Mod 3 - Noise, Events & Condition Changes

I object to the noise limit amendment in this application. I am a resident of Yelgun and already find the noise levels of events at North Byron Parklands to be disruptive and disturbing to myself and my neighbours and feel that an increase in noise levels would unfairly impact on the local residents and wildlife.

My comments relate to the changed noise criteria only, I do not have an issue with additional, low key events to be held on the site.

The application to change the trial guidelines half way through the trial is an admission that the trial is a failure.

Already, residents are affected by noise during this event. I would assume that the noise thresholds were set to somehow defined noise levels that the community would be tolerably affected.

That the proponent now wants to increase the trial noise guidelines so they can "comply" is simply further evidence that the trial has failed and the approval should be revoked.

The location was never appropriate due to its proximity to communities, rural properties and a nature reserve, as well as the traffic issues. The approved festival types on this site should be defined in such a way that prevents inappropriate festival types at this location.

I consider the DA application by the North Byron Parklands group inappropriate.

It was not acceptable by the DoP to grant higher sound levels for the 5 year trial period - so I ask -what has changed to make an increase in sound acceptable?

Against huge community opposition NBP was granted a 5 year trial. This NBP group have NOT been able to meet the terms of that 5 year DA contract in relation to noise. The sound from the festival site is TOO LOUD and I consider the trial to have FAILED

In my opinion it would be a violation to the community if NBP group are granted an increase in the sound levels.
My home is located 2 kilometres from the Parklands Festival site in North Ocean Shores and this is a residential area. I am a local resident and have lived here for over 20 years. Over the past festivals, my family [and my neighbours] have been highly disturbed by the noise coming from the festival site. This Parklands festival site is simply TOO LOUD for a residential area. The sound levels need to be LOWERED. I have experienced the windows of my house rattling with the noise and at times in the evening, being unable to hear my television. The sounds starts affecting the local residents here from the early afternoon, then increasing becomes louder throughout each festival day and becoming increasingly unbearable as each evening progresses. This continues each day of each festival. I cannot comprehend why the NBP group would ask to raise the level of the music, as already the sound levels coming from the festival site is DISRUPTIVE and DISTRESSING for the many nearby local residents. The current sound level is a VIOLATION to the community that lives here.

If the NBP group cannot lower the sound and the impact this makes on the many surrounding residents, then clearly the 5 year trial is a FAILURE and they need to re-locate to a more suitable location for them.

The Blues Festival [also held in this area] successfully operates with lower sound levels. If the Parkland group feel they are not able to operate at a lower sound level, then they need to go somewhere more appropriate for them.

Unlike the other festivals, the sound at the Falls Festival in 2014 was more contained on site, demonstrating that it is clearly possible that NBP group can operate successfully with a lower sound disturbance for the nearby residential community

NBP group claim they cannot operate under current noise constrains and yet each and every festival they have run on this site sells out completely, in a matter of hours of being on sale. How can their claim that they cannot operate be true?
NBP group have made an unreasonable request to raise sound levels - as the sound level is already UNBEARABLE and TOO LOUD for the local community who live here.

It is critical that you REJECT the proposed increase in allowable dBA noise levels

The Complaints Hotline

The complaints hotline is frustrating as it is quite often not answering or is out of action. Also on several occasions when I have managed to get through it was usually an unsatisfactory experience with the operator being uniformed and disrespectful of the local community concerns.
Therefore the number of registered complaints via the NBP complaints hotline are much lower than the actual complaints in the affected community
This hotline would be more accurate and beneficial if it was operated by an independent group with fully informed staff.

The complaints hotline is ineffectual and this needs to corrected during this 5 year trial period

Holding non-music events

It is not clear what non music events NBP group are considering. The Parklands group have a bad track record. The sounds levels are TOO LOUD. It needs to be noted, (REDACTED TEXT). I question the NBP group Duty of Care towards their patrons. NBP group have been unable to manage with what they have been granted, it would to be irresponsible to grant them more events and give them an increase to what they are already holding.

It is critical that you REJECT the proposed increase in non-music events on the Parklands site

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on: Exhibition of Mod (MP09_0028 MOD 3) - Cultural Events Site Nth Byron Parklands, Yelgun.

This is a response from the New South Wales Department of Trade and Investment - Geological Survey of New South Wales (GSNSW).

GSNSW has no resource issues to raise regarding the above matter.

I am concerned by Parklands request for the increase in noise levels at the Yelgun site.

I am at a loss to understand why the consent conditions can be changed during the trial period. The idea of a trial is to assess the operation under a prescribed set of conditions. With added variables, it will be difficult to make a clear-cut assessment.

The idea of the trial period was that Parklands had to demonstrate their willingness and ability to conform to guidelines set by the PAC. Clearly this application suggests they are neither willing nor able to do so.

The existing noise levels have already been reported as intrusive by surrounding community, so if the allowed dB levels were to be changed, it would seem the only option would be to reduce, not increase the levels.

The site is unsuitable for loud concerts. The only reason Parklands is operating is to make money. This is a poor reason to give them priority over the living amenity of a community.

If the current site can't operate to suit the needs of Parklands they should find a more suitable site.

The proposed modifications do not trigger involvement from Fisheries NSW.

I object to the proposed modifications of the Parklands DA. The previous events have already been too loud, it is not okay to increase the noise limits while there are so many complaints lodged formally by the community during events. The situation is not that there are no complaints and the noise limits are being exceeded, there are many complaints and to consider increasing the noise limit while this is the case is not fair to the community.

Dear Planning Department,

I have a business that produces noise, if neighbours complain about it, I have to respond to those complaints and adjust the noise I am making so as not to impact on their lives, I am not allowed to simply get Council to increase the noise limit because I find it hard to conduct my business without it. Please require Parklands to play on the same "level playing field" that the rest of us have to in our community. Please do NOT allow increase to the noise limits allowable for events.

Dear Sir/Madam

I wish to make a submission in favour of the proposed Modification Request for the Cultural Events Site at Yelgun NSW. I approve the request to modify noise criteria to include limits for lower frequency sound emissions from events; provide for small community, non music focused events; and amend minor administrative issues.

North Byron Parklands have been consistently working on improvements to their site and in meeting the requests of the local community on traffic, sound etc. They provide much needed employment in the area.

I support the venue and look forward to other events that can be held on the site.

I understand submissions close on Monday 22nd June 2015. Could you please acknowledge that you have received my submission.

I do not give permission for my name to be published on your website.

Dear Sir/Madam

I wish to make a submission in favour of the proposed Modification Request for the Cultural Events Site at Yelgun NSW. I approve the request to modify noise criteria to include limits for lower frequency sound emissions from events; provide for small community, non music focused events; and amend minor administrative issues.

North Byron Parklands have been consistently working on improvements to their site and in meeting the requests of the local community on traffic, sound etc. They provide much needed employment in the area.

I support the venue and look forward to other events that can be held on the site.

I understand submissions close on Monday 22nd June 2015. Could you please acknowledge that you have received my submission.
I do not give permission for my name to be published on your website.

Dear Mr Stokes,

I have been personally effected by three of the last four events at the Parklands site. The noise in my home with the windows and doors closed was at a level where I could hear the announcers making announcements, I could hear the crowd roar and the melody of the music. It is not just the bass that is disturbing. If my home is 7kms from the site and people can still be effected like this for 4 - 5 consecutive days, how can it be okay to then apply to INCREASE the noise.

The increase of 20 dBA applied for is an increase of 2 to the power of 7, so 128 times more power used to project the sound. This will result in the experience of a four fold increase in noise. This is more than the Bluesfest is allowed.

Most events at different locations get only one or two complaints, the last Splendour event had 139, the first had 73. Please do not allow this increase in noise limits.

I object to the new submission forSlendour in the Grass and other festivals to increase noise levels
A trial process is going on and no changes should be allowed during the trial that increase the levels set by the trial
By its own admission , the sound levels are a failure and Slendour want to increase them and make life evem more unpleasant for we the residents who have already had to endure years of this trial
The environment is continually at risk as the many 1000's of people who flock to the event in our small community ,over flow and to our beaches as it is too unpleasant at the site. Now the organizers want to increase sound levels and put more strain on our native animals
There are already plenty of sites available for festivals in the area ..it is only the greed of the organizers that is stopping co operation to use one site rather than expose our small area to all the problems that this festival continues to bring
If the organizers are already saying they cannot keep noise levels at a safe level themselves , then it is a failed site. Fines will not deter these mega rich groups to do the right thing in our community

Imagine if this was happening in your area...would this be allowed if you lived here..?

I object to the increase in noise limits proposed for events at the Splendour in the Grass site. Blesfest has recently applied for a permanent approval for an outdoor music festival site and they have only applied for a limit of 55dBA. Why should Splendour be allowed to have 65dBA? The background noise in this area is very low. Splendour knew that when they decided to locate their festival site here, they need to minimise their noise emanating from the site, not maximise the noise. I am an older resident and I know many of my friends in the area found the noise very intrusive in their homes.

As a resident of Wooyung I have found the noise levels from the site objectionable. Parklands describes the current limits as "unworkable." However, this does not mean the limits should be raised. In fact, to protect residents from disturbance, the noise limits should be lowered. An appropriate response to this problem would be to improve the monitoring and management of the noise, not to increase the noise limits.

Splendour is a great festival that would be equally as good no matter where it is held. There is no need for it to be held in a wildlife corridor where it can affect animals and their habitats. The noise level does not need to be increased as this is what can harm these animals. The festival will be awesome with the noise levels kept the same. It would be even better if it wasn't affecting the wildlife and was held in an area like where bluesfest is held.

After attending the festival for the first time last year I thought it was spectacular, the music was great, the vibes were brilliant and I enjoyed myself. However, once I was told of the full story behind where Splendour is now held, I felt bad for attending and contributing to the disturbance of such a precious wildlife corridor and a beloved indigenous land. I am in my twenties and feel it a responsibility of our generation to maintain the paradise of our natural environment. As a supporter of the beautiful nature and wildlife surrounding our area, I would hate to see it destroyed merely for something such as music, which can be enjoyed in many other areas which wouldn't have such detrimental effects.

Please consider the opinions of festival goers, such as me, who would in fact enjoy a change of scenery for Splendour and not have to feel so bad whilst partying away for 3 days!

I object to the application by North Byron Bay Parklands to increase noise and activities at the Yelgun site next to the Tyagarah Nature Reserve.

This event should not be held next to over 50 Threatened species let alone increasing negative impacts. The North Byron Bay Parklands site has already made statements geared towards painting a picture to favour the festival. There is no information that shows the negative impacts of this event on the community and the Tyagarah Nature Reserve.

The North Byron Bay Parklands is currently under trial and they should not be allowed to change the conditions of the original approval until a proper independent assessment can be done. Any submissions done through the North Byron Bay Parklands website should be considered to be from concert goers and supporters that probably do not know the impact to the threatened species in the Tyagarah Nature Reserve or the community members that are opposed to this intrusive event.

The event has breached the noise requirements every year and should not be allowed to increase the noise impacts and create more events that will have negative impacts on the Tyagarah Nature Reserve that is meant to protect Threatened Species.

Regards,

I refer to your email below requesting comments from Tweed Shire Council in relation to the proposed modifications to the approval for Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands, Yelgun (MP09_0028 MOD 3).

From a planning and engineering perspective, no issues are raised.

The following comments are raised by Council's Environmental Health Unit:

PART B - Definitions

No objections are raised to the proposed changes to the definitions of large, medium and small trial event.

No objection to the addition of the definition of small community event, however due to the matter of outdoor cinema events having amplified sound inclusive of low frequency element, it is recommended that these events be included within the small trial event.

PART C - Conditions that apply to the trial

Tweed Shire Council has concerns with regard to the proposed removal of C16 (1).

During the trial period it is not considered appropriate to remove the requirement to consider background noise levels. The Review of Noise Limits FINAL report prepared by Air Noise Environment dated April 2015 has not presented the background noise data, as conditionally required, in a format as stipulated within the NSW Industry Noise Policy across the 3 periods: day, evening and night. An understanding of the background vs exposure levels will aid in understanding the level of disturbance experienced by the community in relation to background levels. The introduction of considering low frequency monitoring would also aid in the understanding of comparisons.

Sleep disturbance in particular is considered an issue where the level of exposure, measured LA1, 1 min, is 15 dB(A) above background, LA90, 15 min, measured outside of the bedroom window.

Concern is also raised with regard to the proposed amendment of C16 (2).

The report provided does not present proposed limits in comparison of complaints received and details of the noise exposure levels that triggered the complaints. Would it be that the proposed limits are below the noise exposure experienced that trigger complaints?

There is also very little commentary on the potential for sleep disturbance and the noise exposure limits set in consideration of the duration of the event. People exposed to low-level noise that is audible, unwanted, uncontrollable, unpleasant in character and if the home provides no refuge from it have the potential to become highly stressed. Sleep arousal is also a function of both noise level and the duration of the noise.

Note: It is generally agreed speech interference levels starts at around 50 dB(A) for octave bands centred on the main frequencies 500 Hz, 1 kHz and 2 kHz. For normal speech communications at a distance of approximately 1 m, a background noise of no more than 45 dB(A) is preferable, 55 dB(A) is just acceptable and 65 dB(A) will require extra vocal effect to be understood.

The limits proposed, if deemed adequate for the remainder of the trial period, should be "and" not "or" in 3(a) and (b) with the time period of measurement being 15mins, not 10mins, in line with standard practise.

Noise
1) There is no capacity in the existing consent for a five year Trial to increase decibel levels (there is capacity to reduce noise levels)
2) Every event has breached its noise level consent
3) The up to 10 km noise pollution spill identifies that the Trial development has unequivocally demonstrated that a) the compliance with the Consent has completely failed at every event, and b) that the development is incompatible with existing Consents for all neighbouring properties within 10 km of the Trial development site.
4) Endemic failure of noise management within the Trial Consent by the developers, and endemic failure of Compliance action by the DoP (except when neighbours are forced to spent $15,000 of their own money to prove breaches) gives no basis to increase decibel levels, but gives every basis to declare the Trial failed and the Trial consent invalid.


Independent Certifiers
1) There are no Certification Reports identifying that all identified parameters of the Trial development Consent has been complied with.
2)There have been no Certification Reports identifying the breaches in regard to Aboriginal Heritage and the Bora Ring.
3)There have been no certification Reports Identifying the breaches of failure to fence off and prevent entry to "Protected Forest Blocks",
4) There have been no Reports on the damage to Aboriginal Heratige and damage and faecal contamination to Protected Forest Blocks.
5)DoP staff have completely breached their requirements of compliance by not even being aware of Certification requirements regarding a)the Health and Safety of staff and patrons in every 'bump in and bump out' periods, b) Aboriginal Heritage, and c)Environmental protection
6) DoP staff have been unable to even identify the exact Certifyers, in a State system of Certification that states Certification Transparency at its core.
7) DoP has corresponded with Byron Shire Council telling the Council Compliance Section that they cannot enter the site to get evidence of the endemic and ongoing breaches of Consent
8) DoP staff have improperly identified Consent breaches such as Litter in waterways, gross site rubbish pollution, overflowing sewerage across the site, overflowing grey water, faecal contamination of forest blocks etc. as 'minor' breaches involving no compliance action, in a complete corruption of existing standards of development compliance

Additional Events
1) A 5 year 'Trial' can only be viewed as a propaganda farce if further consents for additional events are added to the 5 year Trial Consent
2)The developers have breached consent at every event and have not demonstrated that they have any capacity to manage the existing events and should not be given consent for any further events.
3) The developers have failed to hold any small 10,000 person music events permissible and proposed under the existing Trial Consent. I allege that the reason is because they cant comply with the Trial parameters of Consent for even a small music event, and as such are now trying a Trojan Horse of 'small community events' to get some sort of consent that they can amend and expand to their usual non compliance in Music events (and all sport days use PA's that are heard for Km's away)

Ecology
The most recent accredited study on the ecology by Stamford University USA, has identified that we are now in the 6th Mass Extinction of the earths species, and the earths environmental collapse includes the probable extinction of the Human Species. As this site is in the area of NSW's highest biodiversity, containing more species and more densely packed species of plants and animals than anywhere else in this state, (REDACTED). The DoP has failed to even pursue compliance within the existing farce of development consent, or compliance within development law, (REDACTED).

The project was approved as a trial for 5 years. Noise leakage into nature reserve and residential areas was one of the significant issues associated with the contentious proposal. If the proponent is failing to keep it within the limits specified for this location , then the trial is a failure, and their approval for same should be revoked.
Or very least , not renewed at the end of the trial period , if they fail to operate within approved guidelines. The site is an ecologically significant wildlife corridor. That was taken into account in the approval process . Limiting offensive industrial noise and other disturbances were a major cause for concern to those living near the site and those who care for it's natural values. A noise limit appropriate for Sydney is not appropriate here. No further events should be allowed until the trial period of current approval is exhausted and studies presented about it's current impacts. The proposal should never have been approved and should not be allowed to continue. I am still a property owner in Yelgun though I moved 300 ks away to escape it. I feel for those not as fortunate. I fear the entire natural value and financial value of the area is being severely degraded by this greed machine.