Jasper County council advances rezoning and development agreement for Pine Level sand mine over strong public opposition

Jasper County Council voted on Feb. 3 to move forward with a development agreement and rezoning that would allow a sand-mining operation on a 264.53-acre tract off Heritage Road and Pine Level Church Road. The motion to approve the second reading passed 4'1 after several hours of presentations, technical briefings and public comment.

Residents and environmental advocates filled the public-comment period to oppose the rezoning. "Please do not approve this rezoning and development agreement," said John Holloway, who identified himself as living about a mile from the parcel. He told the council the change "sets a bad precedent for the rural preservation district" and does not align with the county's comprehensive plan.

The county received detailed briefings from planning staff and the site engineer, Davis & Floyd. Staff said the operator plans to mine a 58-acre area of the tract and must obtain state permits, including mining and land development approvals, before a land-development permit is issued. The engineer described multiple mitigation measures: a 1,000-foot setback from adjacent houses, a 300-foot setback from nearby roads, a stormwater detention approach said to reduce runoff, a wetlands delineation and archeological reviews. The engineer also said truck traffic on the proposed haul route (Pine Level Church Road/High Level Road) is expected at 75'85 trucks per day with 7'9 peak-hour truck movements.

Health and environmental risks were the central focus of opponents. Nancy Weckhorst told the council she lives directly across from the proposed site and cited concerns about silica dust, noise, well-water impacts and endangered species near the parcel. Hugh Murray, who described service-connected lung conditions, said airborne particulates "penetrate deep into the lungs" and urged the council to "protect the health, heritage, and future of the families who call this place home." Grant McClure of the Coastal Conservation League urged the council to apply the criteria in county code (chapter 3, section 2.5) requiring rezoning only when original zoning is improper or where there have been major, unanticipated changes to the area.

Applicant Jeff Hiers said he chose not to carve a smaller mining area from the parcel and that the development agreement includes commitments to reclamation and post-mining end use. He also agreed, at the council's request, to consider language giving the county a first right of refusal should the property be offered for sale in the future. The applicant acknowledged a reclamation plan will be required under the land-development permit process and said that, after reclamation, the site would revert to rural-preservation zoning.

Council members stressed the need for enforceable conditions before third reading. Several asked that the end-use plan, stronger dust control language and monitoring/inspection responsibilities be included in the agreement. Planning staff and counsel said state permits (including DHEC/State mining division) and county land-development approval remain prerequisites to mining operations and that the development agreement must address monitoring, escrow for road repair and reclamation security.

The second reading of the associated rezoning ordinance was approved by voice vote with four ayes and one opposed. The council directed staff to return with the end-use plan and any technical documents required for third reading.

The council's action advances the proposal to a later hearing where final conditions and the third reading of the ordinances will be considered. No mining activity may begin without required state and county permits and any conditions adopted by the council.