Granville’s proposed 40-place child care centre refused over heritage and excavation risks

A proposed 40-place child care centre at 9 Daniel Street, Granville, has been refused after the Cumberland Local Planning Panel found unresolved heritage impacts and insufficient detail about excavation and basement construction.

Development Application 2026/0064 proposed a two-storey centre above basement parking, along with the demolition of rear additions and outbuildings, tree removal, landscaping and stormwater works. It also included an illuminated business identification sign and front fence.

The existing heritage-listed building was to be retained, repaired, refurbished and adaptively reused for ancillary rooms for the child care facility.

The panel said the application had not addressed recommendations in the Heritage Impact Assessment peer review prepared by Nimbus Architecture and Herr[i]age, and updated on 26 June 2026. Amended drawings and supporting information were required before the heritage requirements in clause 5.10 of the Cumberland LEP 2021 could be satisfied.

The panel also found the construction methodology lacked sufficient detail and was not clearly informed by site-specific geotechnical and structural engineering reports. It did not adequately show how adjoining heritage items at 7 and 11 Daniel Street would be protected from excavation and basement construction near the lot boundary.

A further geotechnical report prepared with a heritage professional was required to assess whether the excavation and other works would adversely affect those adjoining heritage items.

The panel also refused a requested deferred commencement condition for a stormwater easement. It said the requirements of clause 6.4 of the Cumberland LEP 2021 had not been met because written evidence that the affected property owners had agreed in principle to the easement had not been provided.

The proposed child care places, parking arrangement and associated building works will not proceed under the application. A revised proposal would need to address the heritage peer review, provide more detailed engineering and construction information, and resolve the stormwater easement issue before consent could be considered.

Heather Warton, Heather Irish, Dennis Loether and Michael Northey supported the refusal, with no votes against. People who lodged submissions were to be notified of the determination.