Cardiff’s newest development is set to revitalise an empty Debenhams, but anonymous letters to the council warn that measures intended to curb crime may push rough sleepers further into hardship.
Cardiff City Council have approved plans for a £17 million public park, part of the ‘City Square Project’. The redevelopment will feature a splash pad, play park, and a raised terrace with space for two restaurants.
However, critics argue that design measures aimed at reducing crime would disproportionately impact rough sleepers seeking shelter.
Ahead of the council meeting at which the plan was approved, two letters were sent to Cardiff Council expressing fears that measures suggested to combat crime would unfairly target rough sleepers seeking shelter.
The measures, which were initially raised by South Wales Police, warned that the public space could encourage anti-social behaviour, drinking, and theft. The police cautioned that without preventative action, the site could become a hotspot for crime.
The anonymous letters opposed implementing “hostile architecture,” urban designs that restrict public behaviour and often disadvantage marginalized groups.
James Petty, a researcher who has studied the impact of urban design on the people inhabiting it, said: “Hostile architecture, also known as ‘defensive’ or ‘disciplinary’ architecture, is a relatively recent term. It loosely describes various structures that are attached to or installed in spaces of public use in order to render them unusable in certain ways or by certain groups. The most common and conspicuous examples are benches and seating that are unusable for any purpose other than sitting. All such measures are aimed at exerting some form of disciplinary control over users of public and urban spaces.”
Jon Sparkes, Chief Executive of Crisis, commented on exclusionary urban design, saying, “The rise of anti-homeless spikes, noise pollution and other hostile measures is a sad indictment of how we treat the most vulnerable people in our society. Rough sleeping is devastating enough without homeless people having to endure such hostility from their surroundings.”
An example in the City Square Project is the incorporation of seating with centrally placed armrests, a feature widely recognized as a deterrent against lying down. The plans also include bright lights to eliminate dark spaces, CCTV monitoring across the site, and security patrols to ‘move on’ rough sleepers.
Proponents claim such measures contribute to order, aesthetics, and safety, yet critics argue they function as exclusionary tools that uphold the same systemic inequalities that drive homelessness.
Jon Sparkes further emphasised the need for a shift in how society addresses homelessness. He said, “We can all be guilty of adopting an out of sight, out of mind attitude when it comes to homelessness. Instead, we need to acknowledge that it is rising and that we need to work together to end it. Councils, developers, businesses and other proponents of hostile architecture need to think again about the obvious harm these insidious measures are causing.
“People who are forced to sleep rough need access to the appropriate help, not to be regarded as a problem to be swept under the carpet. Helping people to stay off the streets and rebuild their lives is about basic social justice – it’s the right thing to do.”
The use of ‘hostile architecture’ to deter rough sleepers is not new to Cardiff. In 2014, Cardiff University installed metal cages over warm air vents outside the Sir Martin Evans building, a move that sparked backlash from students who saw it as an attempt to displace homeless individuals seeking warmth.
While the university justified the measure as a health and safety precaution, critics argued that it exemplified a broader trend of exclusionary urban design. Similar to the concerns surrounding Debenhams redevelopment, such measures highlight the balance between ensuring public safety initiatives and the systemic inequalities that leave many without shelter.
Despite these concerns, the project has garnered significant support from local stakeholders. Helen Morgan, centre director of St David’s shopping centre, emphasized the strong public support for the project. Speaking to the BBC, she said: “Responses to the public consultation launched earlier this year had been overwhelmingly positive, with more than 5,000 community groups and individuals engaging. A new city square will be revolutionary for this part of Cardiff, giving locals and visitors even more reason to spend time at St David’s and in the city centre.”
LDA Design director Robert Aspland praised the project’s ambition. Aspland said, “City Square will be a significant, attractive, family-oriented, and distinctly Cardiff space. It points to a potential way forward for underused retail sites across the UK.”
As Cardiff moves forward with its vision for the site, a central question lingers: is the Debenhams redevelopment a vital regeneration initiative, or does it risk marginalizing Cardiff’s most vulnerable residents?