21st Century Security and CPTED, 2nd Edition

875

36

Implementing CPTED

Randall I. Atlas and Gregory Saville

The big question is, why has no security been designed into our infrastructure and building

environment to any signicant degree? One possible answer is quite simple: no one had to. It is not

possible to design and construct a building without re prevention features, but most buildings are

designed without crime prevention and security features. Building codes and standards require that

all structures comply with re and life safety codes. Until 9/11, security was typically considered

only in high-risk buildings like embassies, banks, nuclear power plants, and 7–11s! Now that the

soft underbelly of our infrastructure and buildings has been exposed, sometimes in a tragic way, the

consciousness of security is permeating the design community. Yet, some communities have been

considering security and crime prevention for several years and seeing positive changes in the built

environment by increased use and lower crime. What is the status today of security being integrated

into architecture and infrastructure? There are some international jurisdictions that have had sig-

nicant success with crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) implementation,

such as New South Wales in Australia, the Design Out Crime program in the United Kingdom, and

the Safe Label program in the Netherlands. Unfortunately, the situation in North America has not

progressed that far in the past few decades.

ATTEMPTS TO REGULATE

Canadian ConneCtion

In the late 1990s, the Canadian government’s Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation spon-

sored research into the feasibility of implementing national CPTED standards with compliance

regulations and measurement strategies (Saville and Wright, 1998). The intent was to review a suc-

cessful Dutch CPTED program called “Safe Labeling” and determine how to implement such a sys-

tem in Canada. Although the program appeared initially feasible, there were complaints from some

sectors of the building industry about increased costs. Lacking political leadership, no national

program emerged.

Today, only a small number of individual municipalities across Canada have taken progres-

sive steps to implement some form of CPTED compliance, such as Vancouver and Victoria in

CONTENTS

Attempts to Regulate ......................................................................................................................875

Canadian Connection ................................................................................................................ 875

American Situation....................................................................................................................876

Design Guidelines—Using the Back Door .................................................................................... 877

Store Security Act .....................................................................................................................878

Safe School Design Guidelines .................................................................................................878

GSA/ISC Security Standards ....................................................................................................878

Smart Growth Connection .........................................................................................................879

New Urbanism’s Challenge ...........................................................................................................880

References ...................................................................................................................................... 881