Can the City Be Liable for Failing to Provide Accessible Crosswalks?

As cities grow and expand, it is vital to ensure they are accessible to everyone, including people with disabilities. One crucial aspect of accessibility is ensuring that crosswalks are accessible to all pedestrians, regardless of mobility or sensory impairments. The state has established various laws and regulations in California to ensure that crosswalks are accessible. However, what happens when a city fails to provide accessible crosswalks? Can they be held liable?

Legal Liability for Inaccessible Crosswalks

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) sets out various standards that cities must adhere to ensure their crosswalks are accessible. These standards include the installation of curb ramps, detectable warnings, and accessible pedestrian signals. The city must install curb ramps at all intersections and detectable warnings at the edge of the curb ramp to alert people with visual impairments of the change in surface. Accessible pedestrian signals, which provide audible information about the crossing signal, must also be installed at certain intersections.

If a city fails to adhere to these standards and a pedestrian with a disability is injured as a result, the city may be held liable. However, proving liability can be a complex process. To prove liability, the injured pedestrian must be able to demonstrate that the city was negligent in its duty to provide accessible crosswalks.

Proving Negligence in a Premises Liability Claim Against the City

Negligence is a legal term that refers to a failure to exercise reasonable care. To prove negligence, the injured pedestrian must demonstrate the following elements:

Duty: The city had a duty to provide accessible crosswalks
Breach: The city breached its duty by failing to provide accessible crosswalks
Causation: The city’s breach of duty was the direct cause of the pedestrian’s injury
Damages: The pedestrian suffered damages as a result of the injury

If all four of these elements can be proven, the injured pedestrian may be able to recover damages from the city. However, proving negligence can be challenging. It requires the injured pedestrian to demonstrate that the city had actual or constructive notice of the accessibility issue and failed to take reasonable steps to address it.

Actual Notice

Actual notice refers to a situation where the city was directly informed of the accessibility issue. For example, if a pedestrian with a disability files a complaint with the city about a lack of curb ramps at a particular intersection, the city would have actual notice of the issue. On the other hand, constructive notice refers to a situation where the city should have been aware of the accessibility issue. For example, if the city fails to inspect its crosswalks for accessibility issues regularly, it may be deemed to have constructive notice of any existing problems.

Constructive Notice

To prove constructive notice, the injured pedestrian may need to demonstrate that the accessibility issue was longstanding and pervasive. For example, if there are no curb ramps at all intersections in a particular neighborhood, the injured pedestrian may be able to argue that the city should have been aware of the issue.

Recovering Damages in a Premises Liability Claim

If the injured pedestrian is successful in proving negligence, they may be able to recover damages for their injuries. These damages may include medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. In addition, the city may be required to change its crosswalks to ensure they are accessible to all pedestrians.

It is important to note that not all accessibility issues will necessarily result in liability for the city. To be held liable, the injured pedestrian must demonstrate that the city’s failure to provide accessible crosswalks was a direct cause of their injury. For example, suppose a pedestrian with a disability trips and falls on a broken sidewalk while attempting to cross a street. In that case, the city may not be liable for their injuries, even if the crosswalk was not accessible.

Moral and Ethical Responsibility of Cities

In addition to legal liability, providing accessible crosswalks is a moral and ethical responsibility of cities. Accessibility is a human right, and cities are responsible for ensuring that all community members have equal access to public spaces and services. Failure to provide accessible crosswalks can lead to social exclusion, marginalization, and discrimination. Curb ramps not only provide accessibility for individuals with mobility impairments but also for parents with strollers, cyclists, and individuals with luggage or other items that they need to roll.

Ensuring that crosswalks are accessible to all pedestrians, including those with disabilities, is crucial for creating an inclusive and equitable community. While the state of California has established various standards and regulations to ensure accessibility, it is ultimately up to city authorities to ensure that they meet these standards. If a city fails to provide accessible crosswalks and a pedestrian with a disability is injured as a result, the city may be held liable for negligence.

Schedule a Consultation With Our Experienced Attorneys Today

Accessible infrastructure can improve public safety. Accidents involving pedestrians can be reduced when crosswalks are designed to be accessible and easy to navigate. This benefits not only individuals with disabilities but also the general public.

Are you looking for a reliable and experienced legal team to handle your legal matters? Look no further than Kash Legal. Our team of experienced personal injury attorneys is dedicated to providing top-quality legal services for our clients. Call us at (888) 527-4128 today or contact us online and see how we can assist you with your legal needs.