Lot 7310 Upper Turon road Sofala
- Thread starter nucopia
- Start date
Help Support Prospecting Australia:
yass00_Au
Ross
David Barber from Crown Lands had a generic reply:
Dear Ross
I refer to your enquiry today.
Please note that the property has been marketed for expressions of interest only. The property is not under contract. The Department intends to review all expressions of interests in February 2016. A decision as to whether the sale of Lot 7310 or part thereof is to proceed will be made at that time.
Your objection to the sale is noted. If you have any further questions please call me on 0427629288.
--
David Baber | Projects Manager, Regional Projects West
Department of Primary Industries, Lands | Tamworth
PO Box 2185 | Dangar NSW 2309
25-27 Fitzroy Street Tamworth NSW 2340
T: 02 6883 3326 | M: 0427629288 | E: [email protected]
My Reply:
Hi David,
Thank you for your prompt reply.
Can you please advise the reason why this item which is a public a utility be opened for expression of interest at all?
Can you please advise the reason for Department of Primary Industries, a Government department engage a private real estate agent to advertise expressions of interest when these matters and information are distributed on http://www.crownland.nsw.gov.au/ front page Media Release and Public Exhibition and Information links?
Regards,
Ross Evgeniou
Dear Ross
I refer to your enquiry today.
Please note that the property has been marketed for expressions of interest only. The property is not under contract. The Department intends to review all expressions of interests in February 2016. A decision as to whether the sale of Lot 7310 or part thereof is to proceed will be made at that time.
Your objection to the sale is noted. If you have any further questions please call me on 0427629288.
--
David Baber | Projects Manager, Regional Projects West
Department of Primary Industries, Lands | Tamworth
PO Box 2185 | Dangar NSW 2309
25-27 Fitzroy Street Tamworth NSW 2340
T: 02 6883 3326 | M: 0427629288 | E: [email protected]
My Reply:
Hi David,
Thank you for your prompt reply.
Can you please advise the reason why this item which is a public a utility be opened for expression of interest at all?
Can you please advise the reason for Department of Primary Industries, a Government department engage a private real estate agent to advertise expressions of interest when these matters and information are distributed on http://www.crownland.nsw.gov.au/ front page Media Release and Public Exhibition and Information links?
Regards,
Ross Evgeniou
Good on ya yass00 AU
Thats the same form letter we all got its as if he just copy and pasts the reply ..
i also sent a second emal asking why and how but never heard back from David Baber.
Lets hope you do.
Thats the same form letter we all got its as if he just copy and pasts the reply ..
i also sent a second emal asking why and how but never heard back from David Baber.
Lets hope you do.
yass00_Au
Ross
SinHof said:
Certainly agree SinHof.
Also if anyone else can post other relevant departments officials emails here and include those in CC's when objecting then it will have more impact and generate more interest and possible controversy which in turn has more people talking/gossiping and asking questions then power to the people will prevail?
This one was brought up by nucopia but what about the other ones that will slip through? Cant save them all if you dont know about them but certainly this thread will have the departments on a back foot but only if more people get behind it.
Cheers,
Ross
yass00_Au
Ross
Ok so I heard back from from Councillor Monika Morse from Bathurst Council. She sounds enthusiastic and is exactly the type of person I was seeking with the right response and attitude to nudge and bring attention to plight:
Monika Morse (Bathurst Councillor):
Good afternoon Mr Evgeniou: thank you for your email alerting us to the sale of the land at Lot 7310 Upper Turon Road.
I am currently making enquiries to find out if it is the recreational area right on the river.
Monica
Monica Morse
Bathurst
Tel: 0413 241 835
Me:
Hi Monica,
Great, eagerly looking forward to your correspondence.
Regards,
Ross Evgeniou
Monika Morse (Bathurst Councillor):
Good Morning: just to let you know that Council staff are looking at this issue in the most comprehensive way legalities, etc.
I will keep you informed.
M
Monica Morse
Bathurst
Tel: 0413 241 835
Monika Morse (Bathurst Councillor):
Good afternoon Mr Evgeniou: thank you for your email alerting us to the sale of the land at Lot 7310 Upper Turon Road.
I am currently making enquiries to find out if it is the recreational area right on the river.
Monica
Monica Morse
Bathurst
Tel: 0413 241 835
Me:
Hi Monica,
Great, eagerly looking forward to your correspondence.
Regards,
Ross Evgeniou
Monika Morse (Bathurst Councillor):
Good Morning: just to let you know that Council staff are looking at this issue in the most comprehensive way legalities, etc.
I will keep you informed.
M
Monica Morse
Bathurst
Tel: 0413 241 835
yass00_Au
Ross
I heard back from David Barber this morning as well:
David Barber:
Hi Ross
A number of residential properties and improvements are located within Lot 7310 and are encroaching on Crown land, this represents a risk to the public users of the reserve and the residents. The Department is therefore looking to resolve this issue by selling certain parts of Lot 7310.
Due to the number of residential parties involved, a sale by EOI is necessary. It is normal marketing practice to engage an external agent.
Regards
Me:
Hi David and good morning,
Once again thank you for your prompt reply and your ongoing correspondence.
Can you please advise what improvements are located within the block and the risks associated to all vested parties including residents and recreational users?
Regards,
Ross Evgeniou
David Barber:
Hi Ross
A number of residential properties and improvements are located within Lot 7310 and are encroaching on Crown land, this represents a risk to the public users of the reserve and the residents. The Department is therefore looking to resolve this issue by selling certain parts of Lot 7310.
Due to the number of residential parties involved, a sale by EOI is necessary. It is normal marketing practice to engage an external agent.
Regards
Me:
Hi David and good morning,
Once again thank you for your prompt reply and your ongoing correspondence.
Can you please advise what improvements are located within the block and the risks associated to all vested parties including residents and recreational users?
Regards,
Ross Evgeniou
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2014
- Messages
- 187
- Reaction score
- 122
Surely if people are building over their boundries they should be made to remove it and remediate it? Or am I misunderstanding?
The second reply from David Barber is word for word the same as he has sent to many others asking why the land is up for EOI
Its very criptic sounds important but says very little.
Lets hope the Bathurst council can get a strait answer and put the brakes on any thing that prevents public access and recreational use of the land. There is enough restrictions in NSW and other states already .
Its very criptic sounds important but says very little.
Lets hope the Bathurst council can get a strait answer and put the brakes on any thing that prevents public access and recreational use of the land. There is enough restrictions in NSW and other states already .
Some dodgy syhte going on and it seems we have
put a spanner in works
ps. Ive had no replies from my email apart from saying they have received it.
put a spanner in works
ps. Ive had no replies from my email apart from saying they have received it.
GaryO said:
My thoughts exactly Gary
I've got my own property investment company Nucopia properties Pty Ltd i have houses apartments a couple of shops , a industrial shed and some vacant land located all over Aust And i have never come accross this kind of BS with a land sale EOI from an agent.. Its been suspect from day one with the agent and now with David Barber and his copy and past replies it just makes me a lot more suspicious that something underhanded is going on.
Keep sending in the email objections the more noise we make the better.
yass00_Au
Ross
Obviously the residents as a collective have first dibs on extending their boundaries and crown lands has offered the existing parcel under their legal criteria otherwise a government department surely wouldn't engage in corrupt behavior? 
Just bending the rules to favor! It's just how they went about it in the public process and collusion with real estate agent to favor existing residences which needs to be scrutinized.
The foot has 26 bones and mine has 66 plus some screws and plates, I had work related accident falling off a 27 level building in Sydney at The Rocks and landing on level 4 early December 2015 so I am limited in mobility and resources other than my outside connection to the world with desktop for the moment. If any one individual or as a collective has the money, resources and the energy to pursue questionable handling of matters between agent and crown lands then all the power to them as this will be the only legal standpoint and at most agent will loose his license and Crown lands heads will roll too if allegations can be proven. I am happy to contribute further where I can.
On the other side of the coin, there are two entrances on the hill and both have private boundaries right next to the access tracks. Every time I visited we can see inside these peoples homes and yards for how close you drive in to gain access. We try not to be driving through at night to be respectful and usually don't have a reason to other than coming back from exploring or a dig. There seems to be constant traffic in/out day and night and at all hours of the night and early mornings too. I try coming in and out as quietly as we can so we don't disturb but I have a Hilux 2.8D and it's a "quieter diesel". Certainly others don't share that same respect we do that's for sure so we treat this kind of access as privileged. The main camp ground backs up onto one of these properties, could you imagine living there? I would be a nervous wreck having the walls vibrate with cars night and day coming in and out, watching people having a ***** by the boundary while in the yard, prospectors poking around the back, multiple groups of campers with blaring music, yelling and carrying on, aerosols exploding in fire pits, smashing bottles and leaving site a pigsty week after week and year after year? You can hear campers 1km away at night plus some so imagine living next door? Lucky Australian citizens don't have a bearing or arms gun policy like the USA? Do we thank Howard and Costello for that? I am sure it has its quiet times too but I would be livid and cringe living there during peak periods.
It doesn't sound like a money grab to me but a genuine concern to resolve a residential issue.
Don't want to put a negative spin on it but is has been predetermined and this place is toast with only 16/17 objections recorded before I added one to the list! The rations on the hill have depleted, pun intended! :lol: Should be renamed "Private Ration Hill".
By any means there is no intention to offend any one person or group in all the above and I respect all the views posted so far.
Not happy Jan!
Cheers,
Ross
Just bending the rules to favor! It's just how they went about it in the public process and collusion with real estate agent to favor existing residences which needs to be scrutinized. The foot has 26 bones and mine has 66 plus some screws and plates, I had work related accident falling off a 27 level building in Sydney at The Rocks and landing on level 4 early December 2015 so I am limited in mobility and resources other than my outside connection to the world with desktop for the moment. If any one individual or as a collective has the money, resources and the energy to pursue questionable handling of matters between agent and crown lands then all the power to them as this will be the only legal standpoint and at most agent will loose his license and Crown lands heads will roll too if allegations can be proven. I am happy to contribute further where I can.
On the other side of the coin, there are two entrances on the hill and both have private boundaries right next to the access tracks. Every time I visited we can see inside these peoples homes and yards for how close you drive in to gain access. We try not to be driving through at night to be respectful and usually don't have a reason to other than coming back from exploring or a dig. There seems to be constant traffic in/out day and night and at all hours of the night and early mornings too. I try coming in and out as quietly as we can so we don't disturb but I have a Hilux 2.8D and it's a "quieter diesel". Certainly others don't share that same respect we do that's for sure so we treat this kind of access as privileged. The main camp ground backs up onto one of these properties, could you imagine living there? I would be a nervous wreck having the walls vibrate with cars night and day coming in and out, watching people having a ***** by the boundary while in the yard, prospectors poking around the back, multiple groups of campers with blaring music, yelling and carrying on, aerosols exploding in fire pits, smashing bottles and leaving site a pigsty week after week and year after year? You can hear campers 1km away at night plus some so imagine living next door? Lucky Australian citizens don't have a bearing or arms gun policy like the USA? Do we thank Howard and Costello for that? I am sure it has its quiet times too but I would be livid and cringe living there during peak periods.
It doesn't sound like a money grab to me but a genuine concern to resolve a residential issue.
Don't want to put a negative spin on it but is has been predetermined and this place is toast with only 16/17 objections recorded before I added one to the list! The rations on the hill have depleted, pun intended! :lol: Should be renamed "Private Ration Hill".
By any means there is no intention to offend any one person or group in all the above and I respect all the views posted so far.
Not happy Jan!
Cheers,
Ross
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2015
- Messages
- 7,768
- Reaction score
- 12,894
If you don't want property bordering onto crown or public land don't buy it to start with? As far as I can tell that lands been crown long before the houses were there. It's a bit like some people around here buy houses near mines then spend all their spare time whinging about the noise from the mines. Others buy houses on the main road then whinge about traffic noise & trucks
Not condoning bad behaviour there but to me it would be a minority. Everytime I've been there it's been very quiet & no traffic in/out of there all day even with a few camps set up? In saying that I steer clear of Sofala as a whole in school holidays, long weekends etc. It gets pretty busy - all the more reason to not lose further land & create more congested camping + possibly more problems from the minority of trouble makers, whom aren't exclusive to this area or Sofala.
As for the access tracks there are alternatives that could be improved or minor re-routing carried out to provide more buffer. There's really only one track right next to a private house block, one passes close to another briefly in one area & one track passes the other private lot but it has no dwelling + is overgrown appearing unused/neglected.
One private dwelling showing track right near boundary (this could be enclosed to allow private access only) & alternative route that could be improved down to camping areas on the river etc.
The other private dwelling showing the track going close to the boundary at one point before branching left to the squatters site tucked in behind the private lot & right down around to camping areas.
This shows the other private lot - basically the rectangular block in the centre bordered by tracks. It is very overgrown, appears unused & neglected. There is no dwelling on this lot.
Point is access isn't impinging on them a great deal, certainly not as much as normal streets or roads would in built up areas, & there is in my opinion opportunity to re-route or improve alternative access away from the private dwellings allowing enclosure of private access without selling it off as a whole. This may be how they go about it now? One of my last responses suggested the whole lot may not be sold but rather portions of it. Hopefully something that can suit everyone is the end result.
Again I don't condone bad behaviour of what is the minority in most cases but I don't condone using that as an excuse to shut everyone out either.
As for owning the properties there. I really don't think they are any more inconvenienced or hard done by than property owners in small coastal communities that swell during holiday time or other people that own property bordering a whole range of public use areas. Surely they paid consideration to this prior to building there or purchasing.
Another interesting point would be how did these even become private lots to begin with. They could have been awarded under Adverse Possession (Squatters Right) over those portions of land to start with whether by current owner or sometime since the 1800's. Not saying they were for sure but the placement of those lots in relation to the current crown land suggests that it could be a distinct possibility. In that case it would be a bit rich now to expect others to stay off there hey?
Not condoning bad behaviour there but to me it would be a minority. Everytime I've been there it's been very quiet & no traffic in/out of there all day even with a few camps set up? In saying that I steer clear of Sofala as a whole in school holidays, long weekends etc. It gets pretty busy - all the more reason to not lose further land & create more congested camping + possibly more problems from the minority of trouble makers, whom aren't exclusive to this area or Sofala.
As for the access tracks there are alternatives that could be improved or minor re-routing carried out to provide more buffer. There's really only one track right next to a private house block, one passes close to another briefly in one area & one track passes the other private lot but it has no dwelling + is overgrown appearing unused/neglected.
One private dwelling showing track right near boundary (this could be enclosed to allow private access only) & alternative route that could be improved down to camping areas on the river etc.
The other private dwelling showing the track going close to the boundary at one point before branching left to the squatters site tucked in behind the private lot & right down around to camping areas.
This shows the other private lot - basically the rectangular block in the centre bordered by tracks. It is very overgrown, appears unused & neglected. There is no dwelling on this lot.
Point is access isn't impinging on them a great deal, certainly not as much as normal streets or roads would in built up areas, & there is in my opinion opportunity to re-route or improve alternative access away from the private dwellings allowing enclosure of private access without selling it off as a whole. This may be how they go about it now? One of my last responses suggested the whole lot may not be sold but rather portions of it. Hopefully something that can suit everyone is the end result.
Again I don't condone bad behaviour of what is the minority in most cases but I don't condone using that as an excuse to shut everyone out either.
As for owning the properties there. I really don't think they are any more inconvenienced or hard done by than property owners in small coastal communities that swell during holiday time or other people that own property bordering a whole range of public use areas. Surely they paid consideration to this prior to building there or purchasing.
Another interesting point would be how did these even become private lots to begin with. They could have been awarded under Adverse Possession (Squatters Right) over those portions of land to start with whether by current owner or sometime since the 1800's. Not saying they were for sure but the placement of those lots in relation to the current crown land suggests that it could be a distinct possibility. In that case it would be a bit rich now to expect others to stay off there hey?
yass00_Au
Ross
mbasko said:
Mbasko if no official public meeting and minutes was recorded for to this item then only the associations have the clout to request one to be held with all parties interested and concerns be heard before the decision is finalized by the due date.
Your lateral thinking and alternatives above would be a clincher in having this item not overturned but amended before any final decision.
Rerouting access certainly has my vote.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2015
- Messages
- 7,768
- Reaction score
- 12,894
Last correspondence I had with Crown Lands is just that it was still open for expressions of interest & no decision on anything will be made until February. They assure me that my objection & others will be taken into consideration + the decision will be made in respect to the Management of Crown Lands Review that was carried out. Where that really leaves it is anyones guess. Everyone pretty much seems to get the same or very similar open ended replies with no firm commitment either way from them.
To me it's looking like the next we hear anything will be February if at all. Hopefully they at least keep NAPFA updated.
To me it's looking like the next we hear anything will be February if at all. Hopefully they at least keep NAPFA updated.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2015
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 15
You may find that the reason the sale has been reverted to an EOI is that if the area is classed as a Crown Land Reserve it cannot be sold under current legislation.
However, on 29.10.2015 a press release from Niall Blair states that new legislation is to be introduced into the NSW Parliament in 2016 that will see "Eight Acts of Parliament be simplified into one" in relation to the management of Crown Lands.
That being the case all NSW residents should lodge their objections with their local parliamentarian prior to the legislation being introduced as the new rules will cover all of NSW. As the current legislation reads Blair is the one who has the final say in relation to these matters.
However, on 29.10.2015 a press release from Niall Blair states that new legislation is to be introduced into the NSW Parliament in 2016 that will see "Eight Acts of Parliament be simplified into one" in relation to the management of Crown Lands.
That being the case all NSW residents should lodge their objections with their local parliamentarian prior to the legislation being introduced as the new rules will cover all of NSW. As the current legislation reads Blair is the one who has the final say in relation to these matters.
yass00_Au
Ross
Monday 25th January, 2016
Councilor Monica Morse: Good evening: I spoke to the General Manager on Friday he said that an email outlining the findings would be sent to me, but I havent received it yet.
However it appears that the land, although it will be sold to a private buyer, will remain a dedicated area and the owner will not be able to fence it and will have to allow public access across the land to reach the river. Apart from the bend in the river which is a delightful spot, the land is not good land and would not be worth Council buying it.
I will send you the official version when I receive it.
I am glad that you brought the issue to our attention. Thankyou.
Regards
M
Monica Morse
Bathurst
Tel: 0413 241 835
28th January, 2016
Me: As promised I received an forwarded email from Councilor Monica Morse today from Bathurst Council with an Official Version from their investigation.
FYI please see attached PDF.
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/doc/member-docs/320/1453985096_lot_7310_upper_turon_rd_sofala_nsw_2795_-_dp_1123796.pdf
Councilor Monica Morse: Good evening: I spoke to the General Manager on Friday he said that an email outlining the findings would be sent to me, but I havent received it yet.
However it appears that the land, although it will be sold to a private buyer, will remain a dedicated area and the owner will not be able to fence it and will have to allow public access across the land to reach the river. Apart from the bend in the river which is a delightful spot, the land is not good land and would not be worth Council buying it.
I will send you the official version when I receive it.
I am glad that you brought the issue to our attention. Thankyou.
Regards
M
Monica Morse
Bathurst
Tel: 0413 241 835
28th January, 2016
Me: As promised I received an forwarded email from Councilor Monica Morse today from Bathurst Council with an Official Version from their investigation.
FYI please see attached PDF.
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/doc/member-docs/320/1453985096_lot_7310_upper_turon_rd_sofala_nsw_2795_-_dp_1123796.pdf
NAPFA
NAPFA Official Representative
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2014
- Messages
- 133
- Reaction score
- 300
Good job Yass00_AU Full marks on your work here.
This is encouraging -- especially a voice from local government added to the clamour:
"Council is forwarding a letter to Crown Lands advising its concern that the existing area utilised as recreation needs to be maintained and access easily available."
We can't assume that the outcome will be positive but it certainly is in the right direction -- a real turnaround thanks to those (few) on the forum and via NAPFA who have worked on this one. Collective action can make a difference especially if we have good arguments, coherently put.
cheers
Stephen
President NAPFA
This is encouraging -- especially a voice from local government added to the clamour:
"Council is forwarding a letter to Crown Lands advising its concern that the existing area utilised as recreation needs to be maintained and access easily available."
We can't assume that the outcome will be positive but it certainly is in the right direction -- a real turnaround thanks to those (few) on the forum and via NAPFA who have worked on this one. Collective action can make a difference especially if we have good arguments, coherently put.
cheers
Stephen
President NAPFA
