What DOB is alleging at this property
This October hearing page is not just a schedule entry. The supplied DOB extract contains 7 summons records for this property identifier. The charge mix is: 4 Other Building / Code Compliance summonses; 2 Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold summonses; Site Safety / Safeguarding. The hearing date is October 2, 2026; the source issue date(s) are July 28, 2026.
Important: The discussion below identifies correction paths, hearing issues and evidence worth investigating from the summons data. It does not state that a defense will succeed. OATH decides liability from the evidence and law presented in the case.
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39557202J
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 2, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION OF A PROPOSED 6-STORY NEW BUILDING IN THE EXCAVATION PHASE, OBSERVED PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT EXP. 1 NOT MAINTAINING A CONTINUOUS 5-FT CLEAR PATH FREE OF OBSTRUCTIONS, CONTRARY TO BC 3307.2.6
Cited provision(s): 223 — BC 3307.6,27-1021 SIDEWALK SHED DOES NOT MEET CODE SPECIFICATIONS
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The issue is typically whether the shed/scaffold was permitted, properly installed and maintained, and whether the equipment matched the approved filing and current safety requirements. Correction can involve permit renewal, physical modification, inspection, or removal.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was the equipment covered by an active permit on the inspection date?
- Did the installed dimensions/protection match the approved design?
- Was a cited defect already corrected before the summons was issued or served?
Evidence that may matter
- DOB NOW equipment permit and approved drawings
- Engineer/contractor inspection logs
- Dated site photographs
- Renewal or removal records
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39557205P
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 2, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION OF A PROPOSED 6-STORY NEW BUILDING AT EXP. 1, OBSERVED A PORTABLE TOILET INSTALLED ON THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK, CONTRARY TO BC 3307.2.1. REVIEW OF THE DOT PERMIT SYSTEM REVEALED NO ACTIVE P
Cited provision(s): 2P7
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The first step is to read the inspector's narrative together with every cited code section and determine exactly what act, condition or missing filing DOB alleges. The correction and hearing strategy should then be built around that specific charge rather than a generic violation-removal checklist.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the summons identify the correct property, respondent, date and observed condition?
- Do agency records support or contradict the inspector's description?
- Was the condition corrected, permitted or otherwise resolved before the hearing?
Evidence that may matter
- Official DOB/OATH property and summons records
- Dated photographs and videos
- Permits, approved plans and inspection results
- Contracts, receipts, professional letters or witness statements tied to the cited condition
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39557209M
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 2, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED THE SITE AT 7PM ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC AN EXCAVATOR HALF WAY INTO SITE WHERE HAZARDOUS CONDITION EXISTED THE EXCAVATION EXCEEDED 12 FT IN DEPTH, ALLOWING UNAUTHORIZED PERSONS, BY CLIMBING ON TO MACHI
Cited provision(s): 109 — BC 3301.2,27-1009(A) FAIL TO SAFEGUARD PERS/PROPERTY AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION OP
How this type of condition is typically resolved
These charges focus on protection of workers, occupants, neighboring property or the public during construction. Correction normally requires fixing the specific unsafe condition, documenting required safety measures and keeping the required site records current.
Hearing issues to verify
- What precise safety measure does the summons say was missing or inadequate?
- Was the condition temporary and corrected before or during the inspection?
- Did an approved site-safety plan or required site document address the cited condition?
Evidence that may matter
- Site Safety Plan / logistics drawings
- Daily safety logs and competent-person/site-safety records
- Photographs taken around the inspection time
- Contractor or safety-manager statements and correction records
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39557203L
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 2, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION OF A PROPOSED 6-STORY NEW BUILDING, OBSERVED HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT OBSTRUCTING THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK, CONTRARY TO BC3307.2.1. REVIEW OF THE DOT PERMIT SYSTEM FOUND NO ACTIVE PERMI
Cited provision(s): 2P7
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The first step is to read the inspector's narrative together with every cited code section and determine exactly what act, condition or missing filing DOB alleges. The correction and hearing strategy should then be built around that specific charge rather than a generic violation-removal checklist.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the summons identify the correct property, respondent, date and observed condition?
- Do agency records support or contradict the inspector's description?
- Was the condition corrected, permitted or otherwise resolved before the hearing?
Evidence that may matter
- Official DOB/OATH property and summons records
- Dated photographs and videos
- Permits, approved plans and inspection results
- Contracts, receipts, professional letters or witness statements tied to the cited condition
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39557210J
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 2, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION, OBSERVED AN OPEN EXCAVATION EDGE EXCEEDING 6 FT IN DEPTH AT EXP. 1 WITHOUT A REQUIRED GUARDRAIL SYSTEM, CONTRARY TO BC 3304.4.4. THE SITE WAS ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC, CREATING A HAZA
Cited provision(s): 2P7
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The first step is to read the inspector's narrative together with every cited code section and determine exactly what act, condition or missing filing DOB alleges. The correction and hearing strategy should then be built around that specific charge rather than a generic violation-removal checklist.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the summons identify the correct property, respondent, date and observed condition?
- Do agency records support or contradict the inspector's description?
- Was the condition corrected, permitted or otherwise resolved before the hearing?
Evidence that may matter
- Official DOB/OATH property and summons records
- Dated photographs and videos
- Permits, approved plans and inspection results
- Contracts, receipts, professional letters or witness statements tied to the cited condition
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39557204N
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 2, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED PLASTIC BARRIERS INSTALLED ON THE ROADWAY EXP1 AND 4 NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS. THE BARRIERS WERE NOT INTERLOCKING AND NOT FILLED WITH WATER OR SAND, AND COULD BE EASILY DISPLA
Cited provision(s): 2F6 — BC 3301.1.3 (2014 CODE) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The first step is to read the inspector's narrative together with every cited code section and determine exactly what act, condition or missing filing DOB alleges. The correction and hearing strategy should then be built around that specific charge rather than a generic violation-removal checklist.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the summons identify the correct property, respondent, date and observed condition?
- Do agency records support or contradict the inspector's description?
- Was the condition corrected, permitted or otherwise resolved before the hearing?
Evidence that may matter
- Official DOB/OATH property and summons records
- Dated photographs and videos
- Permits, approved plans and inspection results
- Contracts, receipts, professional letters or witness statements tied to the cited condition
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39557208K
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 2, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION OF A PROPOSED 6-STORY NEW BUILDING, OBSERVED CONSTRUCTION FENCE WITH MISSING PANELS, CREATING A HAZARDOUS CONDITION BY ALLOWING UNAUTHORIZED PUBLIC ACCESS INTO THE EXCAVATION SITE, EXP
Cited provision(s): 211 — BC 3307.7,27-1021(C) JOB SITE FENCE NOT CONSTRUCTED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The issue is typically whether the shed/scaffold was permitted, properly installed and maintained, and whether the equipment matched the approved filing and current safety requirements. Correction can involve permit renewal, physical modification, inspection, or removal.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was the equipment covered by an active permit on the inspection date?
- Did the installed dimensions/protection match the approved design?
- Was a cited defect already corrected before the summons was issued or served?
Evidence that may matter
- DOB NOW equipment permit and approved drawings
- Engineer/contractor inspection logs
- Dated site photographs
- Renewal or removal records
Case-specific next step
For this property, the first paid review should reconcile the 7 October summons records against the current OATH/DOB record, identify which alleged conditions remain open, and separate the hearing defense from the DOB correction / certification work. That prevents paying for correction work that does not address the actual charge—or appearing at OATH without the documents needed for the cited condition.
Submit These Summonses for Review