Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board grants variances for 80 Adams Terrace with conditions after neighbor support
Summary
The Zoning Board approved variances for a patio at 80 Adams Terrace on condition the applicant remove or move a backyard shed to meet setback rules and install rear dry-well mitigation; an initial motion to deny the application failed.
The Springfield Township Zoning Board of Adjustment on Oct. 21 granted variances for a patio at 80 Adams Terrace after testimony from applicants Michael Ferreira and Tina Ferrer and a neighbor’s public comment.
Michael Ferreira said he constructed a patio in May 2025 to address about 13 years of backyard water problems and acknowledged he exceeded the allowed lot coverage. Ferreira stated the property’s lot coverage rose to roughly 50.5% and that he filed for a variance after a zoning official stopped the work. “I constructed a patio in the back of my house … I did exceed, I believe it’s 14% of the allowed 36. So I’m up to 50.5,” Ferreira said.
Board members pressed on mitigation options and the placement of downspouts. Staff and members discussed moving a dry well to the rear-right of the property to capture runoff and recommended placing mitigation where downspouts already discharge. Neighbor Mary Dose Perlaza, who identified herself as living next door at 86 Adams Terrace, testified she had not experienced water intrusion from the applicant’s property during heavy rains and supported the applicant: “I haven’t had a drop of water from his property.”
A motion to deny the application—centered on the shed/setback issue—was put to a roll call and failed (two votes in favor of denial, five opposed). The board then approved the variances for the patio and the walkway setback while denying the setback variance for the shed; approval was conditioned on the applicant removing or moving the shed to meet the five-foot setback and installing flood-mitigation measures in the rear (a dry well tied into existing drainage). The board noted that removing the shed would reduce the lot coverage to under 50%.
The board recorded the vote and advised the applicants to coordinate the mitigation and any required inspections with town staff.
The decision followed testimony, staff questions about runoff and dry-well placement, and a neighbor’s supportive statement; the item was concluded with the board’s conditions recorded.
