Worked example: swept path check for a refuse vehicle

A refuse vehicle swept path check is the geometry test that decides whether a residential layout works, because the collection vehicle is the largest thing that has to come onto the site every week. Everything below is an illustrative worked example. The dimensions are assumptions that must be replaced with the figures the waste authority gives you for the round that will serve the site.

Get the sequence right and the exercise takes an afternoon. Do it after the layout is fixed and you will be moving plots.

Why the refuse vehicle sets the geometry

Three vehicles compete to be the design vehicle on a housing layout. The fire appliance has dimensions set out in Approved Document B to the Building Regulations, the removals pantechnicon turns up a handful of times a year, and the refuse vehicle arrives every week for the life of the development.

The refuse vehicle usually wins because the consequence of failing is operational rather than theoretical. If the geometry does not work, the waste authority declines to collect from within the site, residents drag bins to a presentation point at the entrance, and the authority that approved the layout fields the complaints. That is why waste teams are consulted on layouts and why their comments carry weight with the highway officer.

A rear-steer 6x2 vehicle tracks differently from a twin-steer or a small narrow-access vehicle, so the axle configuration matters as much as the length. Ask the waste team which vehicle serves that round, and ask whether a smaller vehicle is available, because the answer is sometimes yes for a limited number of properties and never for a whole estate.

Dimensions to model

The illustrative inputs used in this example, all of which need confirming against the authority's fleet list:

But mirror width is the one people forget. A 2.5 m body between walls at 2.6 m centres fits on paper and shears the mirrors off in practice, so track the mirror width where the route is between fixed obstructions and the body width where kerbs are the only constraint.

Height with the bin lift raised governs tree canopies, archways, balconies and any overhanging soffit at the collection point. It is not the travelling height, and a drawing that uses the travelling height for the collection position is wrong.

A worked turning head

The example layout is a cul-de-sac serving 18 houses, 5.5 m carriageway with 2 m footways both sides, terminating in a hammerhead.

1. Set the hammerhead arms at 10 m measured from the centre of the carriageway to the kerb at the end of each arm, with each arm 6 m wide between kerbs.
2. Track the vehicle forward into the left arm until the front axle is clear of the junction radius.
3. Reverse across into the right arm, stopping when the rear overhang is 0.5 m clear of the kerb.
4. Pull forward out of the head and back down the carriageway, checking the envelope against the footway on the inside of the turn.
5. Repeat the sequence in the opposite direction, because a hammerhead is not symmetrical in use once parking bays are added.

With the assumed 9.5 m kerb to kerb radius, that arrangement produces a two-shunt turn with the clearance offset maintained. Shorten the arms to 8 m and the same vehicle needs three shunts and clips the inside footway, which is the point at which the drawing stops being acceptable.

A turning circle is the alternative, and it needs an inscribed diameter large enough for a continuous turn, which on a 10.5 m vehicle is a substantial area of carriageway. On tight sites the hammerhead almost always wins on land take.

Overrun, encroachment and what to do about it

The hierarchy is simple. Footways and shared pedestrian surfaces must stay clear of the envelope. Parking bays shown on the layout must be treated as occupied, so the envelope cannot pass through them. Land outside the application boundary cannot be used at all.

Where the envelope clips a kerb at the nose of a hammerhead, a formal overrun area is the recognised solution: a contrasting surface, flush or near-flush kerbs, and a construction specified to take the axle loading of the design vehicle. Draw it, specify it, and label it as an overrun area on the layout drawing rather than only on the tracking sheet, because the two drawings have to agree.

The response that does not work is removing the clearance offset to make the envelope fit. A reviewer who sees a drawing with no offset assumes the geometry fails, and they are usually right.

Gradient and carrying capacity

Tracking software works in plan only, so three things have to be checked in the text and on sections.

Longitudinal gradient on the access and within the turning head needs to meet the local standard, which commonly sits around 1 in 12 as a maximum for an adopted residential street and tighter within turning areas. Crews will not haul bins up steep approaches either, and the carry route gradient is checked separately against the waste authority's own standard.

Carrying capacity matters where the vehicle crosses a private drive, a block paved area, a basement deck or a podium. A 26-tonne vehicle on a construction designed for cars will crack, and on a podium slab it may be a structural impossibility. Check the loading assumption with the engineer and record it, because this is the failure that surfaces after occupation.

Vertical clearance needs the raised bin lift height, measured against tree canopies at maturity rather than at planting.

Reconciling the result with the parking layout

The common pattern is a layout that passes the swept path check as drawn and fails in practice because the tracking sheet shows an empty street. Model the street as it will be used: visitor bays occupied, allocated bays occupied, and an allowance for the inevitable car parked on the hammerhead nose.

Two practical moves fix most of it. Keep bays out of the swept area at the head rather than relying on markings, and use a physical constraint such as a planter or a build-out where an unmarked parking position would block the manoeuvre. The bin store or presentation point position has to work with the same geometry, and the carry distance from the furthest dwelling has to stay within the standard the authority applies.

Where the numbers will not reconcile, the honest options are a shorter cul-de-sac, a loop road, or an agreed presentation point with a management arrangement. The option that is not available is submitting a drawing that assumes nobody parks.

Presenting the drawing for the highway authority

Put on the sheet: the design vehicle name and dimensions with the source of the data, the software and vehicle library used, the tracking speed, the clearance offset, the base layout drawing number and revision, each manoeuvre numbered and separately coloured, and a note recording the waste authority's confirmation of the vehicle.

The appendix belongs in a Transport Statement for a scheme of this size, with a short narrative rather than a bare set of drawings, and the wider conventions for reading these outputs apply. Storage provision belongs in the Waste Management Strategy, and the layout rationale in the Design and Access Statement. Construction traffic is modelled separately in a Construction Traffic Management Plan, because the delivery and muck-away vehicles are longer than the refuse vehicle and use different routes.

This is general guidance, not legal advice, and every figure above is illustrative. Fleet dimensions, gradient standards and carry distance limits are set locally and change, so confirm them with the waste and highway authorities before producing drawings.

PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.