59.6% lot-size gap and waste access concerns sink 64 Wentworth Road co-living proposal

Burwood’s planning panel unanimously refused the proposed eight-storey, 27-room development after finding its 323.4-square-metre site fell well below the minimum cited for co-living housing.

Council: Burwood Council

Meeting: 17 Sep 2026 6:00 PM

Recorded status: rejected


BRIEF

The Burwood Local Planning Panel unanimously refused DA.2026.24, a proposed eight-storey, 27-room co-living development at 64 Wentworth Road. The minutes cite a 59.6 per cent shortfall against the 800-square-metre minimum lot size, unsatisfactory long-term waste servicing and commercial vehicle access, and concerns about communal open space, future-occupant amenity and design excellence. The refusal applies to the proposal considered at the meeting.


KEY FACTS

- The panel refused DA.2026.24 for an eight-storey, 27-room co-living development at 64 Wentworth Road, Burwood.

- The 323.4-square-metre site was 476.6 square metres, or 59.6 per cent, below the 800-square-metre minimum lot size cited for co-living housing.

- The panel found that long-term waste servicing and commercial vehicle access had not been satisfactorily demonstrated, including against AS 2890.2.

- Additional refusal reasons concerned communal open space, future-occupant amenity, and landscaping and open-space objectives.

- The minutes record the panel’s decision as unanimous on 17 September 2026.


ANALYSIS OF THE RECORD

- The refusal addressed both the proposed site-size variation and the practical operation of waste collection and commercial vehicle access.

- The minutes record the refusal of the application considered but do not record whether the applicant will submit a revised proposal.


QUESTIONS FOR FOLLOW-UP REPORTING

- Will the applicant submit a revised application for 64 Wentworth Road?

- If a revised application is lodged, will it retain the proposed eight-storey scale and 27-room format?

- What waste-servicing and commercial vehicle access arrangement would be proposed in any later application?


RECORDED NEXT STEPS

- The supplied minutes do not record a future application or any next steps for the applicant.


SOURCE PASSAGES

The Burwood Local Planning Panel meeting was held on 17 September 2026.
"This is page 1 of the Minutes of the Burwood Local Planning Panel Meeting of Burwood Council held on 17 September 2026 BURWOOD LOCAL PLANNING PANEL MEETING MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BURWOOD LOCAL PLANNING PANEL held at the CONFERENCE ROOM, 2 CONDER STREET BURWOOD on Thursday 17 September 2026 commencing at 6:00 PM." (Minutes title and meeting details)

Item DA19/26 concerns DA.2026.24, an eight-storey, 27-room co-living development at 64 Wentworth Road, Burwood.
"During the public meeting and deliberation on this item, the Panel chair Kevin Hoffman recused himself and Brian Kirk (expert panellist) acted as the chair for this item. Minutes of Burwood Local Planning Panel Meeting 17 September 2026 This is page 3 of the Minutes of the Burwood Local Planning Panel Meeting of Burwood Council held on 17 September 2026 The Panel was unanimous (Item DA19/26) DA.2026.24 - 8 Storey, 27 Room Co-Living Development at 64 Wentworth Road, Burwood File No: 26/43363 Location: 64 Wentworth Road, Burwood Zoning: R1 General Residential BLPP Referral Criteria Pursuant to the Ministerial Direction dated 6 May 2024 issued under" (Item DA19/26 heading, after the preceding item's unanimity statement)

DA.2026.24 proposed demolishing the existing single-storey dwelling and ancillary structures and constructing an eight-storey co-living development above one basement parking level at 64 Wentworth Road, Burwood.
"Proposal This development application (DA.2026.24) seeks development consent for the demolition of the existing single-storey detached dwelling house and ancillary structures, and the construction of an eight (8) storey co-living housing development above one (1) level of basement parking, at No. 64 Wentworth Road, Burwood. Recommendation That Development Application DA.2026.24, at 64 Wentworth Road, Burwood, for the demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of an eight-storey co-living housing development, be refused for the following reasons: 1) Pursuant to Section 4.15(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposal is inconsistent with Section 69(1)(b) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021." (Item DA19/26, proposal)

The site measured 323.4 square metres against an 800-square-metre minimum for co-living housing, a shortfall of 476.6 square metres or 59.6 per cent.
"Minimum Lot Size: Section 69(1)(b) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 prescribes a minimum lot size of 800sqm for co- living housing. The subject site has an area of 323.4sqm, representing a contravention of 476.6sqm or 59.6%." (Item DA19/26, minimum lot size)

The panel was not satisfied that the applicant's Clause 4.6 request adequately justified departing from the minimum lot-size standard.
"The Panel is not satisfied that the applicant's Clause 4.6 written request adequately demonstrates that compliance with the minimum lot size development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, or that sufficient environmental planning grounds exist to justify the proposed contravention." (Refusal reason 1)

The proposal was found inconsistent with Burwood's waste-management controls, and the panel was not satisfied that it demonstrated satisfactory long-term waste servicing without adverse impacts on residents, neighbouring properties or the public domain.
"2) Pursuant to Section 4.15(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposal is inconsistent with Part 6.2 Waste Management of the Burwood Development Control Plan 2013, including Provision P68. The Panel is not satisfied that the proposal demonstrates a satisfactory long-term waste servicing arrangement capable of operating Minutes of Burwood Local Planning Panel Meeting 17 September 2026 This is page 4 of the Minutes of the Burwood Local Planning Panel Meeting of Burwood Council held on 17 September 2026 without adverse impacts on residents, neighbouring properties or the public domain." (Refusal reason 2)

The panel was not satisfied that basement access and the proposed waste-servicing method had been demonstrated to accommodate commercial waste servicing satisfactorily, having regard to AS 2890.2, Off-Street Commercial Vehicle Facilities.
"3) Pursuant to Section 4.15(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Panel is not satisfied that the basement access arrangement and proposed waste servicing methodology have been demonstrated to satisfactorily accommodate commercial waste servicing having regard to AS 2890.2 – Off-Street Commercial Vehicle Facilities." (Refusal reason 3)

The proposal was found inconsistent with Clause 6.5 of Burwood Local Environmental Plan 2012, and the panel was not satisfied that it exhibited design excellence because a satisfactory long-term waste collection outcome had not been demonstrated.
"The Panel is not satisfied that the proposed servicing methodology provides a satisfactory long-term waste collection outcome for the development. 4) Pursuant to Section 4.15(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposal is inconsistent with Clause 6.5 of Burwood Local Environmental Plan 2012. The Panel is not satisfied that the proposal exhibits design excellence, particularly having regard to Clause 6.5(4)(e), as the applicant has failed to demonstrate a satisfactory long-term waste collection outcome for the development." (Refusal reason 4)


SOURCES

https://burwood.infocouncil.biz/RedirectToDoc.aspx?URL=Open/2026/09/LPP_17092026_MIN.PDF

https://minutesradar.com/news/burwood-infocouncil-burwood-local-planning-panel-meeting-17-sep-2026-6-00-pm-17-sep-2026-6-00-pm-minutes-59-6-lot-size-shortfall-and-waste-f06c2e28c6/


Prepared from public council minutes using automated drafting and checks. No meeting attendance or interviews are implied. Check the original record and seek comment before republishing claims or analysis. Illustrations are generic, not depictions of actual projects.