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; 2 Other Building / Code Compliance summonses. The hearing date is October 7, 2026; the source issue date(s) are July 23, 2026, July 27, 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 39557090Y
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 27, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: @ACTIVE FOUNDATION PHASE SITE OBSERVE NEIGHBOR PROPERTY REAR YARD STAIR(569 WATKINS ST)CRACKED/DAMAGED WITH SOIL LOSS ADJACENT TO SITES UNSUPPORTED OVER 7' HIGH EXCAVATION BC3304.4+UNSUPPORTED EXCAVATION ADJACE
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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39557088P
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 27, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: @ACTIVE SITE IN FOUNDATION PHASE, I REQUESTED PERSONNEL FOR FOUNDATION PHASE SITE SAFETY PLAN 3301.13.1/28-110.2, SHORING DESIGN DRAWING FOR THE LUMBER+PLYWOOD SUPPORTING APPROX. 17'X17' EXCAVATED MATERIAL THAT
Cited provision(s): 1F2 — 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 39556993K
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 23, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: BC 3307.4.7 AT TIME OF MY INSPECTION, I OBSERVED WORK AND STORAGE ZONE WITH EXCESSIVE MATERIAL & SECURITY BOOT NOT PROPERLY PROTECTED/ SECURED AT EXPOSURE 1 IN THE ROADWAY WAS NOT PROVIDED WITH A 4 FEET BARRIER
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 39557089R
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 27, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: @ACTIVE SITE IN EXCAVATION/FOUNDATION PHASE OBSERVE OPEN EXCAVATION OVER 7' IN HEIGHT WITH NO SUPPORT OF EXCAVATION IN PLACE UNDERMINING NEIGHBOR PROPERTY(569 WATKINS ST)REAR YARD STAIR,&NEIGHBOR REAR STRUCTURE
Cited provision(s): 110 — BC 3304.4,27-1032 FAIL TO PROVIDE PROTECTION AT SIDES OF EXCAVATION
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 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