Brandt Beach and Leisure Shores

Dear Editor:

I wish to call to the attention of not only the Brandt Beach and Leisure Shores communities, but also to the whole town of Mattapoisett, about the changes that the Brandt Point Realty Trust is trying to get in their original agreement for a cluster development on Brandt Island Road. Their attorney, Mr. John Williams, is asking for an amendment to the previous agreement which would allow for a change to three-bedroom homes from two-bedroom homes so that he can better market the sale of this land. In his presentation, he notes that the original plan called for a septic system that could handle 10,000 gallons of water treatment a day and that this would be “improved” with a system that could handle 15,000 gallons a day. I truly question whether or not such a system would ever be placed, and I’m told that some of the people who live south of this development have seen an increase in the ground water flowing through their yards just as a result of the first few houses that have been erected since phase one was initiated. Barry Denham had to demand that the roads that had been put in by the developer were not up to standards and that changes had to be made. If this is any indication of the way this development is going to proceed, then the claims of an “improved” septic system must be looked at with skepticism. A perennial stream runs through Leisure Shores and originates from this land. It’s soaking wet back there where phase two is planned.

This whole plan was originally “sold” on the basis that there would be 41 housing units with two bedrooms, eight of which would be three bedroom units. That brings it to a total of 90 bedrooms. With the new “plan” there would be approximately 120 bedrooms. This makes it a significant increase in the number of souls that must be serviced by the town without any increase in revenue to the town. We the citizens and tax payers of Mattapoisett would like to thank the Brandt Point Realty Trust for thrusting this cost upon us. Mr. Williams is quoted as saying that the schools of Mattapoisett are under filled and that “Mattapoisett is a dying town.” Thanks again for “filling” our schools without increasing our revenues. He should come down to Brandt Beach and see the large number of young children that will be “filling” the schools.

The Planning Board voted to require another full hearing regarding this request for and amendment on the grounds that this is a significant change to the original agreement. I urge all who care for Mattapoisett to attend this hearing and discuss this issue completely.

We are being sold a bill of goods by someone who wants a BAILOUT. This country has seen enough bailouts. The developers made a bad decision and we don’t have to “fix it” for them. Just because they didn’t plan their venture correctly doesn’t mean that we have to “pull them from the financial fire” that they had not seen. We shouldn’t have to absorb the costs of a faulty plan just to stuff our schools. The cost in services provided by the town like fire, police and emergency services for this development doesn’t balance with the revenues that this development will provide. The runoff of water which will come from this area will have a serious impact on the water quality in the Brandt Island Cove where some of the cleanest water on the south coast of New England lies.

Watch out all you quahogs, oysters, and fish in Brandt Island Cove, the Brandt Point Realty Trust is coming to make Mattapoisett an “undying town.”


Paul E. Osenkowski, Mattapoisett


The views expressed in the “Letters to the Editor” column are not necessarily those of The Wanderer, its staff or advertisers. The Wanderer will gladly accept any and all correspondence relating to timely and pertinent issues in the great Marion, Mattapoisett and Rochester area, provided they include the author’s name, address and phone number for verification. We cannot publish anonymous, unsigned or unconfirmed submissions. The Wanderer reserves the right to edit, condense and otherwise alter submissions for purposes of clarity and/or spacing considerations. The Wanderer may choose to not run letters that thank businesses, and The Wanderer has the right to edit letters to omit business names. The Wanderer also reserves the right to deny publication of any submitted correspondence.

Leave A Comment...