Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Permit Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies appeal, upholds building permit for 290 North Thor Street after resident alleges forgery
Summary
The Turlock City Council voted 5-0 to deny an appeal challenging building permit 25-1123 for stairs at 290 North Thor Street. Appellant Sean Sheridan alleged forgery and procedural problems; the property owner and staff said the permit process and inspections complied with code.
The Turlock City Council on a 5-0 vote on June 23 denied an appeal of the Planning Commission’s April 2 decision and affirmed that building permit number 25-1123 for stairs at 290 North Thor Street was properly issued.
The appellant, Sean Sheridan, told the council he had compiled a 95-page addendum and 26 exhibits alleging the permit was “secured through documented forgery and impersonation” and that staff reports omitted key inspector letters and an architect’s April 29 letter that he said showed the permit was finalized using invalid documentation. “The stairs must be replaced,” Sheridan said, arguing the permit process reached “the level of administrative cover up.”
Development Services Director Ms. Warner said the appeal’s scope is limited to the administrative record and explained that the application was submitted through the city’s portal, underwent plan check, and was issued to Armando Garcia after verification steps including tax-roll review and driver’s-license checks. Warner said any plan deviations were evaluated under the building official’s authority and that inspections did not note life-safety deficiencies.
Property owner Armando Garcia told the council his family purchased the apartments about two years ago and said they undertook repairs, including work on the stairs. Garcia said he manages the properties for his elderly father and described the repairs as necessary and properly permitted: “We fix the stairs, not replace the stairs… I could have provided the general insurance.”
After public comment, a council member moved to adopt a resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission’s determination that the administrative decision and permit issuance were valid. The clerk recorded the roll-call vote as: Council Member Abraham — Yes; Council Member Bixell — Yes; Vice Mayor Moniz — Yes; Council Member Phillips — Yes; Mayor Bublak — Yes. The motion passed 5-0.
The decision affirms the planning commission’s and staff’s handling of permit 25-1123. Sheridan asked for a continuance to allow the council to consider additional exhibits he offered during the hearing; council members and staff said the record presented to the commission and council was complete and that no legal basis for continuance had been shown.
The council action ends the administrative appeal; any next steps, including code enforcement or civil remedies, would follow the procedures specified in municipal code and applicable building laws.
