One Boston Place, guarded by BV Security, is considered one of the city’s safest and most well-protected structures.
In the wake of 9/11, security is being physically built into building security, but some claim that attention to security is not building sufficiently among property owners, managers and tenants.
“Americans have short memories,” said Stephen Aborn of Vance International, a global, full-service security firm whose Braintree office protects several prominent commercial, medical and public buildings throughout Greater Boston. According to Aborn and other security experts, while the September 2001 terrorist attacks advanced the cause of security by light years, with pre-9/11 attitudes inextricably altered, the lack of a major incident on American soil has lessened the level of vigilance practiced in the immediate aftermath.
BV Security Managing Director John J. Enright cited the passage of time, tight operating budgets and low probability assessments for increasingly relaxed policies among many. Dozens of Boston office buildings that were in a lock-down mode immediately after the 2001 incidents now allow easy passage, he noted, and observers concur that some landlords have acquiesced to accommodate tenant convenience.
“Even if we could afford (total access control), I’m not sure the average tenant or the average citizen will put up with it,” said Arthur Bourque, founder of Wilmington-based Surveillance Specialties, which installs electronic access systems and other security equipment in commercial buildings throughout New England. Bourque’s firm emerged from a tiny home-based operation prior to 9/11 to one that now services major companies and assets throughout the region, none of which he would identify publicly, a policy followed by Vance and BV Security as well.
The only client Enright would unveil is One Boston Place, a 41-story office tower in the Hub’s Financial District for which BV Security physically guards on behalf of the ownership, TIAA-CREF and property manager, CBRE/New England. Considered among the city’s most secure structures, One Boston Place benefits from a commitment to that cause by TIAA-CREF and CBRE, said Enright. “That’s really critical,” he said. “If you can put together a strong partnership between security and the management of the building, you can really raise the level of protection greatly and (ensure) if someone is looking for a target in your area, they are going to look elsewhere.”
In opining that building security could be enhanced in many instances, Bourque and others stressed that property owners are typically mindful of the issue and are taking steps to improve the situation when possible. Surveillance Specialties is constantly receiving orders to install state-of-the-art cameras and other access technology both to existing buildings and for new properties being developed. The company has invested in computers and other equipment to assist architects and developers in designing new facilities with an eye towards security, said Bourque, while Vance principal Robert Long said his firm is also being called in to consult on layout and other aspects of new construction.
A former agent for the U.S. Secret Service who most recently worked for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Rhode Island, Enright was brought on by BV Security earlier this year to provide consulting expertise, assistance that he said includes helping companies evaluate their physical shortcomings on the security end.
Even with better design strategies and sophisticated technology such as camera systems that dramatically increase surveillance capabilities, property owners must continue to rely on people for ultimate protection, most observers spoken with agreed. A camera can capture a person on tape, but Aborn noted that it still requires human recognition powers to use the optical data in a meaningful way. “The camera cannot (interpret) suspicious behavior,” he said.
Indeed, Long said such a shortcoming was detected following the 2005 London subway bombings in which the terrorists were videotaped in advance but were still able to carry out their plot. A review following the incident delivered a clear parable, said Long, one advising to “invest in your people and count on them. Invest in technology but don’t count on it.”
“It’s so true,” said Long. “The cameras can identify the terrorists, but when it comes down to it, you need good people on the ground to respond.”
Enright, whose firm’s main business is supplying guards, said he believes landlords have done a generally solid job of preventing undesirables from getting into a building, but argued that many are lacking in covering the perimeter of their facility. Such a dearth of coverage could allow for pre-planning of an attack to go unnoticed, he said, a process that typically requires the infiltrator to expose themselves. If someone is taking photos repeatedly of a property, it is a good indication they are not merely a sightseer, Enright explained. All too often, however, that aspect of a property is left unattended, he said.
Security, he said, “is a growth industry, but it takes some convincing” to get an owner to make necessary investments. The experience level of the guards is also critical to adequate protection, both Enright and Aborn said, with the companies mandating a measure of training amongst their guards for anti-terrorism tactics and other modern issues. Vance not only has a strike-team ready to provide special protection in the wake of an attack or heighten security during an event such as Boston’s 2004 Democratic National Convention, the firm requires a high level of professionalism among its regular guards as well, said Aborn.
“If there’s one differentiator for Vance, it’s in the training,” he said, citing a 40-hour educational process and a wage and benefits package designed to lure experienced guards to the company.
Looking forward, most spoken with predicted growing demand for security services at commercial properties and other public buildings, but the urgency among tenants does indeed seem to have eased on the terrorist front. Theories that the World Trade Center attacks in New York City would send companies fleeing office towers to low-rise options “never materialized,” acknowledged Cresa Partners principal Richard Lowe, as evidenced by a single-digit vacancy rate for Boston office space above the 20th floor.
“It doesn’t seem to be high on people’s minds,” said Lowe, whose firm represents tenants in finding commercial space. When a client does list security of a building as a concern, Lowe said, it tends to be more related to property crime and personal safety versus a terrorist threat.
Lowe’s outlook was shared by Michael Kearns, executive vice president of operations for Diversified Project Management of Newton. Kearns, who has a background in corporate real estate services, said he seldom hears companies worrying about terrorism issues when helping them prepare for a move. “If I had to characterize it, I’d say security is a bit more of a concern (post 9/11), but it’s not a huge concern,” said Kearns, although he added that certain companies are more attuned than others.
For his part, Enright argued that all employees, guards and building personnel should increase their awareness. “The threat still exists,” he said. Terrorists “are focused on attacking us again in this country Â… but if everyone would take a reasonable approach to security, it would enhance the security of the entire area.”
