Share and Follow
In a recent meeting, the Jasper County Council opted to delay a crucial vote concerning the future of a proposed sand mine. The property in question spans 264 acres and is located on Pine Level Church Road in the Grays area of Jasper County, South Carolina.
Currently designated for rural preservation, the land’s fate hangs in the balance as developer J. Heirs seeks to have it reclassified for resource extraction. This potential shift has sparked considerable debate among both the local population and county officials, highlighting a divide in community priorities.
During Monday’s session, Grays resident Donna Kay McKeever emphasized the region’s commitment to its rural identity. She reminded council members of a guiding principle: “Jasper County will protect and foster the rural character that defines our sense of place.”
The decision on the property has become controversial among the public and county officials.
“Jasper County will protect and foster the rural character that defines our sense of place,” is a quote that Grays resident, Donna Kay McKeever presented to county council members on Monday.
McKeever said that quote was pulled directly from the county’s comprehensive plan. She asked that council members follow their own set standards and vote ‘no’ to replacing the rural and preserved land, with the proposed sand mine.
Another Grays resident, John Holloway, said that rezoning rural preserved land for resource extraction will invite other developers in to do the same.
“I think this rezoning and build agreement sets a bad precedent for the Rural Preservation District,” Holloway said.
Many residents also brought up concerns about health and safety of a nearby sand mine. Silica dust is what several residents and even some council members brought up as a big concern.
“The excavation of the sand clay in its moist state that we’d be extracting and loading into a truck, covered, is not going to be a generator of silica dust,” said the developers engineer.
Neighboring residents to the 264-acre property still said they worry how the mining would affect their air quality, and if any local water supply would be contaminated.
Residents also raised questions about truck traffic. Many neighboring residents fear their property going back generations will lose its value.
“I didn’t want to be the guy that dug 50 on 70. I wanted to be the guy that dug 50 on 250,” said J. Heirs, the developer, looking to reassure residents that he was trying to take the proper steps for the development.
Heirs also said he would have a 1,000-foot buffer from neighboring homes, a 300-foot buffer from roads, and would not interfere with wetlands on the property.
Right now, it’s projected that around 75 trucks a day will be in and out of the property. To help mitigate traffic, Heir’s also looks to improve 500 feet of the roadway outside of the property.
To answer potential health concerns from the public and council members, the developers engineer answered that he doesn’t believe there will be any issues. But he said they still had to go through the state permitting process.
“As we get additional studies and reports needed to pass muster with the state, we’ll be ensuring we meet the threshold as the next stage,” he said.
Regardless, many residents still said they weren’t buying into the proposal.
“I am still extremely opposed to the sand mine,” said Nancy Weghorst, a neighbor to the proposed property.
Adam Bishop, another neighbor, added on, “I think you have seen that a majority of the community does not want it here. I don’t wish anything ill on Mr. Heirs. I have spoken with him. He is a very generous person, very kind person, it seems to me. But he also understands that while I wish him luck, I hope he fails in this endeavor. I hope that you gentlemen listen to your communities and do what is right.”
Despite council moving the project forward in previous meetings, they tabled their decision on Monday. They want to discuss further into the proposed project before making a decision in the third and final reading.