Environmental Impact Assessment Report

for
Scrivani Farms
4903 E Chestnut Ave, Vineland, NJ 08361
ENVL Project #3241
December 14, 2018
Prepared for:
Dr. Tait Chirenje, Stockton University
USC, 3rd Floor
101 Vera King Farris Dr, Galloway, NJ 08205

Additional information about the project and images of the site are located at:
https://scrivanifarmsreport.weebly.com
I. Well water quality study on farms in Vineland, New Jersey.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT

A. This report was made for an environmental pollution and regulation class at Stockton
University. The water testing will be conducted at Stockton University by Doctor Tait
Chirenje. All water sampling was done with the permission of the owners of the wells.
B. The purpose of this project was to analyze and determine the quality of the water in the
wells that we conducted our studies on. We wanted to see the quality along with any
potential pollution we could find. Our goal was to determine if the water being used
throughout the multiple farms studied had acceptable water standards and to report the
findings back to the farms. The farm owner intends to remove a wooded area between
two farms and turn it into farm land, the assessment is of the impact of this.
C. The setting of this study was conducted at multiple farms in Vineland, New Jersey. This
particular region is mainly consistent of farms and agricultural / rural land.
D. The testing was done based off of the known locations of the wells on the property.
1. We went to multiple different wells to test and collected water using basic
sampling methods.
2. Samples were brought back to Stockton University where they would be
stored.
3. Testing is still in process because of the unoperational machinery used to
test the water.

II. A DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT PRIOR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE

PROJECT

A. The nature of the site consists of agricultural land in southern New Jersey. It is in the
outer coastal plains region of New Jersey which has mostly sandy, acidic soils. The area
that the farm is located in southern New Jersey has mainly low lying land that has been
used as farmland since the Lenni Lenape. This intermediate upland section has been
used for farming despite its sandy soils and has been successful in many different types
of agricultural uses. The area that will be renovated is a woody corridor between two
fields. It contains trees and brush, and has a small stream running through it.
B. The neighboring land is also currently being used as farmland. The testing of the wells
will further be reported and properly labeled on the samples. Since these wells are on
farm land they are mostly just agricultural uses not for main human consumption. The
only potential hazardous waste includes leftover farming substances (fertilizes,
fungicide, herbicide, insecticide) which are all stored securely in a shed.
C. A large and fully functional house in which the family resides is central to the property.
The land also contains several large greenhouses, several large barns for holding
equipment and rinsing produce, a small horse stable, and a building that operates as the
headquarters of the company.

III. THE PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT IF IMPLEMENTED

A. LAND
1. “statewide goals strategies and policies” from the New Jersey State Plan are intersecting
with the project directly with goals 1-4.
 1. Revitalize the state’s cities and towns
i. Trenton grows about 150,000 tons of food in community gardens each year. This
demonstrates community pride and awareness of wellbeing as well as importance of
cultivating diverse food selection to avoid the effects of “food deserts”. This agricultural
project supports 90 acres of locally grown specialized crop production that rotates the
crops throughout the year. There will be approximately 31 species of plant available for
consumers year-round.
2. Conserve the state’s Natural Resources and Systems
i. Agriculture is a leading reason for deforestation and subsequent environmental
consequences just by displacing the lands natural resources.
3. Promote beneficial economic growth, development and renewal for all residents of new
jersey
i. A locally owned farm creates an economic feedback system that has several
modes of influence. There are approximately 30-50 employees with specialized skills. An
enriched consumer selection that allows buyers of produce to exercise freedom of
choice. City infrastructure will be supported by tax revenue.
4. Protect the environment, prevent and clean up pollution
i. Large amounts of sediment will degrade water use and quality as well as wildlife
diversity and health. Oxygen sequestration will be depleted in the local area with lack of
forestation. Flooding may occur around roads due to the degree of elevation in the land.
In terms of pollution all state regulation and certifications will be met to prevent any
contamination or hazard to the environment or employees

2. The municipality of Vineland has historically not undergone any subdivision regulations.
This has allows property owners to split land as they have seen fit, subsequently there are many
homes that are quite literally right next to agricultural land. In this property there are 3 residential
houses. Currently, 10 acres of land must be purchased in order to develop it for residential use.

3. Current strict zoning regulations enforced by the municipality of vineland promote a land
stewardship atmosphere for developers. South jersey has primarily been the home of the
agricultural center for New Jersey and thus the preservation of farmland has become
increasingly important in light of the urban sprawl that has been the zoning policy of Vineland.

4. The current ecosystem affected by the project will be pond wetlands that are non tidal
wetlands that are surrounded by vegetation, in this case a deciduous old growth forest. These
wetlands are privately maintained and any agricultural source of contaminant is monitored with
bi monthly inspections in accordance with N.J.A.C 7:7A Freshwater wetlands protections act.

B. WATER
1. No instances of noncompliance with approved State water quality standards.

2. There is a potential risk for increase of pollution or turbidity levels within a surface water
body due to runoff. The land has an approximate downhill slope of about 9° in the South
direction. The water from upstream has the potential to pick up any of the pollutants on
the land and carry them downstream.

3. Aquatic habitats will be affected by this water carrying any chemicals from runoff.
Eutrophication may occur from runoff carrying fertilizers, resulting in nutrient overloading
 in nearby water bodies. This project will results in minor disruption of aquatic habitats.
The following activities will affect the habitat: Land clearing and excavation
 Machinery transportation, operation, and maintenance
 Presence and use of infrastructure
 Chemicals released on property of infrastructure

4. With the use of herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, these chemicals can leach into
groundwater after precipitation and irrigation. This may lessen the quality of the
groundwater of the Kirkwood-Cohansey. Quantity of groundwater would only be affected
from pumping the water out for irrigation purposes only.

5. The only depletion of water would come from well pumping for the purpose of irrigation.

6. Flooding would only occur in areas that are vulnerable to ponding. Structural
obstructions would have minimal effect on the displacement of water as only a small
portion of the land will have buildings. The water that is displaced would have a small
impact on flood levels, but may increase channel erosion, velocity, and siltation of
stream channels.

7. There is potential for cumulative effects from future use of chemicals (fertilizers and
biocides) and unwanted pollutants on water quality. There’s also future potential for
biological contamination from horse feces should they fail to be handled correctly.

Water Quality:
The combination of both would affect water quality of the watershed. If not handled
properly, this could lessen the overall health of aquatic life downstream from the
property. The expected cumulative effect on water quality will be considered non-
significant once mitigation measures are put into place. Monitoring the water quality will
be required to to confirm the effectiveness of the measures implemented.

C. Air
1. The only foreseeable source of air pollution would be from the use of vehicles. The
project will use a fleet of 10 standard duty gasoline trucks with flat beds. Another fleet of
10 heavy duty tractor vehicles will be utilized for farm activity. Fuel is supplied by
certified local DeMatte Oils.
2. Any emissions will be typical and will meet Air Pollution Control Code
3. No odor precautions will be needed.

D. AQUATIC AND TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE:

1. The location of the proposed addition of farmland is a stretch of swampy deciduous
forest containing old growth trees, with a small freshwater stream running through. This
small stream would be lost to the project as it would be filled in to create farm land. The
anticipated impact of this is that the stream will be fragmented, and that any aquatic and
arboreal life will be displaced, and trees removed, causing some habitat fragmentation.
2. The entire aquatic food chain that lives in this stream will be lost; it will presumably
move up or downstream past the farm property to a joined body or water. The farm land
that replaces the stream will likely host prey animals such as mice, which will serve as
food for birds of prey and other predators that utilize farm land
 3. Since the aquatic and arboreal wildlife is going to be displaced from the area by this
project, the effect that the noise, dust, lighting, turbidity and siltation will have on it is
ultimately going to be a need for wildlife to relocate. This project won’t have the same
effects as a typical construction project as it involves changing the landscape rather than
building infrastructure, and there likely won’t be any light disturbing wildlife as the project
will take place during the day time only. Birds of prey and terrestrial life are expected to
avoid the area during the project, and then return when it has completed.
4. Surveys still need to be conducted to determine if and endangered or federally
threatened species inhabit this piece of land, though we don’t believe any do. Upon the
initial site visit, a bald eagle was seen resting in a field. Landowner told us that they don’t
nest on his property, but that they do pass through to rest and hunt. We don’t expect the
project to harm the eagles in any way.

E. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC

1. Food deserts are a significant problem in low income areas. They are related to a plethora of
psychological issues which stem, ultimately, from a person’s neighborhood. People can feel a
distinct disconnection between themselves and their food, which is also inherently linked to
culture. “Many Americans living in rural, minority, or low-income areas are subjected to food
deserts and may be unable to access affordable, healthy foods, leaving their diets lacking
essential nutrients.” (CDC). Food that is imported into the state will come at a higher price as
opposed to locally grown vegetables.
 South Jersey is a historical location that is home to many different farms and businesses
that have established themselves in 1885 when families first came to the state from
either immigration or other forms of Diaspora. Agriculture is a cultural icon in New
Jersey, and it was how the state earned its moniker, the Garden State. Farmland
preservation is a way to combat Urban Sprawl and preserve the natural income and
aesthetic of New Jersey.
 Local business supporting local growth is a statewide goal that is supported by this
project.

2. Natural wetland tributaries flow through the project site that remain unspoiled for any
intended use other than drinking quality.

3. Sustainability is achieved through ensuring that everything is not only up to local, state and
federal code but going further to maintain environmental protection through multi faceted
inspections of mechanics, water, and crops. The farm itself would only be working with licensed
and EPA certified suppliers for seeds and chemicals as well as following EPA regulated protocol
on days to harvest in pesticide application and application of fertilizer to avoid oversaturation of
the soils.

F. There will be no hazardous waste involved with this project. Waste that we anticipate
handling includes whole trees, rocks, and undesirable soils. Whole trees will be sold to a mulch
company for utilization and to save landfill space. Any wood that is not wanted, along with rocks
and soil will be disposed of as Construction and Demolition (C&D) materials so that they can be
reused by being utilized for other projects
G. The aesthetics of the land are going to change by becoming completely uniform. Where
there was a wooded gully with a stream, there will be a continuation of farmland that matches its
surroundings.

H. Although the addition of farmland and removal of a natural stream is a project that is not as
sustainable as leaving the area undeveloped, the process itself will be done in a sustainable
way. Resources that are removed will be recycled as detailed above, and the soil that is added
to the area will be non hazardous and have good drainage. The project will be done slowly as to
allow wildlife time to relocate without being damaged, and the land will be repurposed for
farming, which is much more sustainable itself than industrial land use.

V. AVOIDANCE OF ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

The area that this project will utilize is currently a gully containing a stream, and removal
of it will adversely impact the populations of organisms that inhabit it, and decrease the
biodiversity of the area, which is otherwise farmland. This area is privately owned property and it
is the landowners wish to alter it in such a way.

VI. ALTERNATIVE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

A. No-build Alternative

The No-Build Alternative was considered as required. This alternative would maintain
the existing undeveloped property. This alternative has the least amount of impact in
comparison to any construction alternative. This is the cheapest alternative as it has no
cost for construction and mitigation.
B. No other alternative projects were considered that would have less of an impact on the
environmental health of the land than the original proposed project.