This document contains the 2016 California Building Code (CBC) accessibility provisions adopted by DSA and commentary on selected requirements. Commentary is included from the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design and from DSA for provisions unique to California. Additionally, an expanded table of contents for Chapter 11B is provided at the beginning of the chapter.
Olmstead v. L.C. was a case before the United States Supreme Court in 1999. The two plaintiffs L.C. and E.W. were institutionalized in Georgia for diagnosed mental retardation and schizophrenia. Clinical assessments by the state determined that the plaintiffs could be appropriately treated in a community setting rather than the state institution. The plaintiffs sued the state of Georgia and the institution for being inappropriately treated and housed in the institutional setting rather than being treated in one of the state's community based treatment facilities.
The 30 minute time limit applies to drive-up EVCS of any type. This design option allows brief charging and queuing for charging service, and does not consider that batteries will be charged to full capacity. Where DCFC or any other type of charging is intended for use longer than 30 minutes, EVCS may be provided in regular parking-style vehicle spaces.
Many properties do NOT have enough electricity available to support significant charging installations, so for now, utilities and others are doing “make ready” spaces (upgrading the supporting infrastructure in a parking space for future use without adding the actual charger). How would make ready spaces comply with the ADA standards? Additionally, consider a site with 10 make ready spaces. Would the standards apply differently if that site has no chargers presently installed versus having one active charger installed?
The CBC Chapter 11B accessibility requirements for EVCS do not distinguish between the different EVCS standards like those listed. However, building officials may view different types of service as separate facilities. Where different types of EVCS service are provided at a location, the code enforcement official must determine the applicability of Table 11B-18.104.22.168.
People with disabilities should be able to easily access the Internet. (You can find a video about how screen readers work here.) But to accomplish this, the DOJ should have issued regulations. It issued regulations for State and local governments. It issued regulations for Federal agencies. Why not issue regulations that would apply to private business? As a point of reference, in October 2016, the European Parliament approved the directive 2016/2102 that requires websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies to conform with WCAG 2.0 Level AA. New websites must comply from 23 September 2019 on, old websites from September 23, 2020 on and mobile applications from June 23, 2021 on. These regulations provided direction and time for business to become compliant.
Three defendants were able to dismiss website access lawsuits early because they had already entered into consent decree or settlement agreements with previous plaintiffs which required them to make their websites conform to the WCAG 2.0 within a specified amount of time. That said, not all courts agree that a prior settlement — as opposed to a binding judgment or court order — can be the basis for a dismissal.
When a property owner hits the 20% cost limitation on path of travel improvements, the jurisdictional entity cannot require further improvements to the path of travel to occur. The property owner should be advised, however, that for older facilities that pre-date the ADA, barrier removal is required by the ADA. Barrier removal, however, will not be enforced by the local jurisdictional entity.