Historic case of office building attacks attest lack of adequate building security and aware architects to contrive security design from early design stage to stave off additional problems at later stages. Considering the lack of knowledge for architects to develop programmatic requirement in security design, this research was conducted to (1)summarizing security design guidelines for office building based on zone classification as security layer and (2)demonstrating the application of security design guidelines to review security design of an office building design project to assess security level, identify security problems and propose facility management recommendations. Literature review method was used to summarize security design guidelines for
office building. Case study method by reviewing design drawings of Lille Office Building in France was used to demonstrate the application of security design guidelines to assess security level of building case.

This research organized summary of security design guidelines by zoning classification as security
layers, which are Zone 1 (Off-site Security), Zone 2 (Site Perimeter Security), Zone 3 (Site and Parking Security), and Zone 4 (Building Security). There were total 40 security design guidelines with 19 design categories summarized for overall zone and design categories. Design principles for improving Off-site Security (Zone 1) are to block the site from intentional intrusion and vehicle collision through streetscape furniture and traffic control; for improving Site Perimeter Security (Zone 2) are comply standoff distance and setback requirement to deter and delay intruders, and apply multiple layers of physical barrier as site boundaries for protection and emphasize territoriality; for improving Site and Parking Security (Zone 3) are control site and parking access to prevent unauthorized access, provide public space to increase surveillance and add site
amenities to navigate direction and act as orientation cue; and for improving Building Security (Zone 4) are protect vulnerable areas and main structure from high risk areas, and design building shape, building orientation and building hardening to reduce threat risks when occurs.

Case study method are used to assess the security level of the Lille Office Building design project. It is found that Off-site Security (Zone 1) of Lille Office Building is 67% secure, with the absence of traffic calming devices will effect on vehicle crash and greater blast effect. Site Perimeter Security (Zone 2) is 25% secure, with unmet distance of standoff distance, ground level and setback required will effect on building collapse and glass breakage injury. Site and Parking Security (Zone 3) is 86% secure, with too many site entrances (six) and the absence of weather-protected queuing areas at entries will effect on higher operation cost, sniper and crime activity. Building Security (Zone 4) is 82% secure, with complex geometries, sharp corner and parallel orientation to main public road from building mass will increase severe injuries, flying debris hazard and building collapse. Total 8 potential security problems found based on the number of security design guidelines which are not met, with the major potential security problems are building collapse and greater blast effect of
explosion threat. In addition, this research also found that security is not a single aspect. More security layer is established, the security system will be much more effective.

Historic case of office building attacks attest lack of adequate building security and aware architects to contrive security design from early design stage to stave off additional problems at later stages. Considering the lack of knowledge for architects to develop programmatic requirement in security design, this research was conducted to (1)summarizing security design guidelines for office building based on zone classification as security layer and (2)demonstrating the application of security design guidelines to review security design of an office building design project to assess security level, identify security problems and propose facility management recommendations. Literature review method was used to summarize security design guidelines for
office building. Case study method by reviewing design drawings of Lille Office Building in France was used to demonstrate the application of security design guidelines to assess security level of building case.

This research organized summary of security design guidelines by zoning classification as security
layers, which are Zone 1 (Off-site Security), Zone 2 (Site Perimeter Security), Zone 3 (Site and Parking Security), and Zone 4 (Building Security). There were total 40 security design guidelines with 19 design categories summarized for overall zone and design categories. Design principles for improving Off-site Security (Zone 1) are to block the site from intentional intrusion and vehicle collision through streetscape furniture and traffic control; for improving Site Perimeter Security (Zone 2) are comply standoff distance and setback requirement to deter and delay intruders, and apply multiple layers of physical barrier as site boundaries for protection and emphasize territoriality; for improving Site and Parking Security (Zone 3) are control site and parking access to prevent unauthorized access, provide public space to increase surveillance and add site
amenities to navigate direction and act as orientation cue; and for improving Building Security (Zone 4) are protect vulnerable areas and main structure from high risk areas, and design building shape, building orientation and building hardening to reduce threat risks when occurs.

Case study method are used to assess the security level of the Lille Office Building design project. It is found that Off-site Security (Zone 1) of Lille Office Building is 67% secure, with the absence of traffic calming devices will effect on vehicle crash and greater blast effect. Site Perimeter Security (Zone 2) is 25% secure, with unmet distance of standoff distance, ground level and setback required will effect on building collapse and glass breakage injury. Site and Parking Security (Zone 3) is 86% secure, with too many site entrances (six) and the absence of weather-protected queuing areas at entries will effect on higher operation cost, sniper and crime activity. Building Security (Zone 4) is 82% secure, with complex geometries, sharp corner and parallel orientation to main public road from building mass will increase severe injuries, flying debris hazard and building collapse. Total 8 potential security problems found based on the number of security design guidelines which are not met, with the major potential security problems are building collapse and greater blast effect of
explosion threat. In addition, this research also found that security is not a single aspect. More security layer is established, the security system will be much more effective.

Atlas, Y. R. (2008). 21st Century Security and CPTED: Designing for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Crime Prevention. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC.

Atlas, Y. R. (2013). Designing Against Terror, Violence and Crime. Retrieved from the website: http://www.jurispro.com/files/documents/doc-540424525-resume.pdf.

Attorney-General"Ds Department (2011). Physical Security Management Guidelines. Barton, ACT: Attorney-General"Ds Department.

Benjamin, P. T. (2009). Investigation of System Dynamics Applied to Building Simulation for Anti-terrorism Resource Allocation.
q PhD diss., The University of Wisconsin.

Bernard, R. (2010). Convergence and Layers of Security. Retrieved from the website: http://www.securityinfowatch.com/article/10524095/convergence-and-layers-of-security.

Biringer, Matalucci, and O'Connor (2007). Security Risk Assessment and Management a Professional Practice Guide for Protecting Buildings and Infrastructures. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley.

Challinger, D. (2008). From the Ground Up: Security for Tall Buildings. USA: Asis International.

Crowe, T. D. (1999). Crime Prevention through Environmental Design. 2nd ed. Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Davies, Sandi and Hertig (2008). Security Supervision and Management: The Theory and Practice of Asset Protection. 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann/Elsevier.

Elliott, R. (2014). Building Designs Cope with Threats. Retrieved from the Asis International Security Management. Retrieved from the website: http://www.securitymanagement.com/article/buildingdesigns-cope-threats.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (2006). Design Guidance for Shelters and Safe Rooms. Washington, D.C: FEMA, 2006. Retrieved from the Federal Emergency Management Agency website: http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/DHS/fema453.pdf.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (2003). Primer for Design of Commercial Buildings to Mitigate Terrorist Attack. Retrieved from the Federal Emergency Management Agency website: http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data.

Fennelly, L. J. (2012). Handbook of Loss Prevention and Crime Prevention. 5th ed. Waltham, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Garcia, M. L. (2006). Vulnerability Assessment of Physical Protection Systems. Amsterdam: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Gruber, R. (2006). Perimeter Security: Deter, Detect, Delay, and Deny. Hackensack, NJ: Master Halco.

Hopper, Leonard and Droge (2005). Security and Site Design: A Landscape Architectural Approach to Analysis, Assessment, and Design Implementation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

HM Government (2010). Crowded Places: The Planning System and Counter-Terrorism. Home Office c Crown Copyright.

Designing for Office Building Security HM Government (2012). Protecting Crowded Places: Design and Technical Issues. Home Office cCrown Copyright.

Monsalve, Marco and Sutton (2003). Security Evaluation and Planning. USA: AIA.

Nadel, B. A. (2004). Building Security: Handbook for Architectural Planning and Design. New York: McGraw-Hill.

National Institutes of Building Sciences (2010). Architecture. Retrieved from the WBDG website: http://www.wbdg.org/dd_architecture.php.

National Counter Terrorism Security Office (2011). Counter Terrorism Protective Security Advice. London: ACPO.

National Institutes of Building Sciences (2010). Effective Site Security Design. Retrieved from the WBDG website: http://www.wbdg.org/resources/effective_sitesecurity.php.

National Institutes of Building Sciences (2009). Office. Retrieved from the WBDG website: http://www.wbdg.org/design/office_st.php.

National Institutes of Building Sciences (2013). Secure/ Safe. Retrieved from the WBDG website: ww.wbdg.org/design/secure_safe.php.

National Institutes of Building Sciences (2013). Security for Building Occupants and Assets. Retrieved from the WBDG website: http://www.wbdg.org/design/provide_security.

National Institutes of Building Sciences (2013). The Bollard: Crash and Attack Resistant Models. Retrieved from the WBDG website: http://www.wbdg.org/resources/bollard_arm.

RIBA. (2010). RIBA Guidance on Designing for Counter Terrorism. London: RIBA in partnership with TPS Carillion.

The National Academies Press (2013). Protection of Federal Office Buildings Against Terrorism. Washington, D.C: National Academy, 1988.

U.S. General Service Administration. Security in the Workplace - Informational Material. (undated). Retrieved from the USDA Office of Procurement and Property Management website: http://www.wbdg.org/resources/bollard_arm.

U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, USA. (2013). Physical Security Handbook. Retrieved from the website: http://www.usgs.gov/usgs-manual/handbook/hb/440-2h/440-2-h-ch4.html.

U.S. General Service Administration (2007). The Site Security Design Guide. Washington, DC: GSA.

Victoria University of Wellington. (undated). Security Management Guidelines. Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University of Wellington.

Witherspoon, Ralph, CPP. (2002). Office Building Security. Cleveland, OH: Ralph Witherspoon.