Housing & planning · Central Coast Council
Warnervale childcare plan refused over park, biodiversity and design conflicts
The Central Coast Local Planning Panel voted 4-0 against DA/434/2026 for 23-35 Albert Warner Drive, citing vegetation-retention conditions, RE1 open-space objectives and unresolved impacts on neighbours and local infrastructure.
Reporting from public council minutes. How this article was prepared
A proposed childcare centre at 23-35 Albert Warner Drive, Warnervale, has been refused after the Central Coast Local Planning Panel found it conflicted with an earlier requirement to retain the site’s trees and vegetation and use the land as a park.
The panel’s unanimous 4-0 decision on 17 September 2026 rejected DA/434/2026 under section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Its reasons referred to Condition 5.14 of DA/1894/2023, which requires all trees and vegetation to be retained and the site to be used as a park and revegetated under an approved landscape plan.
The panel said those requirements were essential to avoiding and minimising biodiversity impacts. It also found the application did not address the avoid-and-minimise requirements of section 6.3(a) of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, and was inconsistent with the RE1 zone objectives in the Central Coast Local Environmental Plan 2022. Those objectives include providing land for public open space and recreation and protecting and enhancing the natural environment for recreational purposes.
The refusal also covered the centre’s proposed form and its effects on adjoining properties. Reasons cited bulk and scale that did not respond appropriately to the area’s residential character, a front setback that did not comply with the Childcare Planning Guideline 2021, visual privacy impacts and non-compliant side and rear setbacks.
The panel said there was insufficient information to demonstrate that the proposal would avoid adverse noise impacts on neighbours or impacts on the local traffic network. It also said the application had not shown adequate arrangements for stormwater, sewer, access and waste servicing. Specific concerns included heavy-vehicle access for waste collection, the proposed access arrangements, maintenance of water-quality treatment devices and clearance between the sewer main and the centre.
The reasons further state that the proposal conflicted with the strategic framework for the wider Warnervale South urban release area, that the site was not suitable for the proposed development and that the proposal was not in the public interest. External referral bodies are to be notified. The minutes do not state whether the applicant will revise or resubmit the proposal. The minutes list 22 October 2026 as the scheduled date of the next Local Planning Panel meeting.
What deserves a closer look
The refusal addressed both the proposed land use and the centre's design, neighbourhood impacts and servicing, so the record identifies several separate barriers to the application.
The minutes do not indicate whether the applicant intends to submit a future proposal addressing the refusal reasons.
Questions for follow-up reporting
Whether the applicant will revise or resubmit the childcare proposal is not stated in the minutes.
Whether a future proposal would retain the site's park, vegetation and revegetation outcomes is not resolved by the decision.
What happens next
External referral bodies are to be notified of the panel's decision.
The minutes list 22 October 2026 as the scheduled date of the next Local Planning Panel meeting.
Check the record
These passages were matched to the source text. Read them in context in the original minutes.
The panel refused DA/434/2026 for a childcare centre at 23-35 Albert Warner Drive, Warnervale, under section 4.16(1) of the EP&A Act.
Central Coast Council Local Planning Panel Minutes 17 September 2026 Page 7 OFFICIAL 2.3 DA/434/2026 - 23-35 Albert Warner Drive, Warnervale - Proposed Child care Centre Item 2.3 - 23-35 Albert Warner Drive, Warnervale - Proposed Childcare Centre Site Inspected Yes, by Virtual Site Inspection Relevant Considerations As per Council assessment report Materials Considered • Documentation with application • Council assessment report • Council Memo dated 16 September 2026 • Council Memo dated 17 September 2026 Council Recommendation Refuse Central Coast Local Planning Panel Decision: 1. That Development Application No. DA/434/2026 for a Childcare Centre, at 23-35 Albert Warner Drive, be REFUSED pursuant to section 4.16(1) of the EP&A Act for the following reasons: a.
Item 2.3, item heading and panel decision
Open original minutes ↗The proposal is inconsistent with Condition 5.14 of DA/1894/2023, which requires retention of all trees and vegetation. Park use and revegetation under the approved landscape plan are described as essential to avoiding and minimising biodiversity impacts.
The proposal is inconsistent with Condition 5.14 of DA/1894/2023 in which all trees and vegetation on the site are required to be retained and the use of the site as a park and its revegetation, in accordance with the approved Landscape Plan, is essential to the avoidance and minimisation of impacts on biodiversity.
Item 2.3, refusal reason a
Open original minutes ↗The proposal failed to address section 6.3(a) biodiversity avoidance and minimisation requirements and was inconsistent with RE1 zone objectives for public open space, recreation and protection and enhancement of the natural environment.
b. The proposal fails to address the avoid and minimise requirements of Section 6.3(a) of the Biodiveristy Conservation Act 2016. c. The proposal is inconsistent with the objectives for the RE1 zone in CCLEP 2022 which seek to provide land for public open space and recreational purposes and to protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes.
Item 2.3, refusal reasons b-c
Open original minutes ↗The proposed bulk and scale did not appropriately respond to the area's residential character, and the front setback failed to comply with the Childcare Planning Guideline.
The proposed bulk and scale of the development do not appropriately respond to the residential character of the area, and the landscaping does not positively contribute to the streetscape in accordance with Childcare Planning Guideline 2021, Design Quality Principles 1 – Context, 2 – Built Form and 5 – Landscaping. Central Coast Council Local Planning Panel Minutes 17 September 2026 Page 8 OFFICIAL ii. The proposed front setback fails to comply with C13 of the Childcare Planning Guideline. iii.
Item 2.3, refusal reasons f(i)-f(ii)
Open original minutes ↗The proposal resulted in visual privacy impacts and non-compliant side and rear setbacks, and insufficient information was provided to demonstrate that it would not cause adverse noise or local traffic impacts.
iv. The proposal results in visual privacy impacts on adjoining properties and has non-compliant setbacks to the side and rear boundaries. v. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the proposal will not result in adverse noise impacts upon neighbours. vi. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the proposal will not result in adverse impacts to the local traffic network. g. The application fails to demonstrate that adequate arrangements have been made to make essential services available to the development in accordance with clause 7.6 of Central Coast Local Environmental Plan 2022 as insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate stormwater, sewer, adequate access and waste servicing will be provided for the proposed development as: i.
Item 2.3, refusal reasons f(iv)-f(vi)
Open original minutes ↗The application failed to demonstrate adequate arrangements for stormwater, sewer, access and waste servicing. Specific concerns included waste-collection vehicle access, vehicle circulation arrangements, maintenance of treatment devices and insufficient clearance between the sewer main and the proposed centre.
vi. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the proposal will not result in adverse impacts to the local traffic network. g. The application fails to demonstrate that adequate arrangements have been made to make essential services available to the development in accordance with clause 7.6 of Central Coast Local Environmental Plan 2022 as insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate stormwater, sewer, adequate access and waste servicing will be provided for the proposed development as: i. Access by a heavy rigid vehicle to collect waste from the site has not been demonstrated in accordance with Council's Waste Guidelines. ii. A design that demonstrates all ingress and egress is restricted to Albert Warner Drive, or alternatively access proposed off the internal residential subdivision road shall be restricted to one way circulation (entry only) with exit only Albert Warner Drive. iii. No information has been submitted to demonstrate how the stormwater treatment device or water quality treatment device (GPT) will be maintained. iv. There is an insufficient clearance between the sewer main alignment and the proposed childcare centre.
Item 2.3, refusal reason g and subparts
Open original minutes ↗The proposal contravened the strategic framework for the wider Warnervale South urban release area, and failure to respond to the prescribed layout adversely affected the amenity of adjoining sites and land within the wider area.
h. The proposal does not represent the orderly development of the land and is inconsistent with the objects of the EP&A Act as: i. The development application proposes to develop the site in contravention of the strategic framework developed for the wider Warnervale South urban release area that is prescribed by Chapter 5.25 of CCDCP and the Warnervale District Contributions Plan 2021; and ii. Failure to respond to the layout prescribed in Chapter 5.25 of CCDCP and the Contributions Plan adversely impacts upon the amenity of adjoining sites and land within the wider area.
Item 2.3, refusal reason h
Open original minutes ↗The site was not suitable for the proposed development, and the proposal was not in the public interest.
the development includes measures to remediate the disturbed bushland. j. The site is not suitable for the proposed development. k. The proposal is not in the public interest. Central Coast Council Local Planning Panel Minutes 17 September 2026 Page 9 OFFICIAL 2.
Item 2.3, refusal reasons j-k
Open original minutes ↗Source record
Reporting from the official Central Coast Council Local Planning Panel minutes for the meeting held on 17 September 2026.
Key facts from the minutes
- DA/434/2026 for a proposed childcare centre at 23-35 Albert Warner Drive, Warnervale, was refused under section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
- The panel said the proposal conflicted with Condition 5.14 of DA/1894/2023, including requirements to retain trees and vegetation and use and revegetate the site as a park.
- The panel found the application did not address biodiversity avoidance and minimisation requirements and was inconsistent with RE1 zone objectives.
- Additional concerns included design, privacy, noise, traffic, stormwater, sewer, access and waste servicing.
- The refusal was recorded as unanimous, 4-0, and external referral bodies are to be notified.
Why it matters
- The refusal prevents the childcare proposal from proceeding in its submitted form, with the panel citing vegetation-retention, biodiversity, public-open-space and servicing requirements.