Tag Archives: zoning board

Valley Viewpoints: Fulton zoning board

by Vincent T. LaQuire, Fulton

I attended a Fulton zoning board meeting Dec. 13 in city hall. I left baffled at the board’s ruling.

It was a two-to two-tie or plainly stated, a bust, for Tom Tetro in his attempt to make improvements to Fulton — not only by keeping another house in the city to fall into ruin but by actually paying $3,500 in back taxes due with his purchase. A shame it failed!

Tom stated that he intended to make improvements including a new roof — along with other improvements if the city would allow a variance in the zoning to allow a two family house, which he was one month late in applying for.

I have lived next to this house for 40 years and in the last two it has been unoccupied and has fallen into disrepair.

It is like the city-owned house up the street at 118 Division St.

It is starting to collapse after 12 years of no one living there but the rats, squirrels, pigeons, and occasion drug party and copper thieves.

I applaud the two board members that voted to have 112 Division St. back on the tax roles and improved, especially the kind lady sitting on the board who asked for further review and another vote once the original vote failed.

I also wish to acknowledge my respect for the  other two members who were adamant on following the code for the district — even though I disagreed with their decision.

I can only hope the common council will now see fit to alter the zoning board’s decision, and redistrict the first block of Division Street as R1 as Huhtamaki is no longer is interested in moving south.

The city needs all the properties it can get to help defray the costs of keeping it running.

I would imagine if the board had passed this that two families looking for housing would have a great place to call home, as Tom Tetro is a landlord that keeps his properties up and keeps his tenants appropriately monitored.

My wife and I have personally seen Tom at his properties almost on a daily basis. I respect Tom and wish the board had given him a chance to keep another house on Division Street from becoming another rat-hole in Fulton.

I would imagine that the taxes he was willing to pay would have covered the city’s cost of removing the other eyesore at 118.

It was a win-win for the city: back taxes paid, future taxes paid, and city residents having a new HUD home.

Alas, if the rules are not changed, drive by 112 Division St. and watch decay in action. How long before the snow will break its back?