Mod 4 - Extend Trial

The local and national artists supported. Local jobs and tourism it brings to the Northern Rivers is fantastic. Plus as a local I enjoy going to events and taking guests visiting. I find the events are always well organised and the venue suits small to large events very well with good access and transport options.

I, MY STAFF & FAMILY FULLY SUPPORT THE CONTINUATION OF A TRIAL PERIOD & EXTENTION OF PERMITS FOR EVENTS SUCH AS SPLENDOUR, FALLS AND OTHER CULTURAL EVENTS AT THE SITE. AS A VENDOR SPLENDOUR AND FALLS HAVE BEEN FINANCIALLY BENEFICIAL TO MY FAMILY, AS A PLACE OF CULTURAL ENJOYMENT IN A SAFE ENVIRONMENT, WE FEEL IT SHOULD CONTINUE.

Date, 30/03/2017
RE: Exhibition of Modification Request for the Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4
I strongly object to the proposed modification request, MP 09_0028 MOD 4, by North Byron Parklands (Parklands) to extend the current "trial period" by 20 months.
My reasons for objecting are as follows:
The five year trial period is not due to finish until the end of 2017, by which time Parklands will have had five years to monitor its performance, the effectiveness of its management plans and environmental monitoring plans and programs. Similarly, the DOP will have had five years to assess Parklands performance. The proposed extension of the trial is in no way required to gather more information about the suitability of a permanent cultural event site. Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred as documented by Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups, and very occasionally by the Department of Planning. I consider the extension being sought by Parklands purely a means to satisfy its business interest, i.e. to allow the continuation of music festivals already planned to take place beyond the trial period. However, is not the responsibility of the local community and the environment to endure the impacts of an extended trial simply for the financial benefit of a few people who have hedged their bets too soon.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, safety, security, and more. I have personally witnessed:
- plenty of rubbish being left behind (on the ground) by festival goers outside my property at <REDACTED>, at the beach access tracks in South Golden Beach, at the South Golden Beach Community Hall, and at the new North Ocean Shore sports field which is used for parking by some festival goers;
- traffic jams on Brunswick Valley Way and the roundabouts near Yelgun rest area;
- festival goers walking along unprotected roadsides of Brunswick Valley Way from the north and south towards the site;
- long-term illegal camping, antisocial behaviour, and public health risks (urine and faeces in public areas) at the Yelgun rest area which is completely overcrowded at festival times but otherwise provides a fantastic opportunity for interstate travellers to stay overnight;
- numerous illegal fires on South Golden Beach, campers and swags in the dunes along South Golden Beach (leaving the faeces and rubbish behind), and campervans camping along Pacific Esplanade South Golden Beach;
- drunk festival goers queuing for the festival buses in South Golden Beach by standing in the middle of the roadways; and
- festival goers using my own front yard as a toilet!
At a recent community meeting held at South Golden Beach on 4th March 2017, Commander Wayne Starling of the Tweed Byron Local Area Command stated his concern that the number of festival patrons and visitors to the Shire during festivals was limiting the police's capability to carry out their primary objectives, i.e. to reduce risks and to keep people safe. The NSW Police also recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more, the seriousness of which has been increased following the incident at Lorne during the recent new year's festival, and the major flooding that is currently occurring in the Tweed and Byron Shires as I write this letter.
In addition, I am hugely concerned about Parklands environmental compliance, in particular, Parkland's:
- failure to build either a wastewater treatment plant or sewerage treatment plant onsite and insufficient information about existing offsite transportation of human waste.
- lack of independent environmental monitoring.
- failure to carry out sufficient before-impact environmental monitoring which is essential for undertaking any sort of meaningful before-after control-impact (BACI) environmental monitoring.
- insufficient monitoring of how human waste might affect the land and water of the site as well as any downstream impacts (understanding that many festival goers do not use the portaloos supplied, but rather go in the bushes).
I also consider the festivals to be a burden to the rate payers of the Byron Shire. Festivals increase stress on Byron Shire roads, public amenities and natural areas. Council is also responsible for controlling illegal parking and camping in the Shire and has limited resources available to regulate these issues during normal periods, let alone during festival times. The PAC considered it inappropriate to impose section 94 contributions for a time limited trial, and as such, Parklands currently makes no contribution to Council. I strongly consider that any further activity by Parklands (including an extension of the approved trial) should require a Section 94 contribution to Council to assist in the upkeep of the Shire's infrastructure and the protection and maintenance of the natural environment.

Finally, if Parklands wishes to extend its activities at the site, it should do so by lodging a new application with the appropriate determining authority, i.e. Byron Shire Council. An extension from the state government is not require

We once again strongly oppose the current application before Minister for Planning and the Environment regards the increase of patrons and operating times of festivals held at Tweed Valley Way and Jones Road. My wife and I were forced to sell our very much loved property in North Ocean Shores and relocate far from this event site as a result of the oppressive atmosphere hanging over us directly due to this festival site. We were constantly bombarded with unbelievably loud bass music up until 2am while these festivals were in operation, the windows in our home would vibrate and my wife who suffers from migraine headaches was placed under extreme duress! I do not expect this or any other submission opposing this planned increase of patrons or any other application presented to the State Planning Department by this company to have any influence whatsoever on the departments decision as we have absolutely no doubt that there are corrupt members in this department that overrule all such decisions for personal gain.

RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I........ of .............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I........ of .............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I........ of .............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I........ of .............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I........ of .............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I........ of .............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I........ of .............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I........ of .............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name RE; Exhibition of Modification Request
Cultural Events Site, North Byron Parklands
APPLICATION No. MP 09_0028 MOD 4

Date, 27/03/2017

I Margery Perkins........ of 37 robin street, south golden beach NSW 2483.............address


I wish to register my objection to Parklands (PL) being given this modification.
I am objecting because I feel that for PL to be given this modification would be to reward `bad behaviour'.
Numerous breaches of the current consent conditions have occurred.
These breaches have been documented in the minutes of Parklands' Regulatory Working Group, in Parklands' own performance reports, by resident groups (who have done their own monitoring), and very occasionally by the Department of Planning.
Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic, off-site impacts on residents' amenity, and more. Noise has been an ongoing issue. Noise breaches were common early on, but after an increase in the noise limits was allowed (making compliance much easier) breaches still occurred. Also, the NSW Police recently submitted a report on Splendour 2016 to the DOP, raising concerns about on-site safety, emergency evacuation, and more.
Allowing a lengthy extension in the face of so many problems cannot be justified. The proposed extension would reward Parklands for a job NOT well done.
The time has come when the conditions of the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) are adhered to. That is, as set out in the agreement accepted by PL, "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act".
The time has come for PL to become accountable to the local community and to do what is expected from them and to work with the local community that they are part of. They have had the benefit of state government in getting established and to help them find their feet. Five years was the time given and now it's time to begin working in a partnership.
I fervently hope that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.
Yours with respect,


name Margery Perkins

Great for jobs in the region

I support the extension of the Parklands application

Great for music

I support the trial extension

I support it.

Keep Splendour in Byron

Support the extension because it is effing amazeballs!!!!!!!!!! Keep splendour and falls around forever!!!!!

I support

Good for jobs, Music and the tourism in generaly

Good profit for the businesses of Byron Bay.

I support the extension because splendour needs to be held in Byron!!!

Great for tourism

I support it.

revenue

I support the trial extension