What DOB is alleging at this property
This October hearing page is not just a schedule entry. The supplied DOB extract contains 5 summons records for this property identifier. The charge mix is: 3 Other Building / Code Compliance summonses; 2 Site Safety / Safeguarding summonses. The hearing dates are October 14, 2026, October 7, 2026; the source issue date(s) are July 23, 2026, July 28, 2026, June 14, 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.
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39197877L
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: NO EN DRAWING APPROVED FROM DOB PROVIDED ON THE JOB SITE AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION., MAINTAIN/DISPLAY REQUIRED DOCUMENTS; CONTACT VIA EMAIL: [email protected]
Cited provision(s): 2F7 — BC 3301.7 (2014 CODE) FAILURE TO MAINTAIN/DISPLAY ON SITE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY BC CHAPTER 3
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 39557012Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 23, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION ON A PROPOSED 9 STORIES NEW MIXED-USE BUILDING, AT ROOF LEVEL. CONTRACTOR FAILURE TO NOTIFY TO THE DEPARTMENT IMMEDIATELY/PROMPTLY ABOUT INCIDENT OCCURRED 11:00 AM APPROX. WHERE A PEDESTRI
Cited provision(s): 192 — BC 3301.8 FAILURE TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OF AN ACCIDENT AT CONSTRU
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 39557013K
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 23, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: BC 3307.2.1 AT TIME OF INSPECTION OBSERVED: GC CLAIM THAT PEDESTRIAN FALL ON SIDEWALK. UPON REQUEST FOR DOT PERMIT, E-73 INSPECTION REVEALS GC IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH DOT STIPULATIONS FOR OCCUPANCY OF SIDEWAL
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 39557011R
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 23, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: RESPONDING TO A COMPLAINT WHERE PEDESTRIAN FALL ON SIDEWALK EXPO# 1, INSPECTION REVEALS: CONTRACTOR FAILURE TO SAFEGUARD PUBLIC NOT MAINTAIN 5' OF PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY; BOLTS, UNEVEN RAMP, INADEQUATE SIGNS, NO FL
Cited provision(s): 209 — 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 39555432X
CLASS - 2 · Issued June 14, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED JERSEY BARRIERS AT EXP#1 #2 NOT AS PER MANUFACTURES SPECIFICATION. JERSEY BARRIERS SEVERAL NOT INTERLOCKED IN ADDITION DEFECTIVE DAMAGE CRACKS NOT FILL WITH WATER/SAND WHICH POSES A POTENTIAL HAZARD B
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
Case-specific next step
For this property, the first paid review should reconcile the 5 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