What DOB is alleging at this property
This October hearing page is not just a schedule entry. The supplied DOB extract contains 6 summons records for this property identifier. The charge mix is: 3 Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold summonses; Other Building / Code Compliance; Site Safety / Safeguarding; Work Without a Permit. The hearing date is October 14, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 10, 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 39557714N
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 10, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: UPON INSPECTION I OBSERVED A SIDEWALK SHED INSTALLED AT EXPOS NOT MAINTAINED AND BEING USED IN SAFE CONDITION CONTRARY TO CODE 3307.6.5.1 SAFE CONDITION. MULTIPLE UN-PROTECTED BOLTS ALONG THE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY
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 39557718K
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 10, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: UPON INSPECTION I OBSERVED A FENCE INSTALLED AT EXPOSURE 1 WITH NO "NO SMOKING" SIGNS INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NEW YORK CITY FIRE CODE ON FENCE EXTERIOR OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE AS PER CODE 3303.7.3 SMO
Cited provision(s): 2A9 — BC 3303.7.3 FAILURE TO POST NO SMOKING SIGNS AT CONST/DEMO SITE PER FIRE CODE
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 39557715P
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 10, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: UPON INSPECTION I OBSERVED A FENCE INSTALLED AT EXPOSURE 1 WITH NOT FENCE PROJECT INFO PANEL INSTALLED CONTRARY TO CODE 3301.9.1 FENCE PROJECT INFORMATION PANEL. WHERE A SITE IS ENCLOSED WITH A FENCE IN ACCORDA
Cited provision(s): 217 — BC 3301.9,27-10009(C) FAIL TO PROVIDE/POST SIGN(S) AT JB SITE PURSUANT TO SUBSEC
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 39557721L
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 10, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: UPON INSPECTION A 3 STORY ALT CONSTRUCTION SITE I OBSERVED A FENCE INSTALLED AT EXPOSURE 1 WITH PERMITS POSTED. UPON FULL REVIEW OF THE POSTED PERMITS I OBSERVED NO PRIMARY PERMIT POSTED. PERMIT #B01285395-I1-G
Cited provision(s): 220 — §28-105.11 FAILURE TO POST PERMIT FOR WORK AT PREMISES
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
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39557716R
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 10, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: UPON INSPECTION I OBSERVED A FENCE INSTALLED AT EXPOS 1 NOT MAINTAINED OR CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO CODE. FENCE NOT FULLY PAINTED HUNTER GREEN (GREEN OTHER THAN HUNTER GREEN USED ON PART OF FENCE)FENCE SHALL BE
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
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39557722N
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 10, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: UPON INSPECTION I OBSERVED A SIDEWALK SHED INSTALLED AT EXPOSURE 1 CONTRARY TO CODE. MULTIPLE MUDSILLS NOT SECURED TO VERTICAL MEMBERS TO PROTECT FROM MOVEMENT AND DISPLACEMENT AS PER CODE 3307.6.4.10 FOUNDING.
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
Case-specific next step
For this property, the first paid review should reconcile the 6 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