Discussions

I read some second hand info as well, someone posted a picture on facebook yesterday of an additional sign at that location that says "STOP TOLL GATE"

Not first hand info, but from what I've heard "squatters" have been setting up there campers and staying there.

I'd be hesitant to label as squatting, which implies lack of ownership, without more info. I don't have all of the info which is why I'm interested enough to ask, but had heard that there's a chance there may be some kind of ownership involved?

i dont know the area but by the pic it looks like the sign is on the road? Just wondering if its a case of the development owner not wanting people on the site, even the designated roadway, until its complete? totally a guess tho  
 
you could go ask the city who owns the land for the right answer

Back in October the same thing happened and at the time there was a article in the Brandon Sun saying that the previous owner of the development/land the development is on is fighting with the current owners and city over something to do with the agreement at the time of the sale. Back in late October he put up signs saying the road was now a 'toll road' and sent everyone letters in the mail. He also filed a lawsuit against the city and former city manager in 2014(not sure what ever came out of it). As for the truck in the photo, it looks identical to the one the former owner of the development has. I've actually talked to the guy a few times, seems like an okay guy.  
 
I will try to find the link to the article.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Edited by The_Young_Man, 2016-03-23 12:53:37

Okay here is the link to the story that was in the Brandon Sun back in November.  
 
Link:  
http://www.brandonsun.com/local/police-thwart-developers-bid-to-block-road-339292381.html?thx=y

His name is Barry Andrews. If you look at his previous court history, he has won against the city of Brandon previously, and he does likely have legit claim - but involving innocent homeowners is taking it a step to far. I am surprised the police have not stopped him from delivering posters to the homeowners there.

Brandon2012 said "His name is Barry Andrews. If you look at his previous court history, he has won against the city of Brandon previously, and he does likely have legit claim - but involving innocent homeowners is taking it a step to far. I am surprised the police have not stopped him from delivering posters to the homeowners there. "

Unless it's hate mail or defamatory, I doubt there's anything the police can do. Posters would be considered a nuisance, but nothing more.

I don't think handing out flyers is against the law and he only did it once to my knowledge. But when he tried to turn Outback Drive into a toll road back in late October the police and city stopped him from doing so. Im sure in this case the city and police are fully aware of what is happening.

Where is outback drive? A toll road? Really? Sad!  
 
Edited by Merp, 2016-03-23 19:45:40

is on the opposite side of 18th of TSC. The road is beside the former Fountain Tire location.  
 
And no, it's not a toll road.

The former owner tried to turn Outback Drive into a toll road back in October but at that point the police and city got involved and put an end to it. But from the look of it he's back at it again.  
 
Edited by The_Young_Man, 2016-03-23 20:01:07

I'm glad I didnt build up there. My builder was pushing me to buy a lot out there. Can't be good for the current home owners. no wonder no one chooses the build there.  
 
But why does Barry want a toll road there? Make absolutely no sense.

there has to be more to the story, whats his complaint? why did he try to put a toll on the road? or a not trespassing sign? does he actually own the property the road is on? like I said there has to be more, curious what his side is

Im not sure what Barry's whole story is, but when it comes to trying to turn Outback Drive,which is a public street, into a toll road, he has no legal jurisdiction to do so. Honestly I think it is more for attention than anything.  
 
Edited by The_Young_Man, 2016-03-24 10:03:09

Pasting below a letter that the City sent to residents of the area yesterday. Please note from the wording that there is currently a dispute between the individual and the city that as yet is not resolved in the courts. This letter will be representative of one side of that dispute and it is certainly important to take in all information from all sides when forming an opinion. If anyone has contact information for Mr. Andrews and/or the letter that he has distributed I would very much like the opportunity for all sides in this to be represented in this discussion. I can be reached through the Contact link at the bottom of any page in the site.  
 
--------------------------  
[i]  
March 23, 2016  
 
Dear Resident:  
 
The City of Brandon is aware that Mr. Barry Andrews, on behalf of Executive Homes 2000 Ltd., has circulated a notice to residents of Oakridge Estates indicating his intent to stop traffic on Outback Drive and Bell Avenue.  
 
It is unfortunate and disappointing that Mr. Andrews has taken this action. Nonetheless, the City of Brandon wishes to respond and assure area residents that the City of Brandon has been and will continue to undertake its best efforts to resolve this situation in a manner that is in the best interests of area residents and the City of Brandon as a whole.  
 
So residents are fully aware, the facts described by Mr. Andrews in his notice are not accurate. The City of Brandon disagrees with Mr. Andrews’ assertion that he has no choice but to prevent traffic from accessing the area, as there are options available other than inconveniencing residents, some of whom had initially purchased their properties through Mr. Andrews. The City of Brandon has been attempting to reasonably settle this impasse and has not been bullying Mr. Andrews as he claims.  
 
The City of Brandon has engaged in good faith negotiation practices with respect to this particular matter since it surfaced as an issue in the fall of 2015. However, since there has been no settlement reached, there is litigation pending and all outstanding matters between Mr. Andrews and the City of Brandon will be determined by the courts.  
 
In order to receive initial approval to develop Oakridge Estates, Executive Homes 2000 Ltd. had to construct and provide a means of access to and from its residential development and constructed Outback Drive, over which the City of Brandon maintains it has easement rights. Executive Homes 2000 Ltd. is also contractually committed, within an agreement with the current developer, to ensure that Bell Avenue remains open for use by the public and to provide access to and from Oakridge Estates. In addition, the portions of Outback Drive and Bell Avenue for which Mr. Andrews has alleged he should receive compensation from the City of Brandon are located within what is intended to be, pursuant to present designs, the eventual realignment of 18th Street North by the Department of Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation. Purchase or expropriation of those lands in question is an issue for Mr. Andrews to work on with the Province of Manitoba.  
 
The particular location on which Mr. Andrews’ vehicle and trailer are presently parked is not on the City’s right-of-way and is technically upon the property of Executive Homes 2000 Ltd. Mr. Andrews cannot live in this trailer at this location pursuant to the City of Brandon’s Zoning Bylaw. Further, Mr. Andrews’ previously identified intent to demand a toll from individuals attempting to use Outback Drive and Bell Avenue is not legally authorized.  
 
During this continued litigation process, residents of Oakridge Estates should be comforted in knowing that the City of Brandon will not allow their properties to become landlocked and will ensure access to their properties will be maintained in a safe manner. In addition, the City of Brandon will address whatever circumstances are created by Mr. Andrews to ensure the safety of area residents and the general public. Residents and those accessing Oakridge Estates are encouraged to call the Brandon Police Service directly at 204-729-2345 if any safety concerns arise.  
The City of Brandon will not be intimidated by Mr. Andrews’ ill-advised threats to barricade traffic from having access to Outback Drive or Bell Avenue and disputes his inaccurate claims of bullying tactics.  
 
Should you have any concerns about this matter, please contact my office.  
 
Sincerely,  
 
Scott Hildebrand  
City Manager  
[/i]

Hey Adam you should do an interview with him to get his side of the story. Would be interesting to hear. Quite the unfolding of unfortunate events in that area, and in all truth I actually had to laugh!! looking forward to seeing what happens.  

Its too bad Mr. Andrews feels the need to involve area residents in his dispute with the city when they have nothing, other than living in the development, to do with the dispute.

there is 2 sides to every story. I feel for the residents who are caught in the middle of this dispute.  

Getty said "I'm glad I didnt build up there. My builder was pushing me to buy a lot out there. Can't be good for the current home owners. no wonder no one chooses the build there.     But why does Barry want a toll road there? Make absolutely no sense. "

Pretty much every lot has sold and been built on here in the first phase , in fact there was a big scramble to open more lots last year , things have slowed a little everywhere right now . So what do you mean by "no one chooses to build up there " ?  
The toll road is because the road crosses his little piece property that he mysteriously didn't sell with the rest of the land . He has only threatened to put one up , which he legally cant , and has not caused any real inconvenience for anybody , besides one flyer .

From what I have been told and I don't know if this is 100% the case or true. But what I was told is that Barry owns a section of land at the very front of Oakridge estates and for some reason when Barry sold the development to the current owner that land was not included in the sale. After the sale Barry left the province for a number of years, but came back this past summer to find that Outback Drive and Bell Avenue which is the street that runs to the north of the development beside the John Deere dealer(Enns Brothers) both run right thru his property and the developer and city did not have permission to build these two streets thru his property. So now he is mad at the developer and city and wants the developer or city to buy the land or compensate him but neither want anything to do with him.

post a copy of the letter that barry delivered to all the home owners in the area.  
 
at the end of the day this is not a home owners issue.  
 
if it is before the courts already then what is the point of flyers and road blocks.  
 
the court will decide then everyone needs to follow that outcome. may take a year or 2 to wind its way through the system. but thats the way it is.

TEN said "The guy has a point. If I build something on city property, they will make me tear it down immediately. They have built a road on his property, they need to remove it or compensate him for it, no? "

yes if that is indeed correct, they built on his land without permission or compensation then i would agree, sounds like the city is saying its provincial issue tho

goshdarn said "post a copy of the letter that barry delivered to all the home owners in the area.     at the end of the day this is not a home owners issue.     if it is before the courts already then what is the point of flyers and road blocks.     the court will decide then everyone needs to follow that outcome. may take a year or 2 to wind its way through the system. but thats the way it is. "

If you go to the top of this discussion page and look on the right hand side there is a photo of the letter that Barry sent to residents under 'Photos related to this discussion' title. Adam posted the letter.  
 
Edited by The_Young_Man, 2016-03-26 17:12:36

existed prior to the new owner buying the property. Don't know about Bell, but I see no reason for him to block Outback. Also, reading the letter from the city manager posted above, the development agreement requires easements for both streets as part of the agreement - seems the city has the right for the streets as existing.  
 
Edited by ronfay, 2016-03-26 19:35:07

I think I've gotten about as much information as I could've asked for when posing the original question. I understand that at the moment there aren't any no trespassing signs up in the area. The neighbourhood and routes in/out of it right now look the same as any other neighbourhood would. With that in mind I'm going to close this thread for at least the time being. If any of the directly effected parties have information that they feel is germane to the further understanding of the topic please don't hesitate to be in touch through the Contact link at the bottom of any page in the site and I will ensure that it's shared. If at any point in the future anyone becomes aware of any kind of settlement or judgement on related matters please also let me know so that I can update and perhaps open for comment at a later date. thx  
 
Edited by Adam, 2016-03-26 19:38:11