TWO VIEWS OF OFFICE BUILDING SECURITY

Nov 1, 2002 12:00 PM

Chicago real estate executive Paul Beitler contends many of the security measures implemented in high-rise office buildings nationwide in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center are ineffective, costly and onerous. The proliferation of equipment such as metal detectors and turnstiles in building lobbies, Beitler adds, is a knee-jerk reaction that disrupts commerce by restricting the mobility of tenants and visitors.

“None of the security measures that have been introduced on the part of building owners would have prevented Sept. 11,” says the outspoken Beitler, president of the The Beitler Co., whose firm specializes in tenant representation and is the asset manager for more than 1.5 million sq. ft. of downtown Chicago office buildings owned by Credit Suisse First Boston. “You don't see these kinds of security measures at department stores, hotels and convention centers, so why office buildings?”

In most instances, tenants aren't even requesting that additional safety measures such as bag screening be implemented, Beitler says. “Everybody just assumes that because the World Trade Center towers were attacked, all office buildings are now the target of terrorism. We haven't had an office building in this country that's been blown up by somebody walking through the revolving doors with a bomb,” says Beitler.

Beitler claims security costs in some Chicago office buildings have jumped from 30 cents to $3 per sq. ft. over the past year, outraging some tenants.

Verifying that costs have skyrocketed to that extent is a stretch. Stephen Budorick, senior vice president of New York-based Trizec Properties Inc., which manages the 110-story Sears Tower, one of the most high-profile buildings in the country, says that security costs for that particular high-rise range from $1.20 per sq. ft. to $1.30 per sq. ft., up from 75 cents a year ago. The increase to tenants of the Sears Tower will be capped at 5 percent, thanks to economies of scale throughout the Trizec portfolio, which contains 50 million sq. ft. of owned and managed properties nationwide, he says.

“Three dollars per sq. ft. is an enormous amount of money. I can tell you that even post Sept. 11, we don't spend anywhere near that amount on security at Sears Tower. That number is egregious,” adds Budorick, who works in Trizec's Chicago office. A typical 20-story Chicago building might incur costs of 56 cents per sq. ft. for security, up from 49 cents last year, he says.

Curtis Massey, president and CEO of Massey Enterprises, a disaster planning firm in Virginia Beach, Va., points out that about $150 million was invested to upgrade security at the WTC following the bombing in 1993. “Absolutely none of that made a difference on Sept. 11,” he says.

But none of the experts is advocating that security be eliminated. Beitler proposes that more security efforts be aimed at freight elevators, loading docks and parking lots, places vulnerable to placement of explosives. He encourages higher pay, first-aid training and thorough background checks on security personnel as part of the job interviewing process to ensure they're not convicted felons.

Preparing for a terrorist attack is a more realistic approach than attempting to prevent one, Massey believes. He recommends employee training to prepare the staff to interact with the fire department during an emergency.

“To some extent, Mr. Beitler is correct,” concludes Budorick. “The same Pentagon-style security program is not feasible, practical or necessary everywhere that people choose to do business in the U.S. You really have to look at it on a case-by-case basis.”
— Matt Valley

As managing director for the oldest security firm, Pinkerton Consulting & Investigations, I believe the heightened levels of security and procedures now implemented in many high-rise buildings will make them better prepared for the next attack we might face, and we will face another attack.

Paul Beitler is right, I believe, in saying that none of the measures or systems being implemented at multi-tenant buildings will or would have prevented the disaster on the World Trade Center towers. The fact of the matter is, we now know that nothing would stop that type of terrorist activity.

With 20 years experience in physical risk assessments, vulnerability analysis, and loss prevention, I have assisted in a number of high-rise building security assessments since Sept. 11. The security measures taken by public and private organizations since the tragic attacks have been implemented as overall preventative measures. Measures that should have been implemented years ago for the safety of the public and the consumer.

Airport security has increased in an attempt to prevent future scenarios and for the most part, to limit what can be taken on an aircraft and used as a weapon. The utility and chemical industry has implemented additional security procedures to provide better protection and help prevent contamination and loss of power. These industries have taken additional steps to fortify themselves and us from potential criminal activities. In my opinion, they have implemented practices, procedures and systems that were long overdue, most of which can be considered reasonable precautions.

The same is true with the high-rise and multi-tenant industry. Systems and procedures now being implemented by landlords and property management companies are long overdue in providing a safe work environment for corporate America. Although I agree that optical turnstiles in building lobbies would not prevent a suicide bomber from entering the building and causing considerable destruction, and nothing would, building controls of this type do have a significant impact on unauthorized access and limit the damage that can be done to a facility or a core building system.

Systems and procedures implemented throughout the industry have helped to educate property managers and tenants to potential vulnerabilities and to understand how to be more proactive in preventing criminal activity. Although they might not prevent a commercial aircraft from crashing into their building, property managers throughout the country are taking measures to revise air-intake and ventilation systems to help prevent chemical contamination and are preparing with better emergency evacuations.

No one wants it to be their building or office that is affected by terrorist activity. Risk assessments, evacuation procedures and loss prevention plans are security must-dos for many organizations.
— Mark Pickett

Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2008 Penton Media Inc.

This month in Access Control

• Opening Up About Door Closers
• An Enterprise Approach
• The Framework For Open Systems
• On A Higher Plane
• More from April's issue