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 Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold summonses; Site Safety / Safeguarding; Egress / Exit Obstruction. The hearing dates are October 5, 2026, October 8, 2026; the source issue date(s) are December 6, 2025, December 8, 2025.
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 39547686X
CLASS - 2 · Issued December 6, 2025; hearing October 5, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION, INACTIVE JOBSITE. I OBSERVED THAT THE CONSTRUCTION FENCE PANELS AT EXPOSURE ALL EXPOSURE NOT PROPERLY MAINTAINED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION ACCORDING TO BC 3307.7. FENCE PANELS IN INADEQ
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 39547691K
CLASS - 2 · Issued December 6, 2025; hearing October 5, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED JERSEY BARRIERS IN USE OF A PEDESTRIAN WALK WAY WITH A SPACE OF 2 FT 5" . MOST AREAS AROUND THE SITE ONLY HAD A 4 FOOT CLEARANCE. PEOPLE HAD TO TAKE TURNS PASSING. THIS CREATES A SAFETY HAZARD FOR PEDE
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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39547730Y
CLASS - 2 · Issued December 8, 2025; hearing October 8, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED ACTIVE SITE UPON REQUEST FAILED TO PROVIDE SITE SAFETY PLANS, NO STRUCTURAL DESIGN DRAWINGS, NO MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS FOR COLD FORM STEEL/ C-JOIST WORK @ LEVEL 1. ALL APPROVE DOCUMENTS MUST BE MA
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
Egress / Exit Obstruction — Summons 39547732H
CLASS - 2 · Issued December 8, 2025; hearing October 8, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED ACTIVE SITE WITH MUTIPLE UNSAFE CONDITIONS 3301.5 WORKERS ON SECOND LEVEL FULLY TIE-OFF WITHOUT ANY PROPER INGRESS/ EGRESS, NO THREE POINTS OF CONTRACT WITH FULLY EXTENDED CONSTRUCTION LATTER. ACTIVE W
Cited provision(s): 2P7
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Egress charges are generally corrected by removing the obstruction or restoring the required exit width/path and then documenting that the means of egress is clear and code compliant.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was the cited passageway actually required egress for the affected occupancy?
- Did the alleged obstruction exist when the inspector observed it?
- Was the condition immediately removed and can the timing be documented?
Evidence that may matter
- Dated photographs showing the exit path
- Approved floor/egress plans
- Building or security logs
- Statements or work records documenting removal of stored items/obstructions
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