Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
South Miami DRB defers review of new two‑story house after impervious‑area, septic and tree concerns
Summary
The Design Review Board deferred a decision on a proposed two‑story home at 6741 SW 68th Terrace (DRB2025‑037) after staff counted impervious area at 65% vs. the 45% limit, and members raised unresolved issues about a septic drain‑field overlapping a large tree canopy and whether a wood deck can be treated as pervious.
The City of South Miami Design Review Board deferred consideration of a proposed two‑story single‑family residence at 6741 Southwest 68th Terrace (DRB2025‑037), citing unresolved impervious‑coverage calculations, a septic drain‑field that appears to underlie a large tree canopy, and the need for clearer construction details.
Planning consultant Mark Albers told the board staff review counted impervious area at about 65% against the city's 45% limit. Albers said some of that calculation rested on a pool deck and driveway and recommended conditioning approval on a revised design that demonstrates compliance with the city's impervious‑area rules.
The applicant, Juan Carlos Ferreira, said the rear deck is a wood deck with a trellis and that portions of the deck are pervious; he said the design choices were intentional to try to meet perviousness limits. "We're very mindful during the design of all these concerns," he told the board, and offered to ensure the wood deck has the required spacing if needed.
Board members pressed for specific plan details to support any claim that deck areas are pervious: an engineering or construction detail showing plank gaps (a prior practice discussed referenced an opening of roughly 1/8 inch), removal of compacted subgrade below the deck, and a tree‑canopy overlay on the site plan. Members also noted the city does not give credit for most pavers and that artificial turf counts as impervious unless otherwise treated.
Because the staff report and plans did not yet show those clarifying details — and because the septic drain‑field appeared to overlap the large tree that the applicant said was a primary site feature — a board member moved to defer the application so the applicant could revise plans, add the required technical details and coordinate septic, landscape and tree protection documentation. The motion carried; staff suggested the applicant may return as early as the December 2 DRB meeting.
The item was recorded as DRB2025‑037. The board directed the applicant to provide clear, color‑coded impervious‑area graphics, detailed deck and subgrade sections if treating a deck as pervious, a tree‑canopy overlay, and documentation showing the drain‑field location and any necessary arborist or engineering input.
