By Samantha J. Siegel, co-founder of www.savetheangeloak.org

Angel Oak Can Still Be Saved!

A little over a year ago, we began a battle with developers who wanted to put a massive development right on the edge of the urban growth boundary, surrounding the Angel Oak on three sides.  We were certain that a development of this size could kill the Angel Oak, not to mention severely harm the rural character of Johns Island.

Everyone told us nothing could be done to stall or stop this development.  We were simply too late, they said. The developers had just received final approval from City Council for the planned unit development of Angel Oak Village. However, the developer had not then, and still has not today, received approvals from the state environmental agency, DHEC/OCRM, to fill four acres of wetlands.  Further, although the US Army Corps of Engineers initially said they did not have jurisdiction over the site, we have presented expert testimony demonstrating that they do, in fact, have a responsibility to protect these wetlands.

Construction of Angel Oak Village was set to begin last January.  To date, not a single tree on the 42 acres of land slated for development has been cut down or harmed in any way.

Now, with a petition with just under 8,000 signatures and counting, the Corps pending reevaluation of the wetlands on site, and the support of the community, we believe it is fair to say that it was not too late to make a difference.

We, as residents of Johns Island, are in a unique and powerful position. WE will shape the future of Johns Island by guiding the fate of the Angel Oak. To the contrary of what many believe, phase 1 of the proposed Angel Oak Village development is NOT a done deal.

We have been working diligently to find a positive resolution to the “Angel Oak debate” that best serves the people of Johns Island. 

The decisions made by governments are to protect what is most important for the public good. In the case of this development, our local, state, and federal government officials have been notified about the inconsistent and inaccurate information we discovered in the permitting process.

For example, wetlands that are adjacent to waters of the United States are regulated by the federal government through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The wetlands on the Angel Oak Village project site are connected to Church Creek, a U.S. federally protected waterbody, through a culvert. This means that the wetlands in question should be classified as federally jurisdictional.

Indeed, in May 2002, the Corps issued a letter stating that the wetlands on site were under federal jurisdiction. Just weeks later, they issued a new letter reversing their decision. Further, the letter specified a new file number for future correspondence.

We have several concerns about inaccuracies in the files at DHEC/OCRM at the state level as well.

An email written by the developer, Mr. Demoura, to his lawyer says, “I need to understand what entitlements our agreement with OCRM being [brings] us. We have a serious situation with these tree huggers who are hell bent on calling City Councilmen and whoever else will listen.”

An agreement between DHEC/OCRM and a developer for more wetland fill than is allowed by law is not within that agency’s statutory authority.  If the development were to move forward as planned, the wetland fill would not only destroy an important habitat for a number of species and alter the Angel Oak’s water table, upon which the great tree has been relying on all these years, but construction runoff would be seeping into Church Creek.

People are constantly asking how they can help save the Angel Oak. Much like the growth of a live oak tree, growth in our society must come from the bottom up. When one person stands up, a few more also stand up, and then a few thousand may stand up in solidarity. Write a letter to your local officials voicing your concerns about the development. Your voice is the most powerful tool you have, and its echo can travel great distances.