Town of Charlton

 

 

Town of Charlton

Planning Board Minutes

And Public Hearing Minutes

784 Charlton Road

Charlton, New York 12019

 

Minutes of Planning Board Meeting – August 20, 2007

 

Chairman Raymond Black called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. at the John W. Taylor Hall.

 

Present: Raymond Black, Chairman, Constance Wood, Mark Hodgkins, Jay Wilkinson, John Kadlecek, Dawn Szurek, William Keniry, Esq., Planning Board Attorney, Susan York, Planning Board clerk and Kimberly Caron, Recording Secretary.  Chris Mitchell joined the meeting at 7:50 p.m.   

 

AGENDA MEETING:

 

Mr. Black stated that there are six of seven Board members present which represents a quorum. 

 

Mr. Black stated that there would be a Public Hearing on the Markham subdivision at 7:45 p.m.

 

Minutes

 

Mr. Black asked for comments on the meeting minutes.  Mr. Hodgkins, Ms. Szurek and Mr. Keniry provided comments.  Mrs. York previously provided comments via mail.

 

Gutto (225-1-66.1)

 

Mr. Black stated that he has not received the new maps or anything else that was requested in advance from Mr. Gutto.

 

Mrs. Wood inquired as to where that puts this application with regard to the Public Hearing last month.

 

Mr. Black stated that the 62-day clock is running.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that at the last meeting the Board and the applicant discussed the 62 day time period.  Mr. Keniry stated that Mr. Gutto stated that he understood that the default approval did not apply to him.  Mr. Keniry stated that he could confirm that in writing if the Board would like.

 

Mrs. Wood stated that the next meeting is September 17, 2007.

 

Mr. Wilkinson stated that would be exactly 62 days.

 

Mrs. Wood suggested having a letter drafted for Mr. Gutto to sign.

 

Mr. Black stated that the letter could indicate that the Board and the applicant agree to extend the time to the next meeting or beyond.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that he would draft the letter.

 

Gracey/VanGuilder (237-1-21.1)

 

Mr. Black stated that he does not see any issues with this application. 

 

Mr. Black stated that the driveways are over 500 feet and they have the cross section of the driveway construction on the drawing.  Mr. Black stated that they cross ACOE wetlands not DEC.  Mr. Black stated that raises the question as to whether or not the Board wants to see a permit.

 

Heflin/Durst (255-1-40.1, 41, 43.1, 43.2, 43.3)

 

Mr. Black stated that Warren Longacker from Lansing Engineering, P.C. was present representing Mr. Heflin.

 

Mr. Longacker approached the Board.  Mr. Longacker requested that the Board grant an adjournment of this matter until the next meeting.  Mr. Longacker stated that they have submitted a letter to the Board regarding the water with some new information from a conversation with Mr. McNamara.  Mr. Longacker stated that they would present the project with regard to that letter next month.  Mr. Longacker stated that they wanted to give the Board the opportunity to review that letter.

 

Mr. Black clarified that this is a postponement request, not an adjournment.

 

Mr. Black inquired if at next month’s meeting the Board would be receiving new information.

 

Mr. Longacker stated that the applicant would like the Board to review the letter and also sit down with him to review the new information obtained with EDP.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board is not familiar with that information.

 

Mr. Longacker stated that it is in the letter the Board received.

 

The Board acknowledged receiving a copy of the letter but not reviewing it prior to the meeting.

 

Mr. Black stated that for the Board to move forward with the subdivision plans as independent of water district extension approval, there was a letter written from Mr. McNamara indicating the type of information he needed in terms of the engineering details.  Mr. Black stated that the letter from Lansing Engineering seems to address the water district extension but not necessarily the engineering details in reference to Mr. McNamara’s request.

 

Mr. Longacker stated that engineering plans had been resubmitted this spring.  They were preliminary conceptual details.  Mr. Longacker stated that they are trying to get approval for the water district extension before some of those questions are addressed because some of those questions require additional money to be spent by the applicant.  Mr. Longacker stated that the applicant does not want to spend more money without being able to get the water district extension.

 

Mr. Black stated that he understands why they are asking for the Board to review the information and speak with the engineer to be in a better position to discuss it next month.

 

Mr. Longacker stated that he has spoken with Mr. McNamara and most of his comments could be addressed.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board would see them next month.  Mr. Black stated that the Board would need to review the file and the letter from Lansing Engineering for next month’s meeting.

 

Reports

 

Mr. Black stated that there would not be a Zoning Report as Mr. LaFountain is on vacation.

 

Correspondence

 

Mr. Black stated that there is a conference on August 29th and 30th.

 

Mr. Wilkinson inquired as to what happened to the Storm Water Management plan and where it was headed.

 

Mr. Black stated that in summary, it was reviewed by Blue Neils and Mike McNamara and some of the deviations from the NYS recommendations were deemed to be substantial enough to require a GAP analysis and that therefore for now we’ll adopt just what the state recommended which we have to have in place by January and to engage changes beyond that point.  Mr. Black stated that he thinks that is the direction that the Town Board is heading in.

 

Mr. Kadlecek inquired if the Board has committed to how they are going to rework this into the future.

 

Mr. Black stated no, the it will be on the Planning Board to decide if we want to recommend more changes subsequent to the adoption of the recommendations of the State.

 

The meeting was closed at 7:38 p.m.

 

BUSINESS MEETING

 

Opened at 7:39 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

Minutes

 

Mr. Black provided a change.

 

Mr. Black made the motion to approve the draft of the July 16, 2007 minutes with changes incorporated.  Mr. Kadlecek seconded the motion.  All were in favor.  

 

Gutto (225-1-66.1)

 

Mr. Gutto stated that he has the information the Board requested.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board would see him after the Public Hearing.

 

Town Board Liaison

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board was discussing the MS4 Storm Water Laws.  Mr. Black stated that the Town Board has decided to accept the States recommendations because some of what the Planning Board required might require a gap analysis.

 

Mrs. Verola stated that was the concern.

 

Mr. Black stated that the question becomes how does the recommendations that this Board presented get discussed in the future.  Mr. Black inquired if it was via the Zoning Ordinance review committee.

 

Mr. Wilkinson stated that Mr. Neils took exception to a lot of the Planning Board’s comments and he gave reasons why but he did say some of the comments were very good.  Mr. Wilkinson inquired if any of those comments were going to be included in the new draft.

 

Mrs. Verola stated no, not at this point.

 

Mr. Black stated that with Mr. Hodgkins being the Board’s liaison to that Zoning Ordinance review, the Board should include any recommendations via that committee.

 

Mrs. Verola stated yes.

 

PUBLIC HEARING (7:45 p.m.)

 

Markham (236-1-122)

 

Mr. Black explained the Public Hearing process.

 

Mr. Markham presented the following plan:

 

            -Merged a 10-acre and a 9-acre parcel on Cook Road years ago;

-desire is to separate the parcel again due to personal circumstances with Mr. Markham retaining the 9 acre parcel and Mrs. Markham retaining the 10 acre parcel;

            -220 feet of frontage;

            -wetlands have been delineated;

            -surveyed by DEC two times;

            -all setback requirements are done leaving a building envelope; and

            -percolation tests have been done and passed.

           

Mr. Black asked for comments from the floor.

 

Bob Fenton, 2071 Cook Road, asked if he could take a closer look at the map.  Mr. Fenton stated that the north end of his property is directly across from the south part of this property.  Mr. Fenton stated that he asked for a clarification to see what it was because he had no knowledge of what was being proposed.

 

Ms. Szurek inquired if the map Mr. Markham was using was the same map that the Board had.

 

Mr. Markham stated that it was revised to add the curb cut note, the 60-foot side yard setback and the wetlands note was modified.

 

Stacey Fenton, 2071 Cook Road, inquired how far back the house would be.

 

Mr. Markham stated that he does not have a house proposed yet.  Mr. Markham showed Mrs. Fenton where a house would be placed.

 

Mr. Black read the Daily Gazette publishing pertaining to the Public Hearing.

 

Mrs. Fenton stated that they were attending the meeting because they did not know what a minimum subdivision meant.

 

Mr. Black stated that it is called a minor subdivision and means less than five lots.

 

Mr. Black made a motion to close the Public Hearing.  Mr. Wilkinson seconded the motion.  All were in favor.

 

Public Hearing closed at 7:55 p.m.

 

Markham Deliberations

 

Mr. Black asked Mr. Markham to review the new drawing as the Board has not received a copy.

 

Mr. Markham gave the Board members a copy of the revised drawing.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board requested a curb cut note be added to the drawing and it has been added.  Mr. Black stated that the Board asked for the 60-foot side yard setback to be labeled and it has been done.  Mr. Black stated that the Board had asked for the wetlands note to be modified and that has been done.

 

Mrs. Wood inquired if the wetlands matched the map the Board has.

 

Mr. Markham stated yes the only change was to the wording.

 

Mr. Black stated that the reason was that the Board wanted to be sure of the front line of the wetlands and to look at the 100-foot buffer relative to the side yards and front yard setbacks to see if it appeared that there was a building envelope for a house.  Mr. Black stated that based on the existing house and the lot size available there is a building envelope available.  Mr. Black stated that there is an acceptable percolation test that can be outside of the building envelope.  Mr. Black stated that the Board is in a position to move further.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that the Board took lead agency on March 19, 2007.

 

Mr. Black stated that by letter dated March 19, 2007 the Saratoga County Planning Board stated no significant countywide or intercommunity impact.  Mr. Black stated that the comment of the letter stated that the applicant should show the boundaries of the required 100-foot wetlands buffer on the subdivision map.  Mr. Black stated that it is shown.  The other comment was that all septic designs should be certified by a NYS licensed engineer.  Mr. Black stated that there is a septic note on the drawing that indicated that.

 

Mr. Black stated that the engineering review was done and comments were provided in a letter dated February 17, 2007 from Mr. McNamara.  Mr. Black stated that there were four comments:

1) FEMA flood insurance rate maps were reviewed for the surrounding areas and there are no encumbrances related to flood plain issues.

2) each of the proposed lots comply with area and minimum yard dimensions; however the home on Lot B is less than the required 60 feet; it is a pre-existing non-conforming condition and should not be an issue.

3) add zoning setbacks to the drawing. (done)

4) wetlands flags were not numbered. (re-flagging was done)

 

Mrs. Wood stated that the last paragraph on page two asks for the proposed well and septic locations be shown together with the proposed house.

 

Mr. Black asked Mr. Markham if there were plans currently to build a house.

 

Mr. Markham responded no.

 

Ms. Szurek stated that the letter stated to put a note on the drawing.

 

Mr. Black stated that the applicant has acceptable percolation rate outside the wetlands buffer with the acceptable setback from side yard.  There is an acceptable building envelope.  Mr. Black stated that there is not a well but the well note is on the drawing.  Mr. Black stated that he feels the applicant has met the intent of Mr. McNamara’s concerns.

 

Mrs. Wood made a motion to classify the action as an unlisted action relative to SEQRA with a negative declaration relative to SEQRA.  Mr. Kadlecek seconded the motion.  All were in favor.

 

Mrs. Wood made the motion to approve the subdivision as annotated on the drawing dated August 8, 2007 as Resolution number 2007-11.  Mr. Mitchell seconded the motion.  All were in favor.

 

Mrs. Wood made the motion for the chairman to sign the mylars.  Mr. Kadlecek seconded the motion.  All were in favor.

 

Resolution 2007-11.

 

Gutto (225-1-66.1)

 

Mr. Gutto approached the Board.  Mr. Gutto provided revised drawings for the Board dated August 13, 2007.  Mr. Gutto posted a copy of the drawing for the Board to see.  Mr. Gutto also provided a full Environmental Assessment Form to the Board as well as a copy of his pond excavation plan letter and a copy of his 1993 long EAF from the previous subdivision of this same land.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board would not review the EAF tonight.  Mr. Black stated that Mrs. York would provide copies for the Board members to review.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that the curb cut note has been added to the drawing as item #17.  Mr. Gutto stated that the Right to Farm note has been added to the right hand side of the drawing.  Mr. Gutto stated that the septic note was added as item #12.  Mr. Gutto stated that the well note was added and is item #19.  Mr. Gutto provided an excavation and earth-moving plan for the Board to review.

 

Mr. Black stated that the plan states that it is going to move between 600 to 800 yards of shale from the existing pond project to lot 3-2 by way of an existing driveway from the current pond site up to the rear of lot 3-2, and as an alternate route for transportation, the material can be trucked over the existing driveway from the pond site through lot 3-1, past the existing house, out to Division Street and brought over Route 67 onto lot 3-2 after a driveway access permit is issued.  Mr. Black asked Mr. Gutto if his preference was to bring it through the back land.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that way it would not disturb the neighbors.

 

Mr. Black stated that the plan is stating that if the Board does not want them to go through the back land then there is an alternative.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that the lien evidence has been satisfied and the Satisfaction information is on the map.

 

Mr. Keniry acknowledged that was acceptable.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that note #16 appeared twice and there was no note #15.  Mr. Gutto stated that has been corrected.  Mr. Gutto stated that there is a note here that if you look on the legend, the DEC was out in August of 2007 to flag the wetlands boundary and DEC indicated that the wetlands encumber the back western corner of the lot.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that there was a misstatement in a note on a prior map and there was a question about where the remainder of the federal wetlands went.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board wanted to know if this connects to here.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that the answer is Mr. McFarland had gone back to his records and if you look at the bottom of the legend, if you look at the bigger wetlands area they are hatched almost like little waves and if you look to the west side of this property you will see this little dimple here that had been started and not continued here so this different hatching relates to this particular August 07 location of the Federal wetlands in that building lot.  There is no 100 foot buffer on the Federal lands but on the State wetlands it is right in this back corner where the 100 foot buffer would encumber that corner of that lot.

 

Mr. Wilkinson stated that the well note does not include the language the Board requested which is “lot sales”.  Mr. Wilkinson stated that there was a discussion at last month’s meeting where it was agreed to use that note.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that he used the Town’s note as taken from the notations that were e-mailed to him.  Mr. Gutto stated that he does not understand why his note has to be different than what the Town’s note is and/or that the previous subdivision that was just approved had the same note on it.  Mr. Gutto stated that he thinks that this is discriminatory to make him use anything other when he used the note that was furnished to him.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that the Town designated engineer made a comment in his letter, last sentence of paragraph six, that was not talking about discrimination at all.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that he called Mrs. York to get a copy of the well note that is required by the Town with regard to the notes on the map.  This is what she faxed me.  Mr. Gutto stated that he used the note that was sent.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that is not what the engineer’s note 6 says.

 

Mrs. Wood began to read note 6…..

 

Mr. Gutto stated that his question is why was that not the note that was….

 

Mr. Keniry stated that Mrs. Wood had not finished reading the last sentence.  Mr. Keniry continued reading from Mr. McNamara’s letter “that if the Board receives further testimony related to difficulty with wells it may also wish to consider requiring well development prior to the subdivision approval”.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that it was decided at the last meeting that there would be a note with regard to the well, a well note on this map.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that is not what the Board members just said.

 

Mr. Wilkinson stated that it is stated in the record.

 

Mr. Gutto asked the Board if they wanted the note changed to say that any lot sale is contingent upon the construction of a water well that has adequate flow and quantity.  Mr. Gutto stated that he is not having a problem with changing it, the problem is with the Board having accepted this same note that is already on the drawing ten minutes ago from another applicant.

 

Mr. Black stated that was a different lot.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that there are fifteen lots on this property and as far as he knows there is one set of people that have complained to their well driller that they did not get adequate water.  Mr. Gutto stated that the day that he sold that lot, the builder that bought that lot had a well driller out there drilling.  Mr. Gutto stated that he has always been present in every instance where anyone has drilled on a lot as a contingency for purchasing the lot.  Mr. Gutto stated that he does not mind changing the note but he feels that he is being discriminated against.

 

Mrs. Wood stated that this is a different situation than the subdivision before this one and the Board has required this note using “lot sales” on prior subdivisions.

 

Mr. Gutto stated he will change the note.  Mr. Gutto stated that he is saying that it this just happened to you you would say wait a minute.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that it did not just happen to him because the letter from Mr. McNamara is dated July 12, 2007.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that the Board should have made a special note for him so that he would have gotten 100 tonight instead of a 99.

 

Mr. Keniry reiterated that Mr. Gutto received Mr. McNamara’s letter back in July.

 

Mr. Gutto asked the Board to approve the subdivision based on what has been provided and when they bring the mylars for Mr. Black to sign they will have the note changed to whatever the Board writes down for him.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that he is not trying to cause a problem.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that to say that he is being discriminated against by this Board is not fair.

 

Mr. Black stated that there is a specific difference from the subdivision that was just approved and it is that at the Public Hearing last month for the Gutto subdivision, there were a number of people with lots in the area that said this is a very difficult place to get water and in some places immediately adjacent they did not have adequate water.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that he would change the note.

 

Mrs. Wood stated that the letter from the Saratoga County Planning Board required additional information.  Mrs. Wood suggested sending them the revised drawing.

Mr. Black stated that the first comment from the County pertains to no further subdivisions.  Mr. Black stated that is addressed on note #16 on the map.  Mr. Black stated that the second comment pertained the 100-foot buffer.  Mr. Black stated that there is a new delineation as of August 2007.  Mr. Black stated that the third comment pertained to the wetlands delineation.  Mr. Black stated that was done in August 2007.  Mr. Black stated that the fourth comment pertained to the addition of a curb cut note, which had been added.  Mr. Black stated that the fifth comment pertained to removing the mortgage lien information, which has been done.   Mr. Black stated that the sixth comment pertained to providing DEC approval with regard to the pond including the required permits.  Mr. Black stated that the Board also requested this information at the last meeting.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that they are still working on the topography issue at the bottom of the pond.

 

Mr. Mitchell inquired if the exemption on the permits is because of the size.

 

Mr. Gutto responded yes and also because the neighbors said it was a mine.

 

Mr. Black stated that the County is asking if Mr. Gutto has provided anything to Mr. Koenig since the May 10, 2007 letter and if so they want a copy.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that yes there has been information provided to Mr. Koenig which can be sent to the County but they are still working on the topography of the bottom of the pond to see if they can stock it with fish.

 

Mr. Black stated that Mr. Gutto will need to provide a revised map and any information provided to Mr. Koenig to the County Planning Board for review.  Mr. Black stated that he can also speak to Mr. Valentine at the county Planning Board.

 

Mr. Keniry stated that the Environmental Assessment form should also go to the County.

 

Mr. Kadlecek inquired if Mr. Gutto expected to get less than 5 gallons per minute for the percolation tests as answered in question #22 on the EAF.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that he does not expect anything.  Mr. Gutto stated that he was using what NYS says.

 

Mr. Kadlecek stated that he is trying to clarify Mr. Gutto’s answer on the EAF.

 

The Board discussed the issue.

 

Mr. Black suggested putting “to be determined” since there is no well at this point. 

 

Mr. Black stated that once the Board receives the copies of the information sent to Mr. Koenig, Mrs. York will forward the information to the County.  Mr. Black stated that the Board will review the long form EAF next month and by then the Board should have County approval.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that the 62 days expires in 30 days.

 

Mr. Black stated that it expires at next months meeting.

 

Mr. Keniry suggested deciding on a reasonable amount of time for the applicant to get things together.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board and the applicant are agreeing to extend through the October meeting.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that he would get the information the Board has requested to Mrs. York.

 

Mr. Black stated that note #19 on the map needs to be changed to read “all lot sales for dwelling units shall be contingent upon the construction of a water well with adequate flow capacity and acceptable potability in accordance with NYS Department of Health”.

 

Mr. Gutto stated that he would change the note and provide the information sent to Mr. Koenig.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board would forward the information to the County and hopefully get a response before next months meeting.  Mr. Black stated that the Board would review the EAF and take action on that.  Mr. Black stated that to complete the subdivision process, the Board and the applicant have agreed to defer requirements for Planning Board action to the October meeting.

 

Gracey/VanGuilder (237-1-21.1)

 

Duane Rabideau approached the Board.

 

Mr. Black inquired why the wetlands were Army Corp and not DEC.

Mr. Rabideau stated that a field walk takes precedent to the DEC map in Saratoga County and he has the map that DEC signed off on.

 

Mr. Black asked Mr. Rabideau to add a note to the drawing indicating that the wetlands delineations are based on a field survey annotated by the map DEC signed off on.

 

Mr. Rabideau responded yes.

 

Mr. Kadlecek pointed out that there are three crossings of wetlands areas and asked “are there going to be special difficulties in engineering driveway cuts across those”?

 

Mr. Rabideau stated that they are going to use the cross section for the one that is more than 500 feet long and 16 feet wide.  Mr. Rabideau stated that it is not a problem. 

 

Mr. Kadlecek inquired if there was going to be a culvert.

 

Mr. Rabideau stated yes.

 

Mr. Kadlecek inquired if it was alright for the Board to walk the property.

 

Mr. Rabideau responded yes.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board has been asked by the Town Highway Superintendent to be involved with driveway cuts..  Mr. Black stated that the new required note reads that the Town of Charlton Highway Superintendent wants to make sure it is ok.  Mr. Black asked Mr. Rabideau to add the new driveway cut note.

 

Mrs. York provided a copy of the language for Mr. Rabideau.

 

Mr. Black stated that the Board has a preliminary application, EAF, maps, AG Data Statement, which needs to be revised to add the Mitchell and Burke Farms, and the list of neighbors.

 

Mr. Black made the motion to accept the application as a complete preliminary application and initiate County and engineering review.  Mr. Kadlecek seconded the motion.  All were in favor.

 

Mrs. Wood made the motion to declare the Planning Board as lead agency for SEQRA purposes.  Mr. Kadlecek seconded the motion.  All were in favor.

 

Mr. Black made the motion to schedule the Public Hearing for September 17, 2007 at 7:45 p.m.  Mr. Mitchell seconded the motion.  All were in favor.

 

Mr. Wilkinson inquired if the Board needed to send a copy of the application to the fire department.

 

Mr. Black responded yes.

 

Mr. Rabideau stated that Lansing Engineering did percolation tests and deep test pits for the septic system and determined they would work.

 

Mr. Black asked for that information to be added to the map.

 

Mrs. York provided Public Hearing notification cards and instructions. 

 

 

Heflin/Durst (255-1-40.1, 41, 43.1, 43.2, 43.3)

 

This matter was addressed during the Agenda meeting.

 

Zoning Administrator Report

 

No report.

 

Correspondence

 

Mr. Black stated that there is a DEC Flood Mapping Conference on August 29th and 30th.   Mr. Black stated that it is very important that a Planning Board member attend and that the Town Board be represented and that the Board does some of the homework that was suggested.

 

Mr. Black stated that he cannot attend the meetings.  Mr. Black asked for a member to contact Sandy Verola.

 

Mrs. Wood stated that she could contact Mrs. Verola but could not attend the conference.

 

Mr. Wilkinson inquired if Mr. Schorr would have some information.

 

Mr. Kadlecek stated that he could contact Mr. Schorr to see where he is on this and if he has done the homework, Mr. Kadlecek could possibly accompany him to the conference.

 

Mr. Hodgkins stated that he could attend the conference on the 30th.  Mr. Hodgkins stated that he could keep in contact with Mr. Kadlecek.

 

Mr. Black suggested Mr. Kadlecek also contact John Tasse.

 

Mr. Black made the motion to enter into Executive Session to discuss an Article 78 with the Planning Board Attorney.  Mrs. Wood seconded the motion.  All were in favor.  The Board entered into Executive Session at 9:50 p.m.

 

Executive Session ended at 10:30 p.m.

 

Mr. Black made the motion to adjourn the meeting.  Mrs. Wood seconded the motion. All were in favor. 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

Kimberly A. Caron, Recording Secretary
Town of Charlton Main Index