CARMEL MASTER PLAN COMES UP SHORT
BY:  Chris Primavera
March 1, 2000

The Draft Master Plan the Town of Carmel is currently considering seems to be short on first hand research and relies heavily on outdated, inaccurate information supplied by others. The plan, which is costing taxpayers $150,000.00 (mostly through DEP fees) is based on five to ten year old data in many cases.

The plan only marginally addresses water quantity and quality in Carmel. Our existing water districts are prone to pollution from septic runoff and leaching of chemicals into the supply. A NY Journal News article recently highlighted MTBE pollution, and there are other existing pollution problems in several districts. The only way to ensure clean water is to protect our natural filters (forest and wetlands) and minimize the sources of pollution. The plan identifies wetlands and the 100-year floodplain. These areas and a suitable surrounding buffer must be protected. Slopes greater than 15% should be similarly off-limits. Remarkably, the plan ignores its own findings in the land use plan, designating both wetland and severe slopes for medium to medium-high density zoning. The plan also fails to adequately address buffers between residential and commercial zones. This would allow gas stations and dry cleaners to be sited adjacent to water sources. The plan does not address the quality of water drawn from surface (Lake Mahopac) sources which are prone to MTBE pollution, septic waste and chemical runoff.

The plan proposes a new, large sewer district to the south of Lake Mahopac with no mention of how to fund the system. This is critical, especially in light of the lawsuit involving CSD #2. The plan claims: “The expanded area does not promote an increase in residential density since much of the proposed area is largely developed.” This statement is technically accurate, but it depends on the meaning of the word “largely”. There are substantial tracts of undeveloped property along Baldwin Place Road. There are smaller parcels of land and areas with steep slopes. All of these areas would be prime candidates for denser development with a sewer district in place.

The school system is presently nearing capacity in some areas. If the 2% average increase forecasted by the Mahopac School District is accurate, then room for 750-800 additional students will be required. Renovation and expansion presently underway will not be sufficient. The plan is already outdated and must be revised to reflect actual usage of school facilities. The MP overlooks that, as of last fall, The Falls School is home to the districts’ Kindergarten classes. The data relied on for the conclusions is suspect. Table 7.3 lists a capacity of 7791 students. If this is correct, why are we expanding and renovating as the town has capacity for 3100 more students than are currently enrolled? The authors of the plan must independently verify capacities and projections.

The plan acknowledges that many roads in town are operating at or above their ideal capacity. The solutions offered (timing of traffic lights, roundabouts) are of limited benefit. The only effective means of expanding capacity is to widen the roads in question. This would obviously be complicated and expensive given the layout of property in the area. The plan must outline a realistic strategy to deal with traffic issues. Development (commercial and residential) should be regulated so as not to exacerbate problems. Case law allows development to be keyed to infrastructure improvements.

Of major concern is the escalating tax rate in the town. It has been estimated that new residential development requires $1.30 for every $1.00 in taxes generated. Aside from the Route 6 corridor in Mahopac and Fair Street in Carmel, no areas are designated as commercial or industrial. The plan does not adequately address how to attract and site businesses that will have a positive impact on revenue without harming the environment.

The MP catalogs recreational facilities, but makes no assessment as to whether they are adequate. No direction is given as to whether the town should continue assessing rec. fees from developers in lieu of 10% parkland.

The MP describes the makeup of the Towns’ Fire and Police services. It makes no analysis of their capacity, and does not address the effect of continued development on these departments.


Development, when properly managed, can be beneficial to the community. Absent a well thought out plan, the results can be disastrous. The Draft Master Plan as presented, has the potential to be the latter.