Bendigo councillors refuse ‘controversial’ Guzman y Gomez restaurant proposed to replace Pizza Hut on Violet St
Bendigo councillors have refused a “controversial” Mexican fast food restaurant planned to be built next to furious Violet St residents. See why.
Bendigo
Don't miss out on the headlines from Bendigo. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Bendigo councillors have refused a “controversial” Mexican fast food restaurant.
At Monday night’s Bendigo council meeting, councillors shot down the move to replace the old Pizza Hut on the corner of High St and Violet St with a Guzman y Gomez Mexican fast-food chain due to likely traffic congestion and insufficient parking that would have terrorised nearby residents.
Residents of Violet St raised the alarm after it was revealed the developer wanted to open the restaurant and drive through with only 11 parking spaces for a restaurant of up to 60 patrons, while council required at least 18 parking spaces.
Violet St residents said the addition of a drive through to the site would see traffic congestion backed out into their street, blocking their driveways, and insufficient on-street parking would see the street dangerously overcrowded.
However, Mayor Andrea Metcalf said “community opposition alone is not grounds to refuse a controversial proposal”, supporting the development.
Cr Julie Sloan moved to approve the development saying the plan was “acceptable” despite the deficient parking and likely impact to resident’s amenity - subject to 27 conditions including signage to “discourage” drive through patrons queuing across Violet St residents’ driveways.
“It will reactivate a tired and vacant block … and support establishment of new businesses to meet community needs,” she said.
Cr Margaret O’Rourke said the fast-food joint “ticked most of the boxes” and would bring “revitalisation to a site that has been derelict on our city doorstep”.
“Residents I suspect have gotten used to the fact that this corner has not being occupied,” she said.
“Living in or close to a commercial zone has its limitations ... and the rub this causes - which will continue.”
However, Deputy Mayor Matthew Evans opposed the plan, pointing out the on-street parking was barely available and the deficient on-site parking and increased traffic congestion from the drive through would have a “flow on effect”.
“There’s no doubt that this sort of business will generate more traffic,” he said.
Cr Evans said the drive through traffic would cause amenity impact to homes less than 30 meters away with “tooting, beeping and car engines”.
“All of the issues are interlinked,” he said.
“It’s going to cause a broader problem.”
Cr Jennifer Alden also opposed the proposed plans, saying they raised more “questions and concerns” for residents that it answered and it was “unfortunate” the developer didn’t hold any consultation with affected residents.
“I believe it’s a case of back to the drawing board.”
All councillors present voted to refuse the developers plans to build the restaurant except Crs Julie Sloan, Margaret O’Rourke and Mayor Andrea Metcalf.
Cr David Fagg was absent after declaring a conflict of interest, having a personal relationship with two of the objectors.
‘We’re desperate’: Violet St residents oppose new Bendigo Guzman y Gomez
Jan 28: Bendigo residents are furious at a developer’s plan to build a new Mexican fast food restaurant they say will cause “bedlam” on their street.
A developer has proposed turning the old Pizza Hut into a Guzman y Gomez Mexican fast-food restaurant with a drive through and a liquor licence on the corner of High St and Violet St just outside Bendigo’s CBD.
Violet St residents said they were “devastated” and “incredulous” after their concerns fell on deaf ears, with the council’s planning staff recommending the project be approved.
Resident Jennifer Campbell raised concerns about a loss of privacy from car headlights and onsite lights pointing into people’s homes, while Cindy Smith said the noise from people ordering in the drive through about 30m away from their homes was unacceptable.
The proposed operating hours of 6am to 2am, have nearby residents furious that the amenity of their “otherwise quiet neighbourhood” would be “sacrificed” by “anti-social behaviour”, with slamming car doors, screeching tyres, and loud talking from people in the drive through and “congregating” in the car park.
“As of November 7, it is no longer illegal to be drunk in a public place in Victoria, removing any prospect of any drunken patrons being removed from the vicinity, who may have turned up looking for a late night snack,” Violet St resident Michael Rhode said.
But what has residents most alarmed is the impact of the increased traffic will have, making it difficult for residents to access their homes and increase danger on the “narrow, congested” street.
Mr Rhode said if the council approved the drive through and the parking exemption, they would see cars queued out into their street, blocking their driveways.
“The cars are going to queue back over our driveways and we’re going to be unable to get into our properties,” he said.
Mr Rhode said traffic from The National Hotel just across the road already saw patrons taking up what little on-street parking was available.
“The proposal is to funnel up to 120 cars an hour into (Violet St); it is already bedlam at meal times,” he said.
“Violet St north of the development is a free for all during (peak) meal times — it’s dodgem cars between the parked cars and oncoming traffic.”
The restaurant would provide seating for up to 60 patrons. Under the council’s planning scheme at least 18 parking spots would be required.
The developer is trying to get approval with only 11 spaces on site, leaving a shortfall of seven, which council planning staff support.
The old Pizza Hut operated with 25 parking spaces and no drive through, Violet St residents said.
The council’s planning staff said the proposal being “deficient” in required parking bays was “acceptable” and would be “balanced” by the “benefits” of approving the project.
“The shortfall of seven spaces during the anticipated peak evening periods on weekdays is likely to be found within the surrounding streets. This demand for on street parking is not likely to result in unreasonable amenity impacts on the surrounding area,” council staff said.
“A number of objections relate to traffic impacts and raise concerns about existing traffic issues within Violet Street, largely stemming from a high demand for on street parking.
“Concerns about how existing traffic problems in the street network should be resolved are outside the scope of this application.”
In response to council staff’s “dismissal” of residents’ concerns, Mr Rhode said the assurances by town planners to council staff were “smoke and mirrors” and “half truths” to “justify developments that are well outside the policy guidelines”.
Councillors will vote on the development at Monday night’s council night.