If you are searching for an anti-ram bollard risk assessment in Perth, you are likely facing a serious decision. It may be driven by a new project, public safety concerns, a recent incident, a change in site use, or increasing exposure to vehicle-borne threats. In many cases, the question is not “should we install bollards?” It is:
- do we actually need anti-ram protection here?
- what level of performance is appropriate?
- where should protection be placed to reduce risk without creating new problems?
- how do we justify the decision in a defensible way?
An anti-ram bollard risk assessment provides a structured, practical basis to answer those questions. It helps you avoid both under-protection and overspend, and it supports decisions that can stand up to internal governance and stakeholder scrutiny.
Smartsec Security Solutions provides vendor-neutral anti-ram bollard risk assessments across Perth and Western Australia, focused on risk-based justification and practical, implementable guidance.
What is an anti-ram bollard risk assessment?
An anti-ram bollard risk assessment is a structured assessment of your exposure to vehicle-ramming threats and hostile vehicle mitigation (HVM) risk. It identifies where a vehicle could cause harm, what the likely outcomes would be, and what physical protective measures are appropriate.
This type of assessment typically considers:
- likely vehicle approach paths and speeds
- the vulnerability of people and assets at key frontages
- the distance a vehicle could travel before impact
- the presence of crowds, queues, or predictable congregation points
- existing barriers and natural “stand-off” distances
- feasible mitigation options (including, but not limited to bollards)
A strong assessment does not start with “install bollards.” It starts with exposure and risk, then recommends proportionate mitigation.
When anti-ram bollards are genuinely needed (and when they are not)
Anti-ram protection is not required everywhere. It is most relevant when a vehicle can access a route that allows impact at speed into a vulnerable target.
Typical environments where anti-ram bollard risk assessments are commonly required include:
- public-facing civic facilities and community hubs
- retail frontages and high pedestrian areas
- sites with queues or congregation points near road edges
- events and temporary crowded places
- buildings with sensitive functions or higher consequence impacts
- vehicle-accessible forecourts, plazas, and drop-off zones
However, in many sites, effective risk reduction may be achieved through:
- increased stand-off distance through design
- route control (gates, access control, managed vehicle entry)
- landscaping, seating, planters, or other passive barriers that are fit for purpose
- reconfiguration of traffic movement and approach angles
- operational controls for peak periods and event days
A risk assessment helps you avoid applying a “one solution fits all” approach and ensures measures are proportionate to the actual exposure.
Anti-ram risk is not just about terrorism
Many clients assume anti-ram bollards are only relevant to extreme scenarios. In reality, vehicle impact risk includes multiple scenarios, including:
- deliberate ramming by a disgruntled person
- opportunistic misuse (for example, reckless driving into a forecourt)
- loss of vehicle control (medical episode, impaired driving, distraction)
- unauthorised vehicle access into restricted zones
- high foot traffic areas where a vehicle could cause severe harm quickly
A good assessment considers realistic scenarios relevant to your site. It also helps you communicate risk in a way stakeholders understand, without inflating threat.
What the assessment typically covers
A defensible anti-ram bollard risk assessment focuses on how vehicle impact could occur at your site and what mitigation is reasonably practicable.
A typical assessment will cover:
Site context and target areas
- where pedestrians congregate (entries, queues, crossings, outdoor seating)
- high consequence areas (main entries, lobbies, glazing lines, critical rooms)
- nearby roads, driveways, car parks and drop-off zones
- how the site is used during peak and after-hours periods
This establishes where the “harm zones” are and why they matter.
Vehicle approach paths and likely impact points
- where a vehicle could gain access to a direct path to target areas
- straight-line approaches that enable speed
- turning angles and constrained routes that reduce speed
- stand-off distances between vehicle routes and pedestrian areas
- possible breach points such as mountable kerbs, wide entries, or open plazas
This is often where the highest value findings emerge, because small design changes can sometimes remove the exposure entirely.
Existing controls and natural protection
Before prescribing new controls, the assessment should document what already reduces risk, such as:
- kerbs, elevation changes, walls, planters, or street furniture
- gates and access control points
- traffic calming, tight turns, or constrained entries
- existing bollards (and whether they are fit for purpose)
- operational controls such as closures during events
This provides the baseline and prevents duplicating controls that already work.
Practical mitigation options (not just bollards)
Bollards are one option, but a good assessment considers a range of treatments, including:
- passive barriers integrated into streetscape and architecture
- reconfiguring traffic routes to remove straight-line run-up
- controlled vehicle entry points, gates, or retractable barriers where needed
- relocation of vulnerable congregation points to reduce exposure
- temporary barriers for event-specific conditions
The assessment should recommend proportionate controls aligned to the site’s risk profile and operational needs.
What you should receive at the end
The output should support decision-making, procurement, and stakeholder confidence. It should not be a vague statement that “bollards are recommended.”
You should receive:
- clear identification of the key vehicle impact risk areas
- a risk-based justification for why mitigation is required (or not required)
- practical recommendations for where protection is needed and why
- staged options where appropriate (short-term interim, medium-term funded works)
- vendor-neutral requirements that support fair quoting and better outcomes
- a defensible narrative suitable for governance and audit contexts
If you need to engage suppliers, the assessment can also support a clearer brief, helping you compare proposals on a like-for-like basis.
Common mistakes that lead to wasted spend
Anti-ram measures can be expensive, and the wrong approach can create safety, accessibility and operational problems.
Common mistakes include:
- installing decorative bollards that are not impact-rated for the risk
- placing bollards without considering pedestrian flow, accessibility and compliance needs
- creating pinch points that increase crowd congestion or reduce safe egress
- focusing only on the building frontage while leaving vehicle run-up paths elsewhere
- installing barriers that look secure but can be bypassed due to spacing or layout
- applying permanent solutions when the risk is event-based and intermittent
- treating the issue as purely “security” without integrating traffic movement realities
A risk assessment helps you avoid these errors by linking controls to realistic scenarios and site constraints.
Why vendor-neutral advice matters for anti-ram projects
This is a space where product bias can lead to over-prescription or under-prescription. Vendor-neutral advice helps you:
- select treatments that match the actual exposure and consequence
- avoid paying for performance you do not need
- avoid under-specifying protection in areas that are genuinely high-risk
- create a defensible basis for why measures were chosen
- brief suppliers clearly so quotes are comparable and scope creep is reduced
This is particularly useful when multiple stakeholders are involved, including facilities, safety, procurement and leadership teams.
Smartsec’s approach to anti-ram bollard risk assessments in Perth
Smartsec Security Solutions provides independent, vendor-neutral guidance across Perth and Western Australia. The focus is practical, implementable mitigation that reduces risk while respecting the site’s operational and accessibility needs.
A typical engagement includes:
- a short scoping call to confirm drivers, site context and decision pathway
- site review focused on vehicle approaches, pedestrian congregation points and exposure
- assessment of existing controls and feasible mitigation options
- recommendations that are proportionate, staged where relevant, and defensible
Smartsec is led by Khabeer Rockley (SRMCP), with 18+ years’ experience across security risk management, incident response and resilience planning, supporting government, commercial and private-sector clients across Western Australia.
Who this is for
Anti-ram bollard risk assessments are relevant for many Perth and WA environments, including:
- public-facing civic sites and community facilities
- retail and commercial frontages with pedestrian congregation
- sites with high foot traffic near roads or drop-off zones
- event environments and temporary crowded places
- facilities with higher consequence impacts
If you are unsure whether your site warrants anti-ram protection, that is exactly what a risk-based assessment helps determine.
Next step: a confidential conversation
If you need an anti-ram bollard risk assessment in Perth, Smartsec Security Solutions can help you assess exposure, justify decisions, and develop practical, defensible HVM recommendations.
For a confidential conversation, please contact us via our Contact page.
