RE: SUPPORT for extension of trial period North Byron Parklands

Burringbar is around 10 kilometres from the Parklands site, as a business owner in Burringbar, we anticipate more local businesses will emerge to service a growing demand for tourists, including cafes, restaurants and small scale accommodation.

Having the North Byron Parklands in such close proximity to our village of Burringbar, we recognise the positive contribution the Parklands management and festival organisers have made to the surrounding community over the past several years.


Some of the possible beneficial outcomes that could eventuate from permanency:

* Development of more eco-friendly accommodation, cultural and nature based activities in the hinterland areas
* Bus route extension along Tweed Valley Way through Mooball-Burringbar-Stokers Siding-Murwillumbah during festival weeks
* Potential reason to extend MRT line to Tweed hinterland villages
* Use of Parklands by local community groups, not for profits and schools for community events outside of festival weeks
* Parklands site has had substantial ecological rehabilitation of habitat
* Increased trade during festival weeks
* Investment in local area youth development and employment
* The opportunity for community/not for profits to have fundraising capacity
* Employment at the festivals of local youth
* The promotion of all our villages in appropriate marketing initiatives
* Add to economic sustainability for the rural villages
* Augment regional hinterland tourism
* Extend visitor stay
* Provide jobs, new businesses can be created
while existing businesses will have the opportunity to grow
* workplace training in:
o tourism
o construction
o engineering
o environmental science
o cultural history and a host of other disciplines


Yours sincerely,

Eva Heath
Heath's Old Wares & Collectables
19-21 Broadway
Burringbar NSW 2483
Email to: [email protected]

In response to the request by North Byron Parklands - Trial Period Extension Modification Environmental Assessment.

Tweed Byron Local Area Command have reviewed the submission and the only issue that police raise is that the number of events and maximum permitted patrons remain at current levels. This being 3 trial events per year. 1 large 35000 maximum patrons per event day, 1 medium 25000 patrons and one small event 15000 patrons.

The trial period for the festival site should not be extended as they have not complied with conditions and the festivals are currently having a very negative impact on the Byron Shire. The Shire does not have the infrastructure to cope with such an enormous influx of festival goers. The Shire's access roads have unacceptable added road congestion making it impossible for local commuters to estinmate the time it will take them to travel to work or take their children to schools., The festivals have a very negative impact on surrounding properties and towns from the volume of noise, the festival imposes a negative impact on the environment, on both habitat and wildlife,. I do not believe the site is safe for so many people in attendance. In case of emergency there would be no hope of a swift evacuation. Travel to hospital would be impossible due to road congestion. The extra funds coming into the Shire from the mostly young festival goers are greatly off-set by the enormous expenses incurred to manage the impact on the towns, the rubbish and the negative impact on the town services. The site itself may be cleaned up however the streets of our towns are strewn with beer cans, bottles and rubbish, and the bins around town are either ignored or overflowing.. The public toilets and community facilities cannot cope with the enormous influx of festival goers. It is a money-making operation for the promoters BUT not good economy for the Shire -- the economic benefits to the Shire do not outweigh the negatives. Please do not extend the trial period....

Brunswick Heads Progress Association
PO Box 168
Brunswick Heads NSW 2483
[email protected]

April 26, 2017

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

The Association is hereby registering its objection to Parklands being granted this modification.

The Association objects to this modification for the following reasons:

1. Parklands have breached the current consent conditions on numerous occasions. This has been documented by residents groups and the Department of Planning.
2. Parklands has had ongoing problems with traffic and off-site impacts on residents' amenity. Of particular concern is the noise impact. Breaches have still occurred regularly despite the original conditions being modified, making compliance much easier.
3. On-site safety and emergency evacuation are concerns identified by NSW Police. Recent flooding of the site highlighted its unsuitability as a festival venue because of access problems if evacuation of the site is necessary.
4. Under the Planning and Assessment Commission agreement it is clearly stated that "outdoor events following the trial period will require approval from the Council under part 4 of the EP&A Act". There are no compelling reasons why this procedure that should be followed.

The failure of Parklands to satisfactorily monitor the events at the site is either an indictment of their ability and performance or a deliberate attempt to avoid facing Byron Shire Council as the appropriate controlling body. A lengthy extension cannot be justified.

For the community to have trust in government, which is ultimately responsible and meant to represent electors, laws rules and agreements need to be honoured. It is an undermining of our democracy if commercial interests like Parklands are allowed to dishonor such agreements.

The Association hopes that you will stand by the PAC conditions of the original conditions of PL approval and deny this modification.

Yours faithfully,

John Dunn
President

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

26 April 2017

I oppose Parklands request for a modification to its operations at Yelgun.

In its agreement with the PAC (Planning Assessment Commission) Parklands were given five years to operate before it had to seek approval from the local council. This was a gift that the operators have had the full benefit of. Now the time has come for Parklands to follow procedure and the agreement which was so favourable to it.

If Parklands don't have their act together (and they still have nine months to do so) there is no reason to grant them more time. Surely five years is time enough. Either they are incompetent or are playing games to avoid having to submit to Council.

Parklands are attempting to avoid the conditions that they freely entered into. It is an unbelievable attempt to thwart due process and I would like to see the Minister treat it with the disdain that it deserves.

As a resident of Brunswick I am fully aware of the multiple breaches of sound conditions, the illegal camping, the traffic issues and the clear danger of the site, if it needed to be evacuated, as would have been the case with recent flooding. I also know that the NSW Police have grave concerns about the site.

In the interest of the community seeing that the law applies equally to all please refuse this request.

Yours sincerely,

Kirsten Ingermar

Submission in Objection

MP09_0028 MOD 4


Breach of Trial Consent

1)The proposed 20 month extension is in breach of the Trial Consent, which states that all further Development Applications would be to Byron Shire Council


Present parameters of any further Consent

2) The proposed extension is attempting to be based on the original planning Consent which was granted under Part 3A Legislation that has now been rescinded, and as such the proposal is a both a fraudulent attempt to pervert the original alleged 5 year Trial Consent, and an attempt for a new additional "Extension" Consent unguided by existing planning legislation. With the Rescission of the Part 3A Legislation, any proposed consent would be in breach of the now governing development decision of the Land and Environment Court that Rejected Consent for a similar Trial proposed by Byron Shire Council (with the L&E Court Points of Claim being 1)That the Development was in breach of the then 7k Habitat Zoning that specifically prohibited development of a Place of Public Assembly, and 2) That the Development had failed to demonstrate that no environmental harm would take place). And in breach of the two State Government Commissions of Inquiry on this site, with the latest Cleland Commission of Inquiry stating "that there should be no further intensity of development on this site" (over the previous use for vegetable growing and a small cattle herd)


Breaches of Developer Performance criteria

3) The Developers Performance Report #3
MP 0930028 covering Splendour 2013, 2014 &2015, and Falls events 2013/14 &2014/15 demonstrate that every single event failed to achieve 100% Compliance with Consent Conditions, yet were fraudulently given further Consent to increase numbers, in breach of the Trial Consent Conditions that specified Increases on the basis of successful compliance.


Noise Breaches

4) Despite repeated breaches of Noise Consent Conditions at every event, the Department of Planning staff, attending the event on site, ignored the breaches, and further Department of Planning (DoP) Consents for yearly increases in patrons also ignored and failed to address the repeated breaches, which forced local residents to spend $30,000 of their own money to hire accredited noise engineers, who proved the Noise Breaches. The proved Noise breaches were dealt with by the DoP by a fine of $1,500.00 for the first breach and $3,000.00 for the second breach (i.e $4,500.00 fines for the developer, costing residents $30,000.00 to prove non compliance, in a highly prejudicial to the developer, anti community, anti environment DoP decision to treat the breaches as development consent breaches rather than breaches of the Protection Of the Environment breaches with potential $5,000,000.00 fines).


Noise breaches environmental impacts

5) The developer and the DoP have only considered and responded to Noise breaches impacting on local residents, but have completely failed to consider Noise impacts and breaches on the Wildlife on the adjacent Nature Reserve and SEPP Wetlands, and have completely failed to respond to the Review of the Effects of Human Intrusion and Disturbance on Wildlife authored by Andrew Benwell and David Scotts, submitted to the DoP in objection to the Trial DA by Conservation of North Ocean Shores Inc. (CONOS)


Aboriginal Heritage

6) The Extension Application fails to provide any information on the Consent conditions on Protection of Aboriginal Heritage. Neither on the Developers proposal to protect known artifact and campfire sites by covering them with soil (on this repeatedly flooded site), or on the development sites allegedly fenced off Coroboree Ground. I note that the Arakwal People who are the designated people to speak for this site strongly objected to this development, and I allege the development is in breach of the UN Declaration on the rights of Indigenous People Article 31 Cultural Heritage.

NPWS Land

7) The Developers have failed the Consent requirement to hand over part of the site to the National Parks and Wildlife Service, as a land swap for NPWS land currently being used as part of this development, and as such the event is part held on NPWS land that prohibits this development.

Regionally Significant Farmland

8) Part of this site, being rare frost free sub tropical coastal farmland, was declared by The Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources, as Regionally Significant Farmland to be protected from development pressure, and while the Dept of Primary Industries gave consent for a Trial, there is no Report on the rubbish, vehicle, food waste and overflowing toilets ground water pollution impacts, or construction and soil compacting impacts on this protected farmland

Development governance

9) There is no public confidence in the sites development governance or compliance as

a) the DoP Staff have been found in breach of the Privacy Act in regard to myself and a number of other previous objectors, and breaches of the Privacy Act in regard to members of the developments Community Representatives on the developments Regulatory Working Group, in regard to the DoP staff sending private correspondence to the DoP to the developers, and

b) The DoP instructed Byron Council that their Compliance Staff were not to come on site, and

c) The DoP's internal Reports identify that DoP staff ignored overflowing sewerage, overflowing grey water, and rubbish in waterways, and failed to enact any formal compliance against these breaches, or to acknowledge these as Development Consent breaches in their consents for yearly increases, and

d) The Developers have not provided the legislatively required Reportable Political Donations Declarations required to be attached to this DA, or a Declaration to the previous Amendment DA considered by the PAC, which would have publicly revealed the thousands of dollars of gifts these developers have given to Byron Shire Councilors (including the Mayor and his wife, noting that the Mayors comments appear in the developers documents provided with this DA), and which would have revealed the tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and sponsorships given to the outside employers of Councilors, and any other gifts the developers may have given to elected State Govt Members or DoP employees. I note that Councilors have voted on Byron Council aspects of this development (and on other Greenfield developments by the same principles of this Parklands development, also with no Developer Declarations attached,) in prima facie breach of failing to declare pecuniary conflicts of Interest, and in prima facie breach of the legislative prohibition on Councilors accepting gifts from property developers, and I allege that this development has ushered in an era of development corruption.

Employment

10) There is no independent assessment of alleged employment. The majority of employees are unpaid tourist volunteers whose bond is confiscated if they miss their shift.

Financial Information

11) There is no credible financial information provided as theses two events have recently been sold to a foreign American Corporation, with the likely result that pre and post employment will be overseas, and profits sent overseas. And I note that the new owners names do not appear on this DA, and that this application is submitted by those that are now not in control of these two events.

Submitters Conflict of Interest

12) There is no capacity within this development consideration to identify individual submitters or organizations that have received gifts of thousands of dollars from these developers, and who may be influenced to support this further DA on the basis that they will receive further gifts of cash.

Social licence

There is NO Social Licence for this development. By Submissions to the original Trial DA, the Majority of Byron Shire Residents were opposed to this Trial, with 84% of residents in the locality opposed. We have waited patiently for the end of this farce of a Trial to at least see whether the DoP would provide a factual Report on the Trial, and to put our case against any further proposed development. There has been 5 years for the DoP to Monitor this development. The developers can move these events in the interim, if they wish to pursue any further development on this site (as they previously did by moving to an event site in Queensland for two years). There is no legitimate case to not have the alleged succinct 5 year Trial as a 5 year Trial.

I have seen recent photos of the site in question under flood waters (re the flood through the area on 30/31 March 2017) and would like the government to find an alternate, safer site rather than grant an extension to the trial period.

I think the benefits of the festival far outweigh any negatives and offer my continues support and therefore support an extension of the trial period.