Mod 4 - Extend Trial

we believe that the extension should be granted as this is a fantastic event company who fully respect and appreciate the land and grounds at north byron parklands
it is also one of the last areas where festivals are held and to lose this would be a travesty as it brings in a lot of money to byron and surrounding areas

I wish to make the following submission.

I object to any extension being given to Parkland's proposal.

By approaching the state govt to get their Part 3A approval extended, Parklands is pointedly ignoring a condition they'd previously agreed to. Despite the objections of Byron Shire Council and great numbers of residents, the state government imposed the development upon them, and the state is now due to hand back control to council after five years. Local control is essential to keeping this development under control. An extension of state control should not, responsibly, be granted.

Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, Parklands' own performance reports, resident groups, and the Department of Planning have all noted breaches in the consent conditions over the trial period, ie, numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred. Why should this organisation be trusted in light of previous breaches?

Parklands' ongoing issues regarding traffic, on-site amenities, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, ecological monitoring, and etc should be a red flag, demonstrating their unwillingness to honour conditions that have been set.

Given the site's proximity to Billinudgel Nature Reserve and the Jones Road (Marshalls Ridge) Wildlife Corridor, home to koalas and approximately 50 other threatened and endangered species, it's more than apparent that this application is unsuitable.tThis is simply the wrong place for high noise and high traffic outdoor music festivals historically attracting tens of thousands of visitors.

Noise breaches were common in the early stages of this event. Even after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance easier), breaches have continued to occur, demonstrating Parklands disinterest in accommodating such limits and guidelines.

Recently, a NSW Police report on Splendour 2016 was submitted to the DOP. This report raised concerns pertaining to on-site safety, emergency evacuation, traffic congestion and more. That report concluded that no further festivals be held there until the issue they raise are addressed.

Parklands should have been working with Byron and Tweed Councils to reduce the problems and meet the expectations of local residents from the outset. that hasn't been done, so allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems seems completely unwarranted. They have already had five years in which to monitor their operations. The DOP has also had five years to assess their performance. An additional 20 months of monitoring, as they claim this extension would allow, seems a luxury they don't deserve, and one which only prologs the discontent already felt by concerned and impacted residents and Council, especially given the number of breaches and ongoing issues resulting from Parklands' presence. .

Parklands is now pleading 'unfair' with their claims that Falls 2017 cannot proceed and that there plans for Splendour '18 and Falls '18, and Splendour '19 are too far progressed to cancel, yet they were aware at the time or organising that their approval was for only a five year period. The implication that the festival business will fail if this extension is not granted belies their intimate knowledge since 2012 that their approval would expire at the end of 2017.

I submit that Parklands' presence in the area has caused ongoing and unnecessary stress to residents and that any further extension of their activities will only increase the risk of potential harm to vulnerable species. That they have not yet ironed out issues re traffic congestion, along with their seeming inability to meet safety and emergency requirements, would suggest that Parklands does not honour its agreements nor meet its responsibilities.

On this basis, I object to their request for an extension of trial period! They've had their trial, and have not met conditions set out in the initial application agreement.

I support it

I am very much against the 20-month extension that North Byron Parklands is asking for. They were given a five-year trial with the clear understanding that at the end of the five years our local council would become the consent authority. They should be held to that condition! As a local resident, I have had no voice in how the festivals are being operated or how their performance is being evaluated, and our council hasn't either. All judgments and decisions are made in Sydney, almost as far away from the festivals as you can get. I want the minister to say NO to this extension. Let our local council take over, as was directed by the original PAC approval. At least then we will have Council to complain to, and we can insist that our elected officials look after our interests.

I didn't want the festivals to begin with, and I want them even less now that I've had to live with them for almost five years. I do not want them to get this extension, either. There have been a lot of problems with the festivals to date. Traffic and noise and undetermined effects on the wildlife in the nature reserve right next to the site. And I am also concerned about the water and sewage issues that have not been resolved even though Parklands says they are. I know that our council wrote to you in January to point out the issues about those critical elements of infrastructure. So for Parklands to say it's all been sorted is not to be believed. I want our local council to be the ones giving consent (or not) to this development, as they're supposed to do according to the approval the PAC gave them five years ago. Give us back our local control!

The Splendour in the Grass Festival is beneficial to the entire shire. Reasons include:
- Added revenues to council, local small business, tourism.
- An alternative way to see the landscape within this part of the shire.
- The ability to maintain the surrounding areas with the right eco management.

Trevor Mead Quality Meats strongly supports the extension of the trial period for North Byron Parklands. As a longstanding business in Byron Bay we have experienced positive results from events that have been held at North Byron Parklands. The Splendour festival comes at a very quiet time in our business cycle and increases our turnover at a crucial point allowing us to maintain our staff levels year round. North Byron Parklands actively encourages food stalls to source produce locally. The atmosphere in town during festivals is always happy and relaxed and festival goers are eager to frequent local businesses and happy to sped their money locally. North Byron Parklands has been very generous locally in supporting fundraising. Due to a donation of tickets to festival for our local daycare, we raised over $6000 for equipment. Should the extension be rejected, I am sure that there will be many local businesses that will be severely financially impacted and the effect of this will be a reduction in employment locally.

I strongly support the extension of North Byron Parklands trial period. I have personally seen very positive outcomes to the Byron Area from the festivals that have been held at North Byron Parklands. Financially for businesses, employment for locals, fundraising for charities to name just a few. I personally attended a charity event that raised money at North Byron Parklands for awareness and support of mental health in the Byron Shire. Please continue to support North Byron Parklands.

I strongly support the extension of the trial period for North Byron Parklands. The positive effects to the community that occur due to the festivals held on this site are many and include: employment opportunities locally, increased turnover for local businesses and charitable support from North Byron Parklands to numerous local groups and causes.

I wish to strongly object to this application. The current use of this site should never have been approved in the first place as it is across a valuable wildlife corridor and adjacent to a National Park, the environmental damage already done must be enormous.
The impact on residents is unacceptable. The noise prevents nearby residents from going about their day-to-day lives and can be heard from many kms away. The increased traffic makes the roads at times almost impassable and people find it difficult to access the nearby town of Brunswick Heads and impossible to park; even Byron Bay's already existing traffic problem is much exacerbated.
Drug-taking at these events is notorious and Byron Hospital receives many emergencies during concert times; as the site is well away from services young people's lives are being put at stake.
I believe this site should never have been used as it is and strongly oppose any extension to the trial period.

I support

As a local resident I strongly oppose further increase of amount of patrons to these festivals and frequency of them. They attract too many inconsiderate and rude people in far too large numbers for our area. The residents are unfairly impacted as well as wildlife. Please do not allow them to increase.

Byron Shire have festivals coming out of our ears. Enough already! We the residents and ratepayers deserve some consideration. We ask that you reject the extension of the trial period.

he Festivals have been running on a trial consent for the last 5 years. This is due to expire in December. North Byron Parklands wants to extend this permission for another 20 months but they have had trouble complying with the terms of their current consent and have shown questionable management skills, such as allowing internal traffic jams so bad that it has taken ticket-holders many hours to get off site. Besides asking for an extension, they are seeking planning permission from the state government to increase the number of festivals on the site and the number of people attending each day. This is totally unfair to the 30,000 residents of Byron Shire. We do not have the infrastructure for the huge amount of people attending besides the impact on the environment these festivals have. Our rates are going up every year in order to sustain the infrastructure for the festivals(ie roads sewerage). Enough is enough!!!

Splendour is an extremely important event for a myriad of valuable cultural and social reasons. Not only is the economic benefit to the regional empirical, so too is the incredible publicity it brings to such a tiny town. From a little sleepy whaling town, to one the the greatest music festivals in the world.... AMAZING!!

As a local resident I am against the submission to extend the number of festivals & the size of the festivals. We are already experiencing too many negative impacts on our communities and our environment from large festivals at the North Byron Parklands.

I am opposed to the proposal for more events and greater numbers of tickets.

The events have failed to meet their license requirements, many complaints of excess noise and general disturbance of the amenity of nearby neighborhoods. The community cannot, and should not be expected to deal with this.

The operators have been NON COMPLIANT over the past 5 years. They do not deserve to have an extension to the current trial.

The impacts on the sensitive location are under valued. You can plant trees, but you cannot reduce the stress on local wildlife when lights, noise and human activity levels are so extreme.

Our shire cannot deal with the proposed numbers of visitors the expanded festival license proposes. 100,000 people over a 4 day event is just ridiculous!

We are a rural community, and people have purchased homes here to live a rich life enjoying natural surrounds, community and peace. Please consider their interests first and foremost.

Dear sirs and madams,
firstly, since most all of the revenue from these festivals leaves the shire, one must ask oneself, what are the benefits, IF ANY, of these festivals in the first place, let alone the idea of expanding this horrible policy of permission to take-whilst-giving-nothing, which results in only headaches for residents.

that this proposal is being considered at all is beyond belief. the effects of these festivals at their current levels is already intolerable for a large portion of the local residents, as if the commercial activities if a few non-residents takes priority over the amenity of the many locals whose environment is taken hostage with little or no regard on the effect to the "everyday life" that disappears entirely over the days of money making out at the parklands.

our infrastructure can not take it! our shire crumbles as the festival managers walk away with bundles of cash ... not spent in the towns that are over-run, but spent at the festival itself where it is difficult to come and go, so punters stay on site, while highway exits are closed, the towns commercial activity is quiet, and the roads and amenity of the area is destroyed.

the enormously increased traffic, the illegal camping which leads to left over rubbish, look-outs and parking places turned into toilets is appalling.

the antisocial behaviour in our towns and residential neighbourhoods is angering and scary.

not to mention the destruction of a cherished wildlife corridor.

surely these and many other reasons make it clear that this direction is not the direction ratepayers would choose given the choice! i am more than confidant that if the government were to publicise this opportunity to comment more widely the vast majority will feel the same.

I fully support the music festivals in this shire. They are fun, exciting and they bring a lot of money to the local economy. Shame a bunch of old has beens want to stop everything. Perhaps they want to sleep their lives away.

The economic impact document which has been supplied is inherently flawed at all possible levels, ranging from the methodology used to determine calculations, assumptions (and lack of), and transparent reasoning.
I am highly disappointed that this has been allowed to bypass discussion at a public debate at local council level and as a tax payer I formally request that a public meeting is held so that the truth of the economic impact of this proposal can be discussed as it should be in a functioning democracy.