Proposed Changes to the Licence

[Derby_Dave]

Rubbish, people have always turned up on the Wednesday and the traffic has always been ridiculous, I remember sitting in a queue for 8-9 hours in 1997.

The only way that these traffic problems are going to eased is by organising lots of cheap public transport and giving it priority over cars. At the moment it makes absolutely no sense to travel any other way than by car, for example, it's £45.50 return on National Express from Birmingham (according to the glasto website), well it's not going to cost £135 in petrol money and car park fees for three people in one car.

All I see this doing is moving the traffic problems a few hours forward, so instead of massive queue building up at 8-9am, the queue will build up at 3-4am.

[ivan]

Well to be honest last year was my 9th and have always turned up Wednesday morning and have always virtually driven straight in. Last year was far worse than any other year and bloody ridiculous.

I still do not know what caused the jam on the A37!

[DreadlockDan]

If you're in a campervan on a campsite with it set up for sleeping then 99/100 you'll be fine if you've had drinks although you could theoretically be nicked. If you've pulled over next to a road, planning to have a nights kip and decide to have too many beers you can easily get in trouble if the police see you.

If you've driven to the pub, had lots of booze then go to your car to get your coat you can still done done for being drunk in charge. Same as if you go to get something out of your car when its parked outside your house.

All you can do is make the van appear as though it is not going to be going anywhere in the near future by closing curtains, putting awning up, clamp / wedge the wheels etc. if you're really worried, get a separate key for the ignition and doors then leave the ignition key in the lock ups for the festival. That way you can pretty much prove that there is no intention to drive it.

[Glastoboy]

As for what happened last year, it wasn't just the numbers turning up that caused the problems but the time those people turned up - there was over ten miles of queue on the road out to Glastonbury and beyond before the car park gates opened, and that queue stayed around that size (with some variation) for the whole day.

If there'd not been that queue before the car parks opened and those vehicles that were queuing are removed from the equation then there wouldn't have been queues anything like what there was - simply ensuring it doesn't all start with a queue as it did last year will by itself make a massive amount of difference to how traffic flows around the whole area.

Edited January 15, 2010 by Glastoboy

[Kyelo]

You also admit that in your opinion many people will still aim for the 7-8am arrival time. This still requires driving during usual sleeping hours for many people.

[eFestivals]

I agree with this, but all of this would still be achieved by opening the gates at 3, 4 or 5am on the Weds morning.

Your only argument that 9pm on the Tuesday is better because it would deter people from driving whilst tired (through the night) simply doesn't stack up. Many people drive home after the Sunday night headliner (after 4-5days of excess and no sleep). You also admit that in your opinion many people will still aim for the 7-8am arrival time. This still requires driving during usual sleeping hours for many people.

The earlier the gates open, the less likely there is to be queues at any time, because the arrivals will be spread over a longer time.

I suggested that the Council (who thru their licencing role have to approve what GF do) wouldn't be hugely keen on an after-midnight opening - from the angle that such regulators tend to take an up-themselves view of such things simply because they can.

I agree entirely that in reality it probably makes little difference in reality to how much night-driving might be done because of the normal 8am opening, but it's far harder for them to make such an argument against an 8am opening, simply because 8am is within what's regarded as normal hours.

You also wrote "and if the weather forecast is crap there defo won't be too many." but conversely if the weather is scorchio?

good weather would certainly make a nothing-to-do night in a field more attractive than rain, that's obvious to anyone.

But if access was to be via a pass that needed to be obtained in advance (and which wasn't available to buy on the gate - doing things that way can be used to stop people that have arrived driving off to a pub for a few hours and then back again; it also allows GF to staff at the needed levels for the numbers that will be arriving [which would otherwise be unknown], and cover the costs of those staff) then good weather wouldn't be able to attract anyone who hadn't already planned to arrive early.

I understand that your opinion is that only a few people will arrive between 9-1pm, and that those that do will be well behaved little bunnies but you can't be sure of this can you? So why risk it when it is completely unnecessary?

(I'm presuming you actually meant 1am)

If I've said "few" (and I might have), that was meant relatively - I don't literally mean just three.

No, I can't be sure of that they'll be well-behaved more than any event anywhere can give a concrete guarantee that their event will be trouble-free or nearly trouble-free - you only get to find out for certain when it happens. But all the same just about every event *is* just about trouble free, including Glastonbury. As Glastonbury is able to control the much greater numbers within the festival itself, why do you think the car parks will be more difficult?

It's simply the case of having a suitable management plan, and implementing it. If fears of the sort you're raising came to dominate people's thinking then no events would ever happen anywhere.

As for "completely unnecessary", I'm sure you wouldn't think that if you were a non-festival attending Pilton dweller who'd found themselves grid-locked in their home all day long last June - I'm pretty sure that the opening the car parks early idea is one that is being pursued for their benefit more than it is for festival-goers.

As I've said above, the earlier the gates open the less likely there is to be queues at any time, because the arrivals will be spread over a longer time. That will benefit both locals trying to go about their normal lives and festival goers who'd prefer not to be sat in their cars queuing for many hours.

Edited January 15, 2010 by eFestivals

[ivan]

As for "completely unnecessary", I'm sure you wouldn't think that if you were a non-festival attending Pilton dweller who'd found themselves grid-locked in their home all day long last June - I'm pretty sure that the opening the car parks early idea is one that is being pursued for their benefit more than it is for festival-goers.

For the first time last year , there were no complaints from "the locals ! " regarding traffic at Leeds

festival and there were no reported problems either on or off site.

Why ?

They opened the car parks from 2.00 am ! , and many folk decided to get onto site before the

early morning rush hour .

[ivan]

This still requires driving during usual sleeping hours for many people.

Oh dear ! , so does driving to airport for an early morning flight !!!!

It ain't hard driving thru the night , totally stress free.

Setting off in early hours last year we did the 200 mile journey in 3 1/2 hours .

Had we set off at 8.00 am we prob would not have got to Birmingham by then

and doubt we would have been on site before dark.

[ukslim]

Why ?

They opened the car parks from 2.00 am ! , and many folk decided to get onto site before the

early morning rush hour .

[eFestivals]

Plus last year's Glastonbury might have been equally smooth if it weren't for the *two* traffic accidents that had a domino effect on the whole region.

While I'm sure they had an impact, I very much doubt they were the cause of anything much extra - there was over a ten mile queue on the Glastonbury side before the gates opened, and once that queue was there it was never going to go away until the numbers arriving started to tail off in the evening.

[ivan]

Can you be sure that's the reason? Leeds is much better connected for transport than Pilton. It can absorb much more traffic.

Plus last year's Glastonbury might have been equally smooth if it weren't for the *two* traffic accidents that had a domino effect on the whole region.

[Glastoboy]

1) The earlier the gates open, the less likely there is to be queues at any time, because the arrivals will be spread over a longer time.

2) I suggested that the Council (who thru their licencing role have to approve what GF do) wouldn't be hugely keen on an after-midnight opening - from the angle that such regulators tend to take an up-themselves view of such things simply because they can.

3) As Glastonbury is able to control the much greater numbers within the festival itself, why do you think the car parks will be more difficult?

4) It's simply the case of having a suitable management plan, and implementing it. If fears of the sort you're raising came to dominate people's thinking then no events would ever happen anywhere.

5) As for "completely unnecessary", I'm sure you wouldn't think that if you were a non-festival attending Pilton dweller who'd found themselves grid-locked in their home all day long last June - I'm pretty sure that the opening the car parks early idea is one that is being pursued for their benefit more than it is for festival-goers.

[ivan]

To sum up

Every car arriving and parking up between 9.00pm Tuesday and 5.00 am Wednesday

Is one less car on the road when things start to get busy

Oh and I do not think we would be in the mood to party in the car parks re drugs and alcohol cos

I want to be sober as a judge when I go thru security !

[eFestivals]

1) I think we have established that we both agree on this, we simply disagree about the difference between what 'could happen' if lots of people arrive at 9pm and compared to 3-5am.

2) Then this would seem to be the only argument against the 3-5am opening time. Perhaps I would be better pointing out my concerns to the regulators rather than debating them here with you. As I seem to have to keep reitterating, there is a potential for problems with a 9pm opening that wouldn't apply with a a 3-5am opening time and surely this is also in the Pilton residents best interests.

3) The main difference is the addition of the cars and a reduction in laid on entertainment. Unlike you I do expect the excitement level, party spirit, alcohol consumption, drug taking and merryment-making to be about the same level IF people start arriving on site at 9pm on Tuesday. It's much harder to get a party started at 3-5am in the morning. Obviously, the cars mixed with possible fires & drunks increases the potential of a problems.

4) Please drop the snidey 'if everybody thought like you, nothing would ever happen' bollox. I am not to blame for the mad world of rules, regulations and H&S. I am simply trying to save the Pilton residents and GFL some grief and protect the festivals reputation.

5) Amazing! I am the one thinking primarilly about the Pilton resident and the good of the festival and you manage to make out I am being selfish. Are you even reading what I write, or just having a hard time understanding it? It's fairly simple really.

Taking the risk on opening the car parks at 9pm is the bit that is 'completely unnecessary'. Opening at 3-5am eliminates most of this risk.

Also, what is the crack with the 'early arriver pass' - sounds completely pointless and unworkable too. What time are you allowed in if you haven't got the pass, what do you do with people who arrive without one or too early (start forming a new 10-mile queue?).

1. even if there's a big queue (which I very much doubt) at 9pm, then that's still a HUGE advantage for traffic flows around the area compared to a queue at 8am the next morning. Fewer locals will want to be travelling during the evening, and those that are are likely to be travelling to something of lesser importance than they would be in the morning. So however it pans out, it's an advantageous thing.

2. there's more to argue against it that merely that, because the earlier the gates are opened the more time there is to spread out people's arrival - which means less chance of queues, and smaller queues if any do happen.

As for a 3am-5am opening, all the same possible worries exist for that as they do for a 9pm opening - if you think that huge numbers of people are going to turn up for the moment of the car park opening, then that's going to happen at whatever time it opens (and I believe they'd be far more likely to do so for 3-5am than 9pm, because they'd have less waiting around for the fest).

3. all those things do not and will not mean a riot or anything similar. Yet if it did, how long do you think it'd last for after the first person had their festival ticket confiscated and were thrown off-site?

4. There was zilch 'snidey' meant with that comment - it is simply a statement of fact. A huge range of fears are raised about just about anything (including the existence of the festival itself). Those fears come to nothing, they're just people letting their fears run away in their head.

5. I've said no such thing (have the over-sensitive pills just been handed around? ). You said it was "completely unnecessary", so I gave you a good reason why I feel it's necessary. It's one thing the festival causing some people with no interest in it some mild inconvenience, another thing entirely (and from a licencing point of view) to make their normal life completely impossible (which is what happened last June).

Also, what is the crack with the 'early arriver pass' - sounds completely pointless and unworkable too.

It's certainly not a pointless idea - it would give the festival more control than none over those that arrive, would give them an idea of numbers so that it can be staffed at the necessary levels (otherwise they might be told by MDC that it needs to be staffed at the levels it will be during the fest itself - which is likely to be hugely over-staffed), and will help the fest re-coup the costs of those staff (rather than the money be taken away from the good causes to cover it).

Whether or not it's unworkable is another thing. I believe it will work (or at least, certainly work better than having nothing as a control), but I don't have long experience in managing these sorts of things in the way that the fest does. I'm sure they'll use their huge amount of experience to come up with a system which they feel will work.

What time are you allowed in if you haven't got the pass, what do you do with people who arrive without one or too early (start forming a new 10-mile queue?).

I realise those things will be issues that would need to be managed, but believe that as issues they'd be smaller than the issue of not having any control over those that arrive early (and, given the fears you've expressed of trouble, surely you recognise that some method of control is necessary?), and the issues of similar to what happened last year.

At the end of the day, the festival has a vast amount of experience in managing such things, and I have full confidence that if they're able to go ahead with the car parks opening early they'll come up with a system that will cause fewer issues for locals (and probably festival goers too) than was the case last year. They obviously believe that of themselves too - hence the licence application.

Edited January 15, 2010 by eFestivals

[cejx]

The proposed carpark opening times are for the benefit of the residents not the benefit of the festivalers?

If the carparks open at 9pm, and not that many people decide to park through the night (as has been mooted here), choosing to turn up earlier in the morning - say from 5am onwards instead, surely this will result in a negligible reduction of cars on the road, thus not really benefiting the residents at the end of the day, because the queues will still be there albeit a little bit shorter.

A 4 hour queue is pretty much as grim as a 10 hour queue if you are trying to get to work in the morning, both being disruptive enough to make the residents not wish to use the local roads that day anyway.

[eFestivals]

The proposed carpark opening times are for the benefit of the residents not the benefit of the festivalers?

I'm not saying it's the sole reason, but believe it's a part of the reason. As I've said, it's one thing the festival causing some people with no interest in it some mild inconvenience, another thing entirely (and from a licencing point of view) to make their normal life completely impossible (which is what happened last June).

If the carparks open at 9pm, and not that many people decide to park through the night (as has been mooted here), choosing to turn up earlier in the morning - say from 5am onwards instead, surely this will result in a negligible reduction of cars on the road, thus not really benefiting the residents at the end of the day, because the queues will still be there albeit a little bit shorter.

One of the major causes of the problems last year was that there were huge queues even before the gates opened (10+ miles in one direction, I'm not sure of other routes).

If the gates are open early, then that 10+ mile 'starting' queue will never occur, and any queuing will be whatever (if anything - I'm sure there was some, but I've no idea how much) it was last year minus that 10 miles.

Which is more inconvenient? A (say) 13 mile queue or a (13 miles minus the 10 mile 'starting' queue) 3 mile queue? Surely that demonstrates just how huge an amount of difference opening the car parks early is likely to make?

A 4 hour queue is pretty much as grim as a 10 hour queue if you are trying to get to work in the morning, both being disruptive enough to make the residents not wish to use the local roads that day anyway.

You might consider that 6 hour difference as negligible (whatever it's stopping a person getting to), but I would think few would.

Edited January 15, 2010 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

To sum up

Every car arriving and parking up between 9.00pm Tuesday and 5.00 am Wednesday

Is one less car on the road when things start to get busy

You've nailed it!!

==========

Aside from that, the festival clearly believes that it can be managed in an orderly manner without putting the festival's future at risk, and which will bring benefits to either locals, festival goers or both. If this wasn't the case, then they wouldn't be trying to do it (and the licence application proves that they're trying to do it).

Which of the people here have more experience of traffic and crowd management than the festival to be giving an informed opinion that it can't be worked well?

[redmosquito]

This still requires driving during usual sleeping hours for many people.

Oh dear ! , so does driving to airport for an early morning flight !!!!

It ain't hard driving thru the night , totally stress free.

Setting off in early hours last year we did the 200 mile journey in 3 1/2 hours .

Had we set off at 8.00 am we prob would not have got to Birmingham by then

and doubt we would have been on site before dark.

[Kyelo]

We set off from Leeds at about 9ish, can't remember what time we got into the car parks but I'm sure it was after 4. Total nightmare journey but Pehaw who picked us up did a stirling job as driver after a mamouth journey. Top man!

[redmosquito]

3) The main difference is the addition of the cars and a reduction in laid on entertainment. Unlike you I do expect the excitement level, party spirit, alcohol consumption, drug taking and merryment-making to be about the same level IF people start arriving on site at 9pm on Tuesday. It's much harder to get a party started at 3-5am in the morning. Obviously, the cars mixed with possible fires & drunks increases the potential of a problems.

[budvar]

also, im positive that is a logistics problem....manchester united can have 80,000 people in and out in 4 hours.....

im sure its the roads...but surely some lessons could be taken from how big stadiums can handle te traffic...

[LondonTom]

Manchester United have the benefits of a train station at the ground, two metro stations a short walk away and numerous dual carriage ways surrounding the ground. And the traffic's still not exactly great after a match.

[budvar]

I really like the proposals. My favourite ever journey to Glasto (coming since 2004, bus for the first three and car the last two) was in 2008. We watched the Radiohead gig in London on the Wednesday of the fest and drove straight there afterwards. We arrived at around 4am I believe and, as you'd imagine, didn't have any hold-ups.

Obviously the difference is that we won't be able to get into the festival but I don't see that as an issue. You just wait.

I'll also tell you now that i won't be joining any queues to get through the festival gates before 8am. Just wait in the comfortable car for a bit and let the back-log clear (To me there's no difference between entering teh festival at 8.01am and 11am)

I'm absolutely sure that GFL will be able to organise this. I don't think they'll issue special passes mind - if they can estimate how many stewards they nee din the festival on a Wednesday then they can estimate how many they'll need for teh car park.

Toilets are easily provided (there are toilets in the car parks anyway - the numbers will just have to be boosted)

I don't think they'll need to provide refreshment kiosks - though I'm sure they'll be plenty of van owners who'd pay VERY good money for that slot.

The maths behind this is very simple X number of hours for Y number of cars to arrive. X/Y = cars per hour i.e. potential for congestion.

Two ways to cut congestion - Raise X (which this plan does) or lower Y (anticipate that they'll be more action in this area in future years)

This is a good idea and I very much hope it's approved.

[budvar]

So your saying the orgainisers need to build some sort of monorail system?!

[lord stradmor]

In the words of Apu: "Isn't there a chance the track could bend?"

For this reason, I'd prefer some form of light railway system myself.