Jun 2, 2025 | reaction paper, Week 9
Summary
Chris Binnington’s article “Defensive Landscape Architecture in Modern Public Spaces” looks at how certain design choices in public spaces are made to control or limit how people use them. He explains that this topic is important because public spaces should be places where people can express themselves freely and use the city in ways that support community life and economic activity. Binnington gives a short history of public space, starting from Ancient Greece and including recent changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which showed how important and also how restricted public space can become.
He refers to several studies, including one that shows how some patterns in the way public spaces are designed and managed can leave people out, reducing diversity in terms of income, culture, or behavior. The article’s goals are to explain what defensive architecture is, look at how it affects public life, provide examples from Bristol, and suggest better ways to design. Binnington argues for more open, inclusive design that puts people first.
Critical response
I understand and agree with the points made in the article about how defensive architecture can harm public spaces. As the author says, it often pushes certain people out and makes those spaces less open and welcoming. However, I also have personal experience that makes this issue feel more complicated. When I lived in downtown Portland, I once saw someone dying from an overdose on a public bench. It was a really upsetting moment, and it made me feel unsafe in that space.
I don’t think the answer is to erase people who are struggling from public view—local governments should definitely be doing more to help them. But at the same time, just letting people do whatever they want in these spaces can make others avoid them. That’s not fair either. Everyone should feel like they belong and are safe in public spaces. So while I agree with the article’s main points, I also think the issue is more complex and needs a balance between inclusion and safety for all.
13 ways to be offensive
The article “13 Ways to Build a Fence” from House Beautiful presents a variety of creative and stylish fencing ideas for private homes. It explores different materials and designs—from classic white picket fences to modern wood slats and living green walls—offering both aesthetic and functional inspiration. Each fence type is meant to define property lines, add curb appeal, and provide privacy and security for homeowners.
While fences are mainly associated with private property rather than public spaces, one could argue that they still fit within the broader concept of defensive landscape architecture. Like other defensive elements, fences are designed to control access, limit visibility, and define who belongs on one side or the other. Even though they serve to protect privacy, they can also block views, reduce openness, and sometimes contribute to a sense of separation. In this way, fences raise similar questions about balancing protection, aesthetics, and the social effects of dividing space.
Figure 1 13 ways to be defensive “House Beautiful July 1954 p.60” original caption
Gated communities: travel from US to Europe
The article “Gated Communities in Europe: Fashionability or a Social Challenge?” explores the rise of gated communities across Europe and their broader social impacts. It explains how these private developments often lead to the privatization of roads and public spaces, limiting access for the general public and increasing spatial inequality. The article highlights how this trend contrasts with the European tradition of open, mixed-use cities, especially those shaped by welfare state policies. Using examples from countries like France, Britain, and Ireland, the author shows that gated communities can undermine democratic urban values by physically and socially separating residents. The article concludes that while gated communities may appear attractive or fashionable, they pose serious challenges to social cohesion and inclusive urban development.
Figure 2. More options to defense
https://newtrendsetter.com/2025/05/12/automatic-estate-gates-7dbqqwjah9/
Defensive architecture uses design features to control behavior and protect spaces, but it often excludes certain people and limits diversity. Articles on this topic explain how such designs can harm public spaces by making them less open and welcoming. While I understand the need to address issues like safety and misuse, as someone who actively uses public spaces, I believe these areas should be accessible to everyone. At the same time, I want them to feel safe and comfortable for all users. Finding a balance between inclusion and safety is important to create public spaces that truly serve the whole community.
May 29, 2025 | 1970s, reaction paper, Week 9
Summary
This week’s reading, Defensive Landscape Architecture in Modern Public Spaces by Chris Binnington and Alessio Russo, examines how public spaces are increasingly shaped by design strategies that exclude rather than welcome. The authors focus on physical and symbolic design elements such as benches with armrests that prevent lying down, spikes on ledges, and anti-skateboarding devices that are used to discourage certain behaviors or groups. These features are often justified as ways to improve safety or aesthetics but ultimately function to push out unhoused individuals, teenagers, and anyone who does not align with the space’s intended image. The reading argues that such design choices reflect broader patterns of privatization, gentrification, and social control. Through international case studies, the authors call for a shift toward inclusive, community-centered design that emphasizes access, dignity, and belonging for all users.
Application
An example of defensive design can be found in Bryant Park in New York City. Although the park appears open and friendly, its use of moveable furniture, constant surveillance, and enforced rules creates an environment that discourages certain activities. People are allowed to sit, but not lie down. Furniture is cleared at night, and security officers are present to make sure visitors behave a certain way. This design sends a message about who is welcome and for how long. It fits the reading’s argument that space is often controlled not with signs or fences, but with subtle design decisions that limit access without appearing hostile.
In contrast, many modern residential homes offer a more welcoming and flexible model. Living rooms with long, uninterrupted seating, open floor plans, and minimal clutter create spaces where residents and guests can relax or work without feeling observed or pressured. These kinds of interiors are often featured in design books like House Beautiful as bright, peaceful rooms that welcome all kinds of activities and people. The design encourages people to linger and enjoy the space rather than hurry through it. Thoughtful amenities such as cozy nooks, easy access to water, and comfortable seating invite occupants to spend time without needing to follow strict rules or social expectations.
These two examples show that design is never neutral. Every bench, path, and chair sends a message about who belongs. Binnington and Russo help us see how good design is not just about form or style. It is about care, access, and the right to be present.
Fig 1. Monday night movie seating at Bryant Park | copyright 2001, Project for Public Spaces, Inc.
Figure 2. Open living room that encourages seating | House Beautiful February 1970
May 29, 2025 | 1950s, 2010s, Uncategorized, Week 9
01_Summary
This article explored the impact of defensive landscape architecture in public space in terms of historical, social and cultural aspects. Given that the basic function of public space should provide an accessible, safe, and inclusive environment for the public including women, children, elderly and people with disabilities. However, the public space is not really open to all public with the increasing privatization and privileging only the interests of middle- to upper-class consumers rather than marginalized users. From the historical perspective, public spaces have not been fully accessible to all public and involved a certain degree of exclusion manifesting the implied social hierarchies. Such exclusion depleted the true diversity of public space and only welcomed tourists or visitors while further marginalized others. This article examined the idea and application of Defensive landscape architecture, which originated from Oscar Newman’s publication of Defensible Space in 1972. Such design involves how to make use of the elements in environments to enhance the sense of security and thus reduce the chance for crime. This defensive environmental design measures have been evolved in response to advanced technology and social dynamics including the application of closed-circuit television, anti-skateboarding devices, homeless deterrent spikes and so on. The article also mentioned the critique on defensive landscape architecture including but not limited to loss of diversity and vibrancy of the public space, stigmatization as well as introducing false sense of security by minimizing the opportunities for unwanted behaviors and crimes in public spaces.
02_Response
In my opinion, I think the real social problem, for example the issue of homelessness, should be directly addressed with the social and housing policies rather than using defensive landscape architecture to eliminate their existence in the vision of public space. If the city would like to solve the homeless problem, then affordable housing should be greatly developed while the policy of rehabilitation should also be encouraged to assist people in gaining back a normal life with work. However, I partly agree with the intention of defensive environmental design to eliminate the persistent and undesirable behavior to use the public space. Similar to some social norms about how people behave themselves in real life, a bench is designed for the public to be seated to take a rest for a while or an afternoon instead of letting people to sleep for consecutive days and nights. This is one of the example of persistent undesirable behavior because such action excludes other people to use it as common norm allow and depleting the original purpose of the seating. That is why a long-term occupation of a seating is undesirable and thus defensive landscape architecture should work to defense other’s right to use it in a public space.
03_Application
The first image showed a public bench which is made of concrete and composed of a wavy vertical surface and a horizontal surface with egg-crate like undulation. This seating is definitely belong to defensive landscape architecture as the wavy vertical surface is not only to divide the seating area into at least three area for three people to take a seat but also to provide not a really large flat area for people to sleep on. The whole concrete bench at a first glance provides a sense of concrete sculptural form making people to think of it as street art. However, one of the ‘functions’ of the wavy elements is to stop people from sleeping onto the whole bench and thus discouraging homelessness to persistently stay and occupy this seating as bed or refuge area.
Figure 1. physical rejection of the homelessness in public space
https://nonprofitquarterly.org/homelessness-and-the-fierce-hostility-of-the-urban-landscape/
“Homelessness and the Fierce Hostility of the Urban Landscape”
Figure 2
Defensive Landscape Architecture for Dwelling
“House Beautiful 1951, no. 3, p.3”
“A new concept of comfort”
The second image was originally from the magazine ‘The House Beautiful’ showing the primitive form of defensive landscape design, for example, the trees around the house to provide certain protection to the house, while the planting to the south of the house also provide a buffer zone, which is similar to the trough around a typical historical castle. Meanwhile, one of the advantages of the full glazing of the house is to allow residents to look around and see if there are any signs of danger outside the house as well as to stay inside the comfortable and safer area of the house. In other words, defensive landscape architecture is indeed literally a defensive design measures in terms of landscape elements from the historical perspective protecting people from potential threats.
May 29, 2025 | 2000s, Uncategorized, Week 9
Defensive or unpleasant design serves to homogenize public spaces, and leaves vulnerable populations, like the unhoused and disabled, unsupported. Outdoor areas with designed “zones”, encouraging or discouraging certain activities in the space, can either be inclusive or exclusive to varying social groups. In the article by Binnington and Russo, they include the unhoused in a category they call “highly dependent spatial users” and argue that designing with the intention to exclude this group is unsustainable. They also mention skateboarders, another group that defensive design often targets.
They note two varieties of barriers, physical and symbolic. Physical barriers include completely enclosed trash bins, spikes where people might sleep on the ground, or sharp-angled armrests or dividers on benches where a person might lie down or skate. Symbolic barriers include CCTV cameras, and signs prohibiting specific behaviors.
These barriers all serve to limit the activities and therefore the categories of people who might use the space; a middle-class tourist doesn’t necessarily want to lie down in a park, so they feel welcomed, while an unhoused person would avoid those areas. Liberal middle-class patrons may feel unsettled by the presence of spikes, and more comfortable with a less violent-looking barrier, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they want to share the spaces with people who appear to be unhoused, or even skateboarders. (Despite the perception of criminality, in Love Park, Philadelphia, skateboarders created a community and deterred criminal activity.)
I don’t expect to find any examples of defensive architecture in House Beautiful, but I did find a post on Quora from a user named “Luise”, with photos of ancient “pissots” or corner stones, in Venice. They are meant to prevent men from urinating in the corners by splashing the urine back on their legs and feet. The idea of controlling people’s behavior with architecture is not new, by any means.
If someone tried to urinate on one of these “pissots” or corner stones in Venice, they would be splashed with their own urine.
One of my favorite examples of inclusive urban design is Gabriel Park in Portland. Their entire playground was remodeled a few years ago to include wheelchair accessibility, sensory areas, and eco-friendly materials. They also installed a 10,000 skatepark in 2008, which has become an attraction for kids of all ages.
Girl at Skate Park, Gabriel Park in Portland, OR
Inclusive Playground at Gabriel Park, Portland OR
May 29, 2025 | 1990s, reaction paper, Week 9
Summary:
The reading Defensive Landscape Architecture in Modern Public Spaces by Chris Binnington and Alesslo Russo details the reason for defensive architecture and the effect this has on the community using these spaces through research, case studies, and examples, eventually giving an explanation of how this can be fixed. The reading describes the definition of defensive landscape architecture and the groups of people it excludes. (ex. homeless people and skaters).These spaces were meant to help people feel safe and reduce crime, but often just for certain groups of people. Cameras, lighting, and defensive landscape architecture have made these public spaces feel more privatized. Binnington and Russlo provide numerous examples of defensive landscape architecture, including information on the public opinion, which often didn’t align with the designed spaces’ rationale. A fully lit space was one aspect that the public in one example, disagreed with, leading to the implementation of zoned lighting. The conclusion was that these spaces need to be inclusive, accessible, and welcoming spaces that all people can use comfortably.
Connection #1: House Beautiful
This was a section of the magazine attempting to provide ways to elevate your interior spaces. I found this example promoting the use of a custom towel, upholstered onto a stool in a bathroom. This is something that for many would never even be thought of due to the price of the custom towel to the cost of upholstering it. It feels like a luxury to have this in your bathroom. The magazine as a whole seems to be geared towards the higher economic class through the ads, houses, and luxurious materials and rooms. This connects to the reading because this magazine is effectively excluding many people, honing in on a certain class that can afford these materials.
Connection #2: The Park Bench House
The park bench house by Sean Godsell Architects is an example of an inclusive type of bench that promotes sleeping and shelter for the homeless. He argues that shelter for the homeless can and should be incorporated into the infrastructure of cities, including bus stops and park benches. This is just the opposite of defensive and hostile architecture, promoting people to use it for sleeping instead of pushing against sleeping on a bench. This bench is also adjustable so it can be used as a “normal” bench when not being used as a shelter for the homeless or any other member of the public.
Fig. 2 Woman using the Park Bench House, a bench that can turn into a shelter.
https://www.seangodsell.com/park-bench-house
Fig. 1 Custom towel upholstered chair for a bathroom. House Beautiful, 1990, pg. 74-75 Caption: Buy and extra towel when outfitting your bath, have it monogrammed, and use it to upholster the cushion of a bathroom chair.
May 29, 2025 | 1950s, 1960s, 2020s, Week 9
SUM: The article explores the growing use of defensive landscape design like spikes, fences, and other physical barriers in public spaces. While these features are meant to discourage unwanted behavior, they often end up excluding vulnerable groups such as women, children, older adults, and people with disabilities. The authors point out a conflict between the goals of the UN’s 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, which calls for inclusive and accessible public spaces, and the increasing privatization and gentrification that are reducing public access. By reviewing a wide range of literature, the paper outlines the origins and meaning of defensive architecture, examining why it’s used and how it can lead to unwelcoming environments. It also highlights examples from around the world that demonstrate more inclusive and thoughtful urban design. The authors stress the need for a well-rounded approach that not only considers physical design but also includes social values like equity and community inclusion.
CRIT: I appreciate the authors’ argument, but I found the case studies provided as examples of inclusive design even more compelling. While there are numerous examinations of hostile design, there is far less focus on its opposite. The article demonstrates how public spaces can be intentionally shaped to welcome a wide range of users. These projects show how thoughtful, community-focused design can revitalize neglected or contested areas, transforming them into vibrant, shared environments that foster safety, dignity, and social interaction. The authors ultimately advocate for a fundamental shift in urban planning one that prioritizes inclusivity, accessibility, and civic engagement over exclusion and control. This shift calls for a more holistic and empathetic approach to architecture, where the needs and voices of all community members are recognized and valued. Embracing this inclusive perspective not only enhances the overall quality of urban life but also supports broader goals of social equity, justice, and sustainable development. The only point I wish the authors had elaborated on further is how design encodes values and how shifting those values is where inclusive design truly begins.
Example from reading: The article highlights Folkets Park in Copenhagen as a successful example of inclusive design. This park was redesigned through direct community involvement, leading to features such as armless benches and improved lighting that cater to diverse users, including the homeless and elderly. This inclusive approach challenges traditional defensive strategies by prioritizing safety, accessibility, and dignity for all, embodying the article’s call for holistic urban design that balances physical infrastructure with social values.
Current Example – The “Parklet” Movement: A contemporary example that aligns with the article’s call for inclusive urban design is the rise of “parklets”, small, repurposed parking spaces transformed into mini public parks or seating areas. Cities like San Francisco and New York have widely adopted parklets as a way to reclaim public space for pedestrians and diverse users. Unlike defensive architecture, parklets encourage social interaction, accessibility, and community engagement, offering benches, planters, and bike racks designed to be welcoming to all ages and abilities. This practice embodies the article’s recommendation for thoughtful, community-focused design that enhances urban life and inclusion.
Historical Example- Mid-Century Outdoor Furniture in House Beautiful: Looking back, House Beautiful featured designs from the mid-20th century that reflect a different era’s approach to outdoor public and private spaces. For example, the 1950s showcased streamlined, durable outdoor furniture made from metal and wood, designed for suburban patios and gardens. While visually appealing and functional, many of these designs lacked considerations for accessibility or comfort for all users, such as ergonomic support or adaptability for those with disabilities. This reflects an earlier period where aesthetics and material innovation often outweighed social inclusivity, a contrast to today’s more holistic approach discussed in the article.
Figure 1. Example of inclusive urban design at Folkets Park, Copenhagen
Binnington and Russo, 2022
https://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/ri-vista/article/view/11421
Figure 2. Example of inclusive urban design at Folkets Park, Copenhagen
Binnington and Russo, 2022
https://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/ri-vista/article/view/11421
Figure 3. House Beautiful Cover
House Beautiful, 1950
