relatively short or oversized, they might have little to no options but to stand on the size. Though, the options should be able to provide service to a large population.
Reference:
Kaufmann-Buhler, Jennifer. “If the Chair Fits: Sexism in American Office Furniture Design. Download If the Chair Fits: Sexism in American Office Furniture Design.” Journal of Design History, June 14, 2019, 1-17.