Convention Centers Strike Balance Between Being A Hardened Target And Welcoming To The Public By Brad Gessner, CFE & Ken Stockdell, AIA, LEED BD+C
Arguably the most discussed topic in the convention center industry
today revolves around security at our venues. Arenas, stadiums and theaters implemented enhanced security measures years ago, includ- ing the use of magnetometers, limiting personal items and bag checks every event, and only ticketed patrons or badged employees or con- Convention centers understandably have lagged behind these other
types of public assembly venues when it comes to establishing and implementing policies and procedures related to security because of the type of events they host. Convention centers were designed and operate largely as an open and welcoming venue that usually allows attendees to access the facility to register or pick up their registration badge or credential unimpeded. Or to attend a banquet, free semi- nar, workshop, consumer show or employment exam, often with all of Active shooter and terrorist acts that sadly have occurred around
the world over the past several years requires our industry to change to address this new safety and security challenge. You all are aware of IAVM partnering with ESCA and IAEE to
develop and establish safety and security guidelines for convention centers known as the Exhibitions Meetings Safety & Security Initiative and security for those that work and attend conventions, tradeshows and special events in our venues, but more can be done on this front. The design of convention centers must also play a role in improving the safety and security of our venues. The conversation about security in the design of convention centers
has always raised questions about balancing hardening the buildings versus their mission as open and welcoming hospitality spaces for their event attendees and communities. This conversation has become even more important and urgent in the post-9/11 world in which we live today, and due to the increasing number of active shooter and terrorist attacks. The basic systems involved for any design team are the com- position of exterior walls and the components and extent of coverage of the security systems. There are a variety of threats that need to be considered: explosives carried either by vehicles or individuals (back- packs), weapons carried by individuals, chemical or biological agents, approach. Explosives raise two questions for convention center architects and the design team. First, do we make the building blast-resistant, and for any new build convention center. Where the site allows, creating - keeping vehicles and queuing areas away from the building enclosure reduces the potential impact a vehicle-borne device can have by creat- ing distance from the source to the building. The installation of vari-
12 Facility Manager Magazine
ous types of barriers and barricades capable of stopping a truck from accessing queuing areas and entrances where large numbers of people congregate is important to hardening any center. This can be a rela- tively low-cost strategy, but should be considered early in the design process. The goal is to design some space between streets, parking and between the blast source and the building reduces the energy that the building would have to resist, so careful thought about how vehicle access is designed is a key part of the overall threat mitigation strategy.
building as possible, typically meaning that shuttle buses and cars would be a sidewalk width from the entrance doors. This is combined with the kind of openness that a hospitality facility like a convention center has historically provided, with exterior walls composed of a high percentage of glass versus solid structure. Along with a discus- sion of how the site is going to be planned, the second conversation the design team needs to have with the facility owner and operator in addition to their security advisors is about how far they want to go in designing the exterior enclosure to provide blast resistance.
be resisted, and the amount of acceptable damage the building will sustain. In this conversation, the balance to be struck is how much glass versus solid wall with the cost of the system needed to resist the forces expected with the established damage criteria. This is an iter- ative process that might involve multiple system scenarios, and would uncover the practical limits of resistance the building can provide giv- - tendee protection should be the primary consideration here. On the loading dock and back-of-house side, the design team needs to consider how to manage access by tractor trailers, POV’s and con- tractor personnel that come in and out of the facility. Trucks and the freight they carry must be screened on site, or at a marshalling facility. The design of the back of house and loading docks should take all of this into consideration. Will the convention center employ an em- ployee and contractor badging system, and will they all be required to enter and exit from one or two areas? While the construction of the exterior of the building generally lends itself to a more robust ac- cess screening and entrance control system and physical resistance to a possible blast scenario, the potential amount of explosives and the number of people moving in and out of these areas makes it a signif- icant potential threat that requires as much, if not more, attention as the front-of-house. Weapons carried by individuals (Active Shooters) has been a very
lively topic for discussion in our industry recently. Every state has its own gun laws about concealed and open carry, and most of the ways to address this threat involve operational requirements and protocols rather than design responses. The main considerations for the design team for this type of threat are the number of doors and entrances designed into the facility, security camera coverage, and command center and accommodating magnetometers and other screening de-
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
