Building security: good and bad news.

New York City office buildings are more secure than they were before Sept. 11. That's the good news. The bad news is that many remain vulnerable.

"We don't have consistency between buildings here in New York City. You can readily see who is taking this seriously and who isn't," says Jim Francis, senior vice president of security services for risk consulting firm Kroll. "It's a very poor excuse to say, as many are, that they're just waiting for the other shoe to drop. Now is the time to do something."

What, exactly? Here are some options-hire armed guards to stand inside your lobbies, install closed circuit cameras over the loading docks, set up turnstiles en route to the elevator banks, apply security film to your windows, check the bags of everyone who enters the building, invest in a key card system for your tenants use after hours.

It's a lot to consider. And the sobering part is that none of these measures is fail-safe, which may explain why so many landlords are trying to "self-diagnose" their security needs, something that Francis finds alarming. Few critical appraisals are derived from such an approach, and financial considerations are likely the culprit.

"We might be going back to sleep on this one. Remember that (Bin Laden's terror network) Al Qaeda historically strikes every three to five years. They are also known to pass by hardened targets," says Francis.

'Hardened' is security patois for a well-protected building. As there exists no uniform way to rate this, he says that security experts must examine each building on a case-by-case basis.

After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, sweeping security changes among Manhattan office buildings were few and far between. The World Trade Center itself boosted its own security after that attack, but to many people, (WTC bomber) Ramzi Yusef's failed bid to topple the towers only proved how strong the towers really were.

What happened then was a gradual process of forgetting about an imminent threat. Before Sept. 11 of last year, complacency was a luxury that we could not--and still can't--afford.

"Security must be practical and must relate to the real threat. It also must be something you can defend in a court of law," says security consultant David Aggleton, president of Aggleton & Associates.

If tenants are uncomfortable with their building security, it can become a problem for the landlord. Especially when a lease is up for renewal, or a potential tenant makes inquiries.

"At best, security is a deterrent. If a terrorist is set upon attacking someone, they will. The only thing an owner can do is lower the odds that their property is targeted," says Aggleton.

Deterrence makes for nervous neighbors. Think about it--anyone who owns a building near a potential target is therefore at greater risk. The weakest link on the block will be viewed as the most viable target, while a hardened building might be passed up.

Both Francis and Aggleton believe that owners must decide whether or not a terrorist would want to strike their property. If they decide their property does not represent a target, it may not matter. Being near one is seemingly enough to worry about.

"The tenants may believe that the building is a target, and because of that owners are forced to take security measures. People won't lease space in a building otherwise," says Aggleton.

Insignia/ESG is taking a "comprehensive approach" to the terrorist threat. It is conducting risk assessments, extra fire/evacuation drills and even hiring full-time "life safety" officers to oversee its buildings. The New York City Fire Department requires two fire drills a year at commercial office buildings.

"There are a slew of things that we are doing. We are conducting spot checks throughout our buildings, and checklists are now being adhered to," says Wayne Taub, managing director of operations.

Added security costs are passed along to tenants. Since tenants are billed on the operating costs of the previous year, they won't be paying this added price until 2003, says Taub, when they'll be "in for a surprise."

His building managers were forbidden to be away from the office this week, in case of any crises that might transpire. Cushman & Wakefield would not comment on any changes to their security protocol this week.

"We'll be taking all of the appropriate measures the week of Sept. 9," says Taub.

Security by design is obviously the most effective. After Sept. 11, engineers, architects, and developers are now working together with security consultants and blast experts.

"It wasn't always this way. Before, these disciplines worked separately on projects," says Mark Bradshaw, president of the International Association of Professional Security Consultants, a selective group of independent security consultants.

It costs much less to design a building against progressive collapse than to reinforce that building (what is called "retrofitting") after it is built. The key engineering term now is redundancy, which basically means that the weight of a building can be redistributed if something gives beneath it.

"We are being forced to tread new ground here. Progressive collapse--the same thing that happened in Oklahoma City--is much more relevant to people now, so people are demanding redundant design," says John Abruzzo, senior associate at engineering firm LZA Technology.

The weakest link in most commercial office buildings is also the most sought after by its tenants--windows. LZA sees many landlords replacing the glass in their lower floors as a way to reduce injuries from a street-level explosion.

Flying glass can be lethal, especially the annealed and heat strengthened glass that is built into the skin of New York City buildings. Annealed glass becomes shards. The results are devastating since glass shards are too small to surgically remove.

The next level of glass is called strengthened glass--this is the glass used in the side windows of cars. After that comes laminated glass.

"Windshield glass is laminated. It has two layers of glass and doesn't become hundreds of shards," says Abruzzo.

A powerful explosion can blow an entire sheet of laminated glass out of its frame. The same explosion would turn an annealed pane into tiny daggers. Annealed glass explodes like a shotgun, scattering tiny shards in a wide pattern. Under the same circumstances, a piece of laminated glass would be blown out in one piece like a bullet being fired from a rifle. The latter could cut someone in half at close range, but there is a less risk of multiple lacerations.

"In blast conditions, over 80% of injuries are caused by glass," says Carol Borow, president of CHB Industries, a Long Island-based seller of security film for windows. Her product makes windows less vulnerable via a credit-card thick layer of plastic.

Borow witnessed a test years ago wherein a 3-foot by 3-foot pane of annealed glass was placed 20 feet away from 5 pounds of dynamite.

"That pane turned into 900 shards. They actually counted every single one," she says.

Most New York City office buildings use annealed or heat strengthened glass. The curtain walls on most Manhattan office buildings are also annealed or heat strengthened.

This is ordinary window glass. If you've ever broken one, you know how difficult it is to clean up the shards. Also, the jagged pieces still attached to the frame can be deadly.

"A lot of building owners are just retrofitting their windows on the lower stories, anticipating a street level blast," says Borow.

It's doubtful that any engineer could design a building that could withstand another airborne attack by fuel-laden jets. As Abruzzo puts it, our planes are "just too big."

Despite a spike in demand for security consultations immediately after Sept. 11, Mark Bradshaw sees demand lagging now. There's a chance that it could change this week, as the events loom large one year after the fact.

"We went from controlling people as they enter the lobby to worrying about buildings being torn down by airplanes. That's a big gap," he says.