Fighting for Accessible City Streets and Sidewalks

DRP has also raised Title II of the ADA to improve accessibility of city streets and sidewalks.

 For instance, in 1997, DRP filed Lippold v. City of Pittsburgh, to challenge Pittsburgh’s failure to install curb ramps on streets that had been re-paved or altered since the effective date of the ADA. The parties reached a settlement, which required Pittsburgh to install curb ramps on all corners of all streets that are re-paved or otherwise altered, and, by the end of 2001, to install curb ramps that should have been installed during the years 1992-98.

After monitoring revealed substantial non-compliance with the settlement agreement, DRP filed a motion for contempt, which the court granted. Pursuant to the court’s contempt order, the City hired a monitor to oversee its compliance.

In 2005, DRP filed Keller, et al. v. City of Lancaster, et al., on behalf of three individuals with mobility disabilities, alleging that the City of Lancaster and Secretary of PENNDOT violated Title II of the ADA by (1) failing to install ADA compliant curb ramps on sidewalks when it resurfaces city streets or otherwise performs street and sidewalk construction, renovation, or alteration; (2) failing to maintain existing curb ramps in a usable condition; and (3) failing to maintain existing sidewalks to ensure they are accessible to persons with mobility disabilities. The case settled, and as a result, the City of Lancaster has installed 700 curb ramps and agreed that moving forward, it would ensure any curb ramps needing to be updated will be repaired or replaced as part of any future street resurfacing projects.