What DOB is alleging at this property
This October hearing page is not just a schedule entry. The supplied DOB extract contains 4 summons records for this property identifier. The charge mix is: 2 Site Safety / Safeguarding summonses; Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold; Work Without a Permit. The hearing date is October 14, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 3, 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 39198892Y
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: PSWO ISSUED FOR FTM : ATOI OBSERVED AT EXPO # 4 SUPPORTED PIPE SCAFFOLD IN PLACE IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE BUILDING CODE (BC3314.1 / BC 3314.8) POSES AN UNSAFE CONDITIONS SUCH AS MISSING GUARD RAILS, NOT FU
Cited provision(s): 102 — 28-301.1 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BLDG IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER
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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39198895J
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: VIOLATION ISSUED FOR FAILURE TO MAINTAIN SAFETY MEASURES NO HANDRAIL SYSTEM . ATOI OBSERVED ON AN ACTIVE SITE IN THE INTERIOR THE STAIRCASE LEADING FROM THE FIRST FLOOR TO THE SECOND FLOOR HAS NO HANDRAIL SYSTE
Cited provision(s): 120 — BC 3301.2,27-1009(A) FAILURE TO INSTITUTE/MAINTAIN SAFETY EQUIPMENT MEASURES OR TEMPORARY
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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39198893X
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: VIOLATION ISSUED FOR FAILURE TO MAINTAIN SAFETY MEASURES NO GUARDRAIL SYSTEM . ATOI OBSERVED ON THE SECOND FLOOR ON AN ACTIVE SITE IN THE INTERIOR NO GUARDRAIL SYSTEM AROUND A OPENING IN THE FLOOR WHICH IS A SH
Cited provision(s): 115 — BC 3301.2,27-1009(A) FAILURE TO INSTITUTE/MAINTAIN SAFETY EQUIPMENT MEASURES OR TEMPORARY
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
Work Without a Permit — Summons 39198894H
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: WORK WITHOUT PERMIT: PSWO ISSUED FOR ALL GENERAL CONSTRUCTION CARPENTRY, DEMOLITION AND STRUCTURAL, WORK BEING DONE ON THE RESIDENT. ATOI OBSERVED A TWO STORY WOOD FRAME HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL EXTENSION ATTACH
Cited provision(s): 101 — 28-105.1 WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The correction path usually starts by determining whether the observed work required a permit and whether the condition can legally remain. If it can remain, legalization may require plans, a filing, permit, inspections and closeout; if it cannot or the owner does not want to legalize it, restoration to a lawful condition may be required.
Hearing issues to verify
- Did a valid permit already cover the exact work described by the inspector on the issue date?
- Was the cited activity actually permit-required work, or was it maintenance / exempt work under the applicable facts?
- Do the approved drawings, permit scope and inspection history match the condition the inspector described?
- If a Stop Work Order was issued, was the work stopped and was any later work performed only after the required authorization?
Evidence that may matter
- Permit and DOB NOW/BIS job records that predate the inspection
- Approved plans and amendments showing the cited work
- Dated photographs of the condition and construction stage
- Contracts, invoices and contractor statements establishing what work was actually performed
- Inspection / sign-off records if the work was subsequently legalized
Case-specific next step
For this property, the first paid review should reconcile the 4 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