The implications for hostile architecture are often presented as subtle design solutions that can aide the public from unwanted city disturbances. However, many individuals are beginning to notice these design efforts to become politically driven initiatives for controlling people experiencing homelessness and loiterers.

Elizabeth Kim from the Gothamist shares in her recent article responses from architects and their perspectives on hostile architecture. 

“There are these battles of access that often play out through architecture and urban design,” said Tobias Armborst, a Brooklyn-based architect and urban designer. Armborst co-founded Interboro Partners which focuses on public space design and community engagement. The ethos of the practice highlights design methods that focus on inclusive design and awareness. In 2017 Armborst and his colleagues wrote a book about the topic of hostile architecture called The Arsenal of Exclusion & Inclusion. In regards to hostile architecture Armborst shares with Kim, “they seem neutral at first, but then they become political.”

Kim continues by adding, "hostile design is an age-old concept (just look at the slanted perimeter walls around Central Park), and according to Armborst, it's not restricted to built structures. It can range from an overtly oppressive policy like redlining to one more subtly irritating like the piping of classical music into a public plaza to deter skateboarders."