LUPC Addresses Burnt Jacket Rumors at Beaver Cove Select Board Meeting- by Emily Patrick 

   Addressing growing concerns from Beaver Cove residents about the large residential development on Burnt Jacket Mountain, representatives from LUPC spoke virtually at the July 27 Beaver Cove select board meeting about a recent site visit.

   In a recent statement obtained by the Moosehead Lakeshore Journal, LUPC said, “The Land Use Planning Commission permitted residential development for Burnt Jacket Holding I, LLC, including residential structures, underground utilities, and a roadway. The residential permits plan did not approve tunnels, bunkers, or data centers.”

   Despite this, the amount of blasting occurring at the site has sparked ongoing rumors among residents about the above-mentioned concerns. Pressure from locals reached Beaver Cove officials, who reached out to LUPC.

   Audie Arbo, Permitting and Compliance Manager at LUPC, said due to the request from Beaver Cove officials, LUPC staff conducted a routine permitting compliance site visit on July 21. Beaver Cove select board Chair Joe Babbit was also invited to attend the site visit with LUPC staff, project staff, the general contractor and an owner representative.

   Arbo said, “We didn’t see anything that was of concern…in excess of the permit that was issued.” As a reminder, LUPC has approved three permits for the site: most recently, a building permit for a single-family residence, a private road permit, and a permit to bury the utility lines to run power to the property. Arbo acknowledged that the permits were issued for a “large development,” but that, “The staff looked at all three permits and found them to be in compliance with what we would expect.”

   Babbitt, who says he attended the site visit for the purpose of “anti-gossip mongering,” said there are essentially three building sites within the overall permitted area. The “site of most excavation” that can be viewed from the lake is where a “large barn with a pasture” is going to be. “Most of what you see is the excavation site for the barn,” Babbitt explained, saying “a lot of earth” is being moved to create the pasture and harvest stone for the rest of the project.  

   Babbitt posited that perhaps that’s why there has been so much blasting at the site, saying, “To me, the amount of terracing going on where the barn is being built…their strategic preference was to level down instead of build up.” He said there was also no evidence of a helipad at the site, addressing another rumor.

   The second building, or “guest” house, according to Babbitt, is at the “shell stage” with walls and a roof. The main house, a 28,000 square-foot “mega-mansion,” is the part of the project that’s “the least far along,” according to the board chair. When asked about a timeframe for the project to be completed, Babbitt said, “Two to three years is the numbers I heard.” Though he wasn’t sure if the owners were planning to be seasonal or full-time residents, he said his understanding is that the residence is “a family’s project for that family’s use.”

   Babbitt said, “My experience going up there for this tour with the LUPC staff was that the owner’s representative and staff on the project were very generous with their time, they were great about answering all our questions…they could not have been, in my opinion, more forthcoming and more transparent,” within the privacy standards they must adhere to.

   “The big thing that I was disappointed to hear is how much trespassing they’re having to deal with,” Babbitt said. As many know, locals were first alerted to the sale when the hiking trails on Burnt Jacket Mountain were closed by the new owner.

   “So we’ve lost our hiking trails up there?” Greg Cyrus, who was in attendance, asked. Arbo and Babbitt both confirmed the hiking trails are on private property and are now closed to the general public and explained that adverse possession does not apply when hiking was allowed by the previous landowner- adverse possession must be in opposition to the owner’s wishes. Hank McPherson, the property’s previous owner, allowed hiking, so “squatter’s rights” would not apply here and the new owner’s wishes govern access. “I’m not a land use lawyer, but that’s my understanding of it,” Arbo explained.

   “These are private landowners and residents that are going to be members of our community…and they deserve the privacy and respect we all enjoy,” Babbitt said.

   In closing, Arbo said, “This wasn’t about environmental compliance. There wasn’t anything that was triggering an environmental compliance review…just a review of the permitting and ongoing construction based on the town’s request we go out.”

   “Usually, when there’s not a protected resource in play…we reach out to the agent, we reach out to the contractor, we ask how it’s going, and we check in with them…that’s what we normally do.” Arbo said aside from the project being so large, “It’s a pretty routine occurrence of development in the UT.”