Protect, reroute, or redesign around live utilities.
When services appear where sockets should go, use a structured path. Prove utilities (241–243), enforce clearances, and select protection/sleeving or reroute versus redesign (422, 244, 332). Coordinate with authorities (133–134), track permit impacts, and keep a live risk register and clash log. Mark-ups must feed drawings (934) and acceptance documentation (714, 938) without delaying HVM bollard delivery. Include one-sentence context that naturally links upward to the parent hubs (this section and the chapter hub). Add SIRA context with a link to SIRA Bollards (UAE) when relevant. Link installation pages only if helpful: What to Expect and Installation Guide.
Important: This is a general guide. For live projects we develop a tailored
Method Statement & Risk Assessment (MS/RA) and align with authority approvals (e.g., SIRA) where in scope.
617.1 Detect/prove utilities
Confirm via GPR/EM and trial pits (241–242). Proofing avoids HVM bollard clashes.
Start with a layered detection plan: desk study, surface mark-out, and non-intrusive surveys such as GPR and EM survey, followed by targeted trial pits to achieve positive identification (241, 242). Define a hand-dig zone around suspected alignments to reduce strike risk and to confirm depth class before excavation of crash-rated bollard sockets.
Capture a geo-referenced photo log and chain your findings to the Survey Deliverables (248). Where detection is uncertain, impose depth-class controls (243) and stop-work triggers tied to the ITP (714).
| Aspect | What matters | Where to verify |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | Tested system (bollard + footing) | Global Crash Ratings |
| Operations | Duty cycles, fail-state, safety devices & measures | Installation Guide |
617.2 Minimum clearances
Apply depth/offset rules by service class (243). Clearances protect crash rated bollard sockets.
Adopt clearance bands by utility type (power, comms, gas, water, drainage). Use the depth-class framework (243) to keep sockets and duct banks outside “red-zone” assets. Where keeping offset is impossible, record a no-go envelope and escalate to the clash log (617.9) for resolution.
617.3 Protection & sleeving
Specify sleeves and slabs where coexistence is approved. Protection keeps HVM bollard arrays feasible.
When authorities permit coexistence, design protective measures: sleeves at crossings, warning tiles/tapes, and concrete protection slabs with depth and bearing checks coordinated to foundation loads (331–333). Keep lean-mix blinding and compaction procedures from Backfilling & Compaction (628) to maintain settlement control around protected services.
617.4 Reroute vs redesign
Use decision trees to pick reroute or shallow bases (244, 422). Choices preserve crash rated bollard performance.
Build a simple decision tree: (a) reroute utility (diversion) with service diversion specifications and NOC timeline; (b) redesign the foundation using shallow foundations (244) while preserving rating-critical dependencies in Depth & Utilities choices (422). Validate that any shallow solution remains within the product’s tested family window (421, 415) and does not create drainage or uplift issues (334, 614).
617.5 Authority coordination
Book NOC/permits and witness points (133–134). Coordination accelerates HVM bollard programmes.
Map all permit/NOC requirements in one tracker (133–134), including witness points for proving and backfilling. In the UAE, confirm if SIRA coordination is in scope and align the utility strategy with any reviewer expectations that affect HVM bollard siting, socket depths, and conduits.
617.6 Permit impacts
Log lead times and lane closures. Impacts inform crash rated bollard scheduling (855).
Record processing times, traffic plan approvals, and lane closure windows; reflect these in the programme & phasing (855) and the look-ahead. Identify critical path items (e.g., diversions that must precede foundation works) and surface risks to the risk management plan.
617.7 Risk register updates
Record residual utility risks (351). Registers keep HVM bollard teams alert.
Maintain a live risk register with specific fields for utility strike risk, protection failure, and schedule slippage. Tie each risk to controls (e.g., stop-work triggers) and verify them during site audits (728). Align residual risks with the hazard analysis for HVM bollard sites (351) and reference evidence in the ITP (714).
617.8 Mark-up on drawings
Redline conflicts and approvals (934). Mark-ups guide crash rated bollard construction.
Apply consistent mark-out codes on the ground and mirror them onto “Issue for Construction” layers using the site’s Ducting & Trench Details (934). Each Clash ID should have coordinates, photos, decision, and sign-offs, then flow to the as-built drawings (731).
617.9 Clash resolution log
Track issue→action→close. Logs reduce HVM bollard surprises (938).
Keep a single source of truth: a clash log that records discovery, containment (controls on site), resolution option (protect, reroute, redesign), and closure evidence linked to the Submission-Pack Guidance (938). Review the log at daily huddles and include relevant items in SAT witness packs (638) so reviewers see a clear chain of decisions.
Related
External resources
- NPSA — Hostile Vehicle Mitigation (HVM)
- ASIS — Security Risk Assessment Standard
- FEMA 426 — Building Protection Reference
617 Utility Conflicts — FAQ
What’s the safest way to confirm a buried service before we dig?
Use layered detection: desk study, mark-out, non-intrusive GPR/EM, then targeted trial pits with a hand-dig zone. Record depths and positions with a geo-referenced photo log and update drawings before excavation.
When should we choose a shallow foundation instead of diverting a utility?
When diversion lead time blocks the programme and a tested shallow foundation exists that preserves rating-critical dependencies. Validate with the product family’s evidence and confirm drainage/groundwater implications.
How do authority permits affect our HVM bollard schedule?
Permit/NOC lead times and traffic plan approvals can become critical path. Track them in the programme with witness points, and align with any SIRA requirements if the project falls under UAE security approvals.
What must be in a clash resolution log to satisfy reviewers?
Include a unique Clash ID, location, photos, utility owner, risk/impact, chosen option (protect/reroute/redesign), approvals, and closure evidence. Cross-reference ITP items and add the final status to as-builts.