{ "id": "nexus-ext-1-0007-135077", "citation": "Res. 15413-2010 Sala Constitucional", "section": "nexus_decisions", "doc_type": "constitutional_decision", "title_es": "Omisión municipal en construcciones de aceras y obstáculos para persona no vidente", "title_en": "Municipal failure to build sidewalks and remove obstacles for a blind person", "summary_es": "La Sala Constitucional conoce de un recurso de amparo interpuesto por una persona no vidente que reside en la Urbanización Villa Lico, en el cantón de Flores, quien alega que los vecinos han construido rampas de más de un metro de alto y que, en general, no existen aceras adecuadas, lo que le impide transitar libremente y pone en peligro su vida. La recurrente señala que ha realizado múltiples gestiones ante la Municipalidad de Flores, incluyendo por medio del Patronato Nacional de Ciegos, sin obtener resultados. La Sala determina que la Municipalidad tiene la obligación legal, derivada de la Ley 7600 (Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad) y del Código Municipal, de garantizar la eliminación de barreras físicas en las calles para asegurar el libre tránsito de las personas con discapacidad. Asimismo, la municipalidad debe fiscalizar el cumplimiento, por parte de los propietarios, de construir y mantener las aceras, y en caso de omisión, sustituirlos para luego recuperar los costos. La Sala acoge el recurso y ordena a la Municipalidad de Flores iniciar de inmediato los trabajos para solucionar la falta de aceras y apercibir a los propietarios para que cumplan con sus obligaciones, ajustándose a las especificaciones técnicas de la Ley 7600 y su reglamento, pudiendo la Municipalidad suplir las omisiones y aplicar las multas correspondientes conforme a los artículos 75 y 76 del Código Municipal.", "summary_en": "The Constitutional Chamber hears an amparo filed by a blind person residing in the Villa Lico urbanization in Flores canton, who alleges that neighbors have built ramps over a meter high and that there are generally no adequate sidewalks, preventing free movement and endangering his life. The petitioner notes that he has made multiple requests to the Municipality of Flores, including through the National Board of the Blind, without success. The Chamber finds that the Municipality has a legal duty under Law 7600 (Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities Act) and the Municipal Code to ensure the elimination of physical barriers on streets to guarantee free transit for persons with disabilities. Furthermore, the municipality must oversee compliance by property owners to build and maintain sidewalks, and in case of omission, step in to do the work and later recover costs. The Chamber grants the amparo and orders the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin work to resolve the lack of sidewalks and to warn property owners to fulfill their obligations, in accordance with the technical specifications of Law 7600 and its regulations, with the municipality authorized to remedy any omissions and impose corresponding fines under Articles 75 and 76 of the Municipal Code.", "court_or_agency": "Sala Constitucional", "date": "2010", "year": "2010", "topic_ids": [ "_off-topic" ], "primary_topic_id": "_off-topic", "es_concept_hints": [ "recurso de amparo", "persona no vidente", "Ley 7600 Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad", "Código Municipal artículos 75 y 76", "fiscalización municipal", "aceras", "barreras físicas", "legitimación activa", "condena en costas", "Patronato Nacional de Ciegos" ], "concept_anchors": [ { "article": "Art. 41", "law": "Ley 7600" }, { "article": "Art. 103", "law": "Ley 7600" }, { "article": "Art. 125", "law": "Ley 7600" }, { "article": "Art. 126", "law": "Ley 7600" }, { "article": "Art. 75", "law": "Código Municipal" }, { "article": "Art. 76", "law": "Código Municipal" } ], "keywords_es": [ "recurso de amparo", "persona no vidente", "derechos de las personas con discapacidad", "Ley 7600", "aceras", "Municipalidad de Flores", "Código Municipal", "artículo 33 constitucional", "igualdad", "barreras físicas", "fiscalización municipal", "Villa Lico", "San Joaquín de Flores", "Patronato Nacional de Ciegos", "rampas", "obstáculos en aceras", "libre tránsito", "costas" ], "keywords_en": [ "amparo", "blind person", "rights of persons with disabilities", "Law 7600", "sidewalks", "Municipality of Flores", "Municipal Code", "Article 33 Constitution", "equality", "physical barriers", "municipal oversight", "Villa Lico", "San Joaquín de Flores", "National Board of the Blind", "ramps", "sidewalk obstacles", "free transit", "costs" ], "excerpt_es": "IV.- De la lectura del considerando anterior, se desprende que existe un deber genérico de todos los entes y órganos que conforman la Administración, incluidas las municipalidades, de garantizar el derecho a la igualdad de las personas con discapacidad, mediante la eliminación de cualquier tipo de barreras, que puedan impedir el ingreso total de estas personas a la sociedad. En el caso específico de las municipalidades una de las obligaciones que se derivan de lo dicho anteriormente, consiste en eliminar cualquier tipo de barrera física en las calles de su cantón, que limite el tránsito de las personas con discapacidad que habiten o simplemente transiten por su jurisdicción. Este deber, es desarrollado por la Ley 7600 en su artículo 41, y por el Reglamento a la citada ley, en sus artículos 103, 125 y 126, al disponer en lo que interesa:\n\nVI.- En el caso concreto, el recurrente reclama que en el Barrio San Martín de San Gabriel de Aserrí no existen aceras, situación que genera una serie de problemas para el amparado, quien es una persona no vidente. En su informe, las autoridades recurridas informan que tras realizar una visita al lugar antes mencionado, se pudo constatar que sólo algunos sectores cuentan con aceras; sin embargo explican que se encuentran imposibilitados para actuar, hasta tanto el amparado no señale los lugares en los que la falta de acera le genera un problema. Con vista en lo anterior, esta Sala considera que en el presente recurso se constata la alegada violación a los derechos fundamentales del amparado, pues del propio dicho de los recurridos se deduce que en varios sectores del Barrio San Martín no existen aceras, situación que constituye una violación no sólo a los derechos del amparado, sino también a la obligación de la Municipalidad recurrida de velar porque las calles del cantón cuenten con la infraestructura necesaria para garantizar el libre tránsito de las personas con discapacidad, tal y como lo dispone la Ley 7600 y el Código Municipal. Asimismo, conviene aclarar a los recurridos que no existe una obligación del amparado de informar cuales son los sitios en los que estima que la falta de aceras le genera un problema, esto, por cuanto la Municipalidad accionada no puede delegar en los administrados su obligación de fiscalizar y velar por el cumplimiento de la ley en los terrenos que forman parte de su jurisdicción. Así en razón de lo expuesto anteriormente, lo procedente es acoger el recurso planteado, como en efecto se hace.\n\nV.- Sobre el fondo. Como se estipula en el pronunciamiento parcialmente trascrito, la construcción de las aceras es primordialmente obligación de los propietarios de los distintos inmuebles, pero corresponde a las municipalidades fiscalizar que se cumpla ese deber, y eventualmente sustituir a los dueños, para luego recuperar esos montos. Por ello, se estima el amparo, ordenando a la Municipalidad de Flores, que de forma inmediata, inicie los trabajos para solucionar el problema generado por la falta de aceras en el sector Villa Lico de San Joaquín de Flores y, en las que correspondiere a propietarios o poseedores de bienes inmuebles, los aperciba para que inicien las obras necesarias en la acera frente a sus propiedades, ajustando las obras a las especificaciones contenidas en la Ley número 7600 y su reglamento. Lo anterior, sin perjuicio de que en caso de omisión del propietario o poseedor respectivo de cumplir las obligaciones señaladas, la Municipalidad de Flores supla los trabajos y aplique las multas correspondientes, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en los artículos 75 y 76 del Código Municipal.", "excerpt_en": "IV. From the reading of the preceding recital, it follows that there is a generic duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, by eliminating any type of barrier that may prevent the full inclusion of these persons in society. In the specific case of municipalities, one of the obligations that arise from the foregoing consists of eliminating any type of physical barrier on the streets of their canton that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who reside or simply travel through their jurisdiction. This duty is developed by Law 7600 in its Article 41, and by the Regulation to said law, in its Articles 103, 125 and 126, stating as relevant:\n\nVI. In the specific case, the petitioner claims that in the San Martín neighborhood of San Gabriel de Aserrí there are no sidewalks, a situation that creates a series of problems for the protected person, who is blind. In their report, the respondent authorities state that after visiting the aforementioned place, it was verified that only some sectors have sidewalks; however, they explain that they are unable to act until the protected person points out the places where the lack of a sidewalk causes a problem. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that in this appeal the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the protected person is confirmed, since from the respondents' own statement it follows that in several sectors of the San Martín neighborhood there are no sidewalks, a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the rights of the protected person, but also of the respondent Municipality's obligation to ensure that the canton's streets have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the free transit of persons with disabilities, as provided by Law 7600 and the Municipal Code. Likewise, it is appropriate to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation of the protected person to report which sites he considers the lack of a sidewalk causes a problem, since the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to supervise and ensure compliance with the law on the properties that are part of its jurisdiction. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the appeal, as is hereby done.\n\nV. On the merits. As stipulated in the partially transcribed ruling, the construction of sidewalks is primarily the obligation of the owners of the various properties, but it is the responsibility of the municipalities to oversee that this duty is fulfilled, and eventually to substitute the owners, later recovering those amounts. Therefore, the amparo is granted, ordering the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin the work to solve the problem caused by the lack of sidewalks in the Villa Lico sector of San Joaquín de Flores and, where applicable to owners or possessors of real estate, to warn them to begin the necessary work on the sidewalk in front of their properties, adjusting the works to the specifications contained in Law 7600 and its regulation. The foregoing, without prejudice to the fact that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to comply with the stated obligations, the Municipality of Flores shall carry out the work and impose the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Municipal Code.", "outcome": { "label_en": "Granted", "label_es": "Con lugar", "summary_en": "The amparo is granted and the Municipality of Flores is ordered to immediately begin work to resolve the lack of sidewalks and to warn property owners to comply with their obligations, with the municipality authorized to remedy any omissions and impose fines.", "summary_es": "Se estima el recurso de amparo y se ordena a la Municipalidad de Flores iniciar de inmediato los trabajos para solucionar la falta de aceras y apercibir a los propietarios para que cumplan con sus obligaciones, pudiendo la Municipalidad suplir las omisiones y aplicar multas." }, "pull_quotes": [ { "context": "Considerando IV", "quote_en": "there is a generic duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, by eliminating any type of barrier", "quote_es": "existe un deber genérico de todos los entes y órganos que conforman la Administración, incluidas las municipalidades, de garantizar el derecho a la igualdad de las personas con discapacidad, mediante la eliminación de cualquier tipo de barreras" }, { "context": "Considerando VI", "quote_en": "the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to supervise and ensure compliance with the law on the properties that are part of its jurisdiction", "quote_es": "la Municipalidad accionada no puede delegar en los administrados su obligación de fiscalizar y velar por el cumplimiento de la ley en los terrenos que forman parte de su jurisdicción" } ], "cites": [], "cited_by": [], "references": { "internal": [ { "target_id": "norm-23261", "kind": "concept_anchor", "label": "Ley 7600 Art. 41" } ], "external": [] }, "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/ext-1-0007-135077", "tier": 2, "_editorial_citation_count": 0, "regulations_by_article": null, "amendments_by_article": null, "dictamen_by_article": null, "concordancias_by_article": null, "afectaciones_by_article": null, "resoluciones_by_article": null, "cited_by_votos": [], "cited_norms": [], "cited_norms_inverted": [ { "doc_id": "norm-23261", "norm_num": "7600", "norm_name": "Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "02/05/1996" }, { "doc_id": "norm-40197", "norm_num": "7794", "norm_name": "Código Municipal", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "30/04/1998" }, { "doc_id": "norm-50877", "norm_num": "3391", "norm_name": "Reglamento para el Control Nacional de Fraccionamientos y Urbanizaciones", "tipo_norma": "Reglamento", "norm_fecha": "13/12/1982" }, { "doc_id": "norm-53161", "norm_num": "0", "norm_name": "Reglamento de Construcciones", "tipo_norma": "Reglamento", "norm_fecha": "10/11/1982" }, { "doc_id": "norm-871", "norm_num": "0", "norm_name": "Derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado — Artículo 50 de la Constitución Política", "tipo_norma": "Constitución Política", "norm_fecha": "07/11/1949" } ], "sentencias_relacionadas": [], "temas_y_subtemas": [], "cascade_only": false, "amendment_count": 0, "body_es_text": "“I.- Objeto del recurso. El recurrente considera lesionados los\r\nderechos fundamentales del amparado, en particular los contenidos en el\r\nartículo 33 constitucional, en virtud de que es una persona no vidente y que\r\nlos vecinos del lugar donde reside en la Urbanización Villa\r\nLico, han construido rampas de más de un metro de alto, lo que es de\r\nconocimiento de la\r\n Municipalidad recurrida, y pese a esto no interviene ni\r\nrealiza nada al efecto para solucionar el problema, ya que le resulta\r\nprácticamente imposible transitar libremente por las aceras, sin poner su vida\r\nen peligro. Alega que el tutelado ha realizado múltiples gestiones telefónicas\r\ny personales así como por intermedio de la Directora del Patronato Nacional de Ciegos ante la Alcaldesa de la Municipalidad de\r\nFlores, en ese sentido, sin obtener resultados positivos, todo lo anterior en\r\nviolación de la Ley\r\n7600.\n\r\n\r\n\nIV.- Sobre el derecho. En anteriores oportunidades la Sala se ha referido al\r\nproblema del\r\nacceso al espacio físico público para personas con discapacidades relacionadas\r\ncon la posibilidad de trasladarse de un lugar a otro. Por ejemplo, por\r\nsentencia número 2008-10096 de las 19:00 horas del 17 de junio de\r\n2008, se indicó: \n\r\n\r\n\n“…el tema de los derechos de\r\nlas personas con discapacidad, los cuales se encuentran tutelados a nivel\r\nconstitucional por el principio de igualdad desarrollado por el artículo 33 de la Carta Magna, y a nivel\r\nlegal por una serie de normas, entre las que destaca la Ley 7948 \"Convención\r\nAmericana para la\r\n Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las\r\nPersonas con Discapacidad\", y la\r\n Ley 7600 \"Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las\r\npersonas con discapacidad\". Sobre lo anterior, conviene destacar lo\r\ndicho en la sentencia número: 2005- 15751 de las diez horas con veintiocho\r\nminutos del\r\ndiecisiete de noviembre del\r\ndos mil cinco, en la que se señaló en lo que interesa: \n\r\n\r\n\nIII.-\r\nSobre el fondo. En primer término es importante señalar que con la\r\n\"Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación\r\ncontra las Personas con Discapacidad\", aprobada por la Asamblea Legislativa\r\npor ley N° 7948 y la \"Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas\r\ncon Discapacidad\", N° 7600, así como las “Normas Uniformes para la\r\nequiparación de Oportunidades de las personas con discapacidad” consisten en la\r\npiedra angular de protección de los derechos de las personas con discapacidad. \n\r\n\r\n\n La Convención Americana\r\nSobre Derechos Humanos y la Constitución Política de Costa Rica, consagran el\r\nprincipio de igualdad de la persona y la prohibición de hacer distinciones\r\ncontrarias a su dignidad -artículos 24 y 33 respectivamente-. Adicionalmente, La Convención define en su\r\nartículo 1 la\r\n Discriminación de la siguiente manera: \n\r\n\r\n\n \"El término discriminación\r\ncontra las personas con discapacidad, significa toda distinción, exclusión o\r\nrestricción basada en una discapacidad, antecedente de discapacidad,\r\nconsecuencia de discapacidad presente o pasada, que tenga el efecto o el\r\npropósito de impedir o anular el reconocimiento, goce o ejercicio por parte de\r\nlas personas con discapacidad, de sus derechos humanos y libertades\r\nfundamentales \" \n\r\n\r\n\n Asimismo, consagra la\r\nobligación de los Estados que la suscribieron, a\r\nadoptar: \n\r\n\r\n\n \"las medidas\r\npara eliminar progresivamente la discriminación y promover la integración por\r\nparte de las autoridades gubernamentales y/o entidades privadas en la\r\nprestación o suministro de bienes, servicios, instalaciones, programas,\r\nactividades, tales como el empleo, el transporte, las comunicaciones, la\r\nvivienda, la recreación, la educación, el deporte, el acceso a la justicia y\r\nlos servicios policiales y las actividades políticas y de administración\" \n\r\n\r\n\n IV.- De\r\nla lectura del considerando anterior, se desprende que existe un deber genérico\r\nde todos los entes y órganos que conforman la Administración, incluidas\r\nlas municipalidades, de garantizar el derecho a la igualdad de las personas\r\ncon discapacidad, mediante la eliminación de cualquier tipo de barreras,\r\nque puedan impedir el ingreso total de estas personas a la sociedad. En\r\nel caso específico de las municipalidades una de las obligaciones\r\nque se derivan de lo dicho anteriormente, consiste en eliminar cualquier\r\ntipo de barrera física en las calles de su cantón,\r\nque limite el tránsito de las personas con discapacidad que habiten o\r\nsimplemente transiten por su jurisdicción. Este deber, es desarrollado por la Ley 7600 en su artículo 41, y\r\npor el Reglamento a la citada ley, en sus artículos 103, 125 y 126, al disponer\r\nen lo que interesa: \n\r\n\r\n\nArtículo 41.- Especificaciones técnicas reglamentarias \n\r\n\r\n\nLas construcciones nuevas,\r\nampliaciones o remodelaciones de edificios, parques, aceras, jardines, plazas,\r\nvías, servicios sanitarios y otros espacios de propiedad pública, deberán\r\nefectuarse conforme a las especificaciones técnicas reglamentarias de los\r\norganismos públicos y privados encargados de la materia. \n\r\n\r\n\nLas edificaciones privadas\r\nque impliquen concurrencia y brinden atención al público deberán contar con las\r\nmismas características establecidas en el párrafo\r\nanterior. \n\r\n\r\n\nLas mismas\r\nobligaciones mencionadas regirán para los proyectos de vivienda de cualquier\r\ncarácter, financiados total o parcialmente con fondos públicos. En este tipo de\r\nproyectos, las viviendas asignadas a personas con discapacidad o familias de\r\npersonas en las que uno de sus miembros sea una persona con discapacidad\r\ndeberán estar ubicadas en un sitio que garantice su fácil acceso. \n\r\n\r\n\nArtículo 103.- Fiscalización \n\r\n\r\n\nEl Ministerio de Obras\r\nPúblicas y Transportes, el Ministerio de Vivienda y Asentamientos Humanos, el\r\nMinisterio de Salud Pública, el Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, las\r\nMunicipalidades y demás entidades competentes de revisar planos y conceder\r\npermisos de construcción y remodelación o cualquier otra autorización similar, deberán\r\ncontrolar y fiscalizar que las disposiciones pertinentes contenidas en\r\nel presente reglamento se cumplan en todos sus extremos. \n\r\n\r\n\nArtículo 125.- Características de las aceras \n\r\n\r\n\nLas aceras deberán tener un ancho mínimo de 1.20 mts., un acabado antiderrapante y\r\nsin presentar escalones; en caso de desnivel éste será salvado con rampa. \n\r\n\r\n\nLos cortes transversales o\r\nrampas que se hagan a lo largo de la línea de propiedad, no será de un tamaño\r\nmayor a 1,20 mts., deberán cumplir con los requisitos\r\nde gradiente, superficie y libre paso de aguas. Podrán hacerse en estos casos\r\nsin necesidad de visto bueno municipal. \n\r\n\r\n\nEn caso de ser mayores los cortes o menor la distancia de separación según dicho, su\r\ndistancia máxima sobre la línea\r\nde construcción será la que exista de área de entrada o de estacionamiento.\r\nEstas áreas deberán cumplir con los requisitos que indique el reglamento al\r\nrespecto y deberá contarse en este caso con el visto\r\nbueno de la municipalidad del\r\nlugar para su ejecución. \n\r\n\r\n\nLas\r\naceras deberán tener una altura (gradiente) de entre 15 y 25 cms. medida\r\ndesde el cordón del\r\ncaño. En caso de que la altura de la línea de propiedad sea menor a la\r\nseñalada, se salvará por gradiente que deberá cumplir con lo establecido a\r\ncontinuación. \n\r\n\r\n\nLa gradiente en sentido\r\ntransversal, tendrá como\r\nmáximo el 3%. \n\r\n\r\n\nArtículo 126.- Rampas en las aceras. En las aceras, en todas las\r\nesquinas deberá haber una rampa con gradiente máxima de 10% para salvar el\r\ndesnivel existente entre la acera y la calle. Esta rampa deberá tener un ancho mínimo de 1.20 mts. y construidas en forma\r\nantiderrapante. \n\r\n\r\n\nV.- Por otra parte, también\r\nconviene mencionar que el deber antes mencionado, no sólo tiene asidero en lo\r\ndispuesto por la normativa que tutela específicamente los derechos de las\r\npersonas con discapacidad, tal y como es el caso de la Ley 7600, sino además en la\r\nobligación de las municipalidades de velar por que las calles de su\r\njurisdicción cuenten con la infraestructura necesaria para garantizar la\r\nseguridad de los habitantes del cantón, tales como acercas, cordones, caños y\r\ncunetas, y que además no existan sobre ellas obstáculos que puedan dificultar\r\nel tránsito de las personas, especialmente de aquellas que sufran algún tipo de\r\ndiscapacidad. Este deber es desarrollado por los artículos 75\r\nincisos d) y g) y 76 del Código Municipal, los cuales a su vez otorgan a la Municipalidad una\r\nserie de potestades con el fin de garantizar el cumplimiento de lo dispuesto\r\npor ellos, al disponer en lo que interesa: \n\r\n\r\n\n\"Artículo\r\n75. \n\r\n\r\n\nDe conformidad con el Plan\r\nRegulador Municipal, las personas físicas o jurídicas, propietarias o\r\nposeedoras, por cualquier título, de bienes inmuebles, deberán cumplir las\r\nsiguientes obligaciones: (... ) \n\r\n\r\n\nd) Construir las aceras\r\nfrente a sus propiedades y darles mantenimiento. \n\r\n\r\n\n(....) \n\r\n\r\n\ng) Abstenerse de\r\nobstaculizar el paso\r\npor las aceras con gradas de acceso a viviendas, retenes, cadenas, rótulos,\r\nmateriales de construcción o artefactos de seguridad en entradas de garajes.\r\nCuando por urgencia o imposibilidad de espacio físico deben de colocarse\r\nmateriales de construcción en las aceras, deberá utilizarse equipos adecuados\r\nde depósito. La municipalidad podrá adquirirlos para arrendarlos a los\r\nmunícipes. \n\r\n\r\n\n(... ) \n\r\n\r\n\nSalvo lo ordenado en la Ley General de Salud, cuando\r\nlos munícipes incumplan las obligaciones anteriores, la municipalidad está\r\nfacultada para suplir la omisión de esos deberes, realizando en forma\r\ndirecta las obras o prestando los servicios correspondientes. Por los\r\ntrabajos ejecutados, la municipalidad cobrará, al propietario o poseedor del\r\ninmueble, el costo efectivo del servicio o la obra. El\r\nmunícipe deberá rembolsar el costo efectivo en el plazo máximo de ocho días\r\nhábiles; de lo contrario, deberá cancelar por concepto de multa un cincuenta\r\npor ciento (50%) del valor de la obra o el servicio, sin perjuicio del cobro de\r\nlos intereses moratorios.\n\r\n\r\n\nCon base en un estudio técnico previo, el Concejo Municipal fijará los\r\nprecios mediante acuerdo emanado de su seno, el cual deberá publicarse en\r\n\"La Gaceta\"\r\npara entrar en vigencia. Las municipalidades revisarán y\r\nactualizarán anualmente estos precios y serán publicados por reglamento.\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nCuando se trate de las\r\nomisiones incluidas en el párrafo transanterior de este artículo y la\r\nmunicipalidad haya conocido por cualquier medio la situación de peligro, la\r\nmunicipalidad está obligada a suplir la inacción del propietario, previa\r\nprevención al munícipe conforme al debido proceso y sin perjuicio de cobrar el\r\nprecio indicado en el párrafo anterior. Si la municipalidad no la suple y por\r\nla omisión se causa daño a la salud, la integridad física o el patrimonio de\r\nterceros, el funcionario municipal omiso será responsable, solidariamente con\r\nel propietario o poseedor del inmueble, por los daños y perjuicios causados. \n\r\n\r\n\nArtículo\r\n76.- \n\r\n\r\n\nCuando se incumplan las\r\nobligaciones dispuestas en el artículo anterior, la municipalidad cobrará\r\ntrimestralmente con carácter de multa: \n\r\n\r\n\na) Por no limpiar la vegetación\r\nde sus predios situados a orillas de las vías públicas ni recortar la que\r\nperjudique el paso de las personas o lo\r\ndificulte, trescientos colones (¢300,00) por metro\r\nlineal del\r\nfrente total de la propiedad. \n\r\n\r\n\nb) Por no cercar los lotes\r\ndonde no haya construcciones o existan construcciones en estado de demolición,\r\ncuatrocientos colones (¢400,00) por metro lineal del frente total de la\r\npropiedad. \n\r\n\r\n\nc) Por no separar, recolectar\r\nni acumular, para el transporte y la disposición final, los desechos sólidos\r\nprovenientes de las actividades personales, familiares, públicas o comunales, o\r\nprovenientes de operaciones agrícolas, ganaderas, industriales, comerciales y\r\nturísticas solo mediante los sistemas de disposición final aprobados por la Dirección de Protección\r\nal Ambiente Humano de l Ministerio de Salud, cien colones (¢100,00) por metro\r\ncuadrado del área total de la propiedad. \n\r\n\r\n\nd) Por no construir las aceras\r\nfrente a las propiedades ni darles mantenimiento, quinientos colones (¢500,00) por metro cuadrado del frente total de la propiedad. \n\r\n\r\n\ne) Por no remover los objetos,\r\nmateriales o similares de las aceras o los predios de su propiedad, que\r\ncontaminen el ambiente u obstaculicen el paso, doscientos colones (¢200,00) por metro lineal del\r\nfrente total de la propiedad. \n\r\n\r\n\nf) Por no contar con un\r\nsistema de separación, recolección, acumulación y disposición final de los\r\ndesechos sólidos, aprobado por la\r\n Dirección de Protección al Ambiente Humano del Ministerio de\r\nSalud, en las empresas agrícolas, ganaderas, industriales, comerciales y\r\nturísticas, doscientos colones (¢200,00) por metro lineal del frente total de\r\nla propiedad, cuando el servicio público de disposición de desechos sólidos es\r\ninsuficiente o inexistente o si por la naturaleza o el volumen de los desechos,\r\neste no es aceptable sanitariamente. \n\r\n\r\n\ng) Por obstaculizar el paso\r\npor las aceras con gradas de acceso a viviendas, retenes, cadenas, rótulos,\r\nmateriales de construcción o artefactos de seguridad en entradas de garajes,\r\nquinientos colones (¢500,00) por metro lineal del frente total de la propiedad.\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nh) Por no instalar bajantes ni\r\ncanoas para recoger las aguas pluviales de las\r\nedificaciones, cuyas paredes externas colinden inmediatamente con la vía\r\npública, ochocientos colones (¢800,00) por metro\r\nlineal del frente\r\ntotal de la propiedad. \n\r\n\r\n\ni) Por no ejecutar las obras\r\nde conservación de las fachadas de casas o edificios visibles desde la vía\r\npública cuando, por motivos de interés turístico, arqueológico o patrimonial,\r\nlo exija la municipalidad, quinientos colones (¢500,00)\r\npor metro cuadrado del\r\nfrente total de la propiedad.\" .\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\nVI.- En el caso concreto, el\r\nrecurrente reclama que en el Barrio San Martín de San Gabriel de Aserrí no\r\nexisten aceras, situación que genera una serie de problemas para el amparado,\r\nquien es una persona no vidente. En su informe, las autoridades recurridas\r\ninforman que tras realizar una visita al lugar antes mencionado, se pudo\r\nconstatar que sólo algunos sectores cuentan con aceras; sin embargo explican\r\nque se encuentran imposibilitados para actuar, hasta tanto el amparado no\r\nseñale los lugares en los que la falta de acera le genera un problema. Con\r\nvista en lo anterior, esta Sala considera que en el presente recurso se\r\nconstata la alegada violación a los derechos fundamentales del amparado, pues\r\ndel propio dicho de los recurridos se deduce que en varios sectores del Barrio\r\nSan Martín no existen aceras, situación que constituye una violación no sólo a\r\nlos derechos del amparado, sino también a la obligación de la Municipalidad\r\nrecurrida de velar porque las calles del cantón cuenten con la infraestructura\r\nnecesaria para garantizar el libre tránsito de las personas con discapacidad,\r\ntal y como lo dispone la Ley\r\n7600 y el Código Municipal. Asimismo, conviene aclarar a los recurridos que no\r\nexiste una obligación del amparado de informar cuales son los sitios en los que\r\nestima que la falta de aceras le genera un problema, esto, por cuanto la Municipalidad\r\naccionada no puede delegar en los administrados su obligación de fiscalizar y\r\nvelar por el cumplimiento de la ley en los terrenos que forman parte de su\r\njurisdicción. Así en razón de lo expuesto anteriormente, lo procedente es\r\nacoger el recurso planteado, como\r\nen efecto se hace.” \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\nDecisión en la\r\nque se insiste en que forma parte del derecho de igualdad de las\r\npersonas con discapacidad la posibilidad de desplazarse en los espacios\r\npúblicos sin obstáculos.\n\r\n\r\n\nV.- Sobre el fondo. Como se estipula en el pronunciamiento parcialmente trascrito, la\r\nconstrucción de las aceras es primordialmente obligación de los propietarios de\r\nlos distintos inmuebles, pero corresponde a las municipalidades fiscalizar que\r\nse cumpla ese deber, y eventualmente sustituir a los dueños, para luego\r\nrecuperar esos montos. Por ello, se estima el amparo, ordenando a la Municipalidad de Flores,\r\nque de forma inmediata, inicie los trabajos para solucionar el problema\r\ngenerado por la falta de aceras en el sector Villa Lico de San Joaquín de\r\nFlores y, en las que correspondiere a propietarios o poseedores de bienes\r\ninmuebles, los aperciba para que inicien las obras necesarias en la\r\nacera frente a sus propiedades, ajustando las obras a las especificaciones\r\ncontenidas en la Ley\r\nnúmero 7600 y su reglamento. Lo anterior, sin perjuicio de que en caso de\r\nomisión del propietario o poseedor respectivo de cumplir las obligaciones\r\nseñaladas, la\r\n Municipalidad de Flores supla los trabajos y aplique las\r\nmultas correspondientes, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en los artículos 75 y\r\n76 del Código Municipal.”", "body_en_text": "“I.- Purpose of the appeal. The appellant considers that the fundamental rights of the protected party have been violated, particularly those contained in Article 33 of the Constitution, because he is a blind person and the neighbors of the place where he resides in the Villa Lico Urbanization have built ramps over one meter high, which is known to the respondent Municipality, and despite this it does not intervene or take any action to solve the problem, making it practically impossible for him to move freely on the sidewalks without endangering his life. He alleges that the protected party has made multiple phone and in-person efforts, as well as through the Director of the Patronato Nacional de Ciegos before the Mayoress of the Municipality of Flores, in this regard, without obtaining positive results, all of the above in violation of Ley 7600.\n\n\nIV.- On the law. On previous occasions, this Chamber has addressed the problem of access to public physical space for persons with disabilities related to the ability to move from one place to another. For example, in judgment number 2008-10096 at 19:00 hours on June 17, 2008, it was stated:\n\n\n“…the issue of the rights of persons with disabilities, which are protected at the constitutional level by the principle of equality developed in Article 33 of the Magna Carta, and at the legal level by a series of norms, among which Ley 7948 “Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad” and Ley 7600 “Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las personas con discapacidad” stand out. Regarding the above, it is worth highlighting what was stated in judgment number: 2005-15751 at ten hours and twenty-eight minutes on November seventeen, two thousand five, in which it was pointed out regarding the relevant part:\n\n\nIII.- On the merits. Firstly, it is important to note that the “Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad”, approved by the Legislative Assembly through Law No. 7948, and the “Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad”, No. 7600, as well as the “Normas Uniformes para la equiparación de Oportunidades de las personas con discapacidad” are the cornerstone of the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities.\n\nThe American Convention on Human Rights and the Political Constitution of Costa Rica enshrine the principle of equality of the individual and the prohibition of making distinctions contrary to their dignity - Articles 24 and 33 respectively-. Additionally, the Convention defines in its Article 1 Discrimination as follows:\n\n“The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on a disability, record of a disability, consequence of a current or past disability, that has the effect or purpose of preventing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms.”\n\nLikewise, it establishes the obligation of the States that signed it to adopt:\n\n“measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, and activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities.”\n\nIV.- From the reading of the preceding whereas clause, it follows that there is a generic duty on all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, through the elimination of any type of barriers that may prevent the full entry of these persons into society. In the specific case of municipalities, one of the obligations derived from the above is to eliminate any type of physical barrier in the streets of their canton that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who live or simply pass through their jurisdiction. This duty is developed by Ley 7600 in its Article 41, and by the Regulation to said law, in its Articles 103, 125, and 126, when providing, as relevant:\n\nArticle 41.- Regulatory technical specifications\n\nNew constructions, expansions, or remodeling of buildings, parks, sidewalks, gardens, plazas, roads, sanitary services, and other publicly owned spaces must be carried out in accordance with the regulatory technical specifications of the public and private bodies in charge of the matter.\n\nPrivate buildings that involve public attendance and provide service to the public must have the same characteristics established in the preceding paragraph.\n\nThe same aforementioned obligations shall apply to housing projects of any nature, financed totally or partially with public funds. In this type of projects, housing assigned to persons with disabilities or families in which one of the members is a person with a disability must be located in a site that guarantees their easy access.\n\nArticle 103.- Oversight\n\nThe Ministry of Public Works and Transport, the Ministry of Housing and Human Settlements, the Ministry of Public Health, the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, the Municipalities, and other competent entities for reviewing plans and granting construction and remodeling permits or any other similar authorization, must control and oversee that the pertinent provisions contained in this regulation are fully complied with.\n\nArticle 125.- Characteristics of sidewalks\n\nSidewalks must have a minimum width of 1.20 m., an anti-slip finish, and be without steps; in the event of a grade difference, it must be overcome with a ramp.\n\nCross-sectional cuts or ramps made along the property line shall not be larger than 1.20 m., must comply with the requirements of gradient (gradiente), surface, and free water passage. These may be made in these cases without the need for municipal approval.\n\nIn the event that the cuts are larger or the separation distance is less than said, their maximum distance on the building line (línea de construcción) shall be that of the existing entrance or parking area. These areas must comply with the requirements indicated by the regulation in this regard, and the approval of the municipality of the location must be obtained for its execution.\n\nSidewalks must have a height (gradient (gradiente)) of between 15 and 25 cm. measured from the curb of the gutter (caño). In the event that the height of the property line is less than indicated, it shall be overcome by a gradient (gradiente) that must comply with what is established below.\n\nThe gradient (gradiente) in the transverse direction must have a maximum of 3%.\n\nArticle 126.- Ramps on sidewalks. On sidewalks, at all corners there must be a ramp with a maximum gradient (gradiente) of 10% to overcome the existing grade difference between the sidewalk and the street. This ramp must have a minimum width of 1.20 m. and be constructed with an anti-slip surface.\n\nV.- Furthermore, it is also worth mentioning that the aforementioned duty is not only based on the provisions of the regulations that specifically protect the rights of persons with disabilities, as is the case with Ley 7600, but also on the obligation of municipalities to ensure that the streets in their jurisdiction have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the safety of the inhabitants of the canton, such as sidewalks, curbs (cordones), gutters (caños) and ditches (cunetas), and that there are no obstacles on them that may hinder the transit of persons, especially those with some type of disability. This duty is developed by Articles 75 subsections d) and g) and 76 of the Código Municipal, which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers in order to guarantee compliance with their provisions, when stipulating, as relevant:\n\n“Article 75.\n\nIn accordance with the Municipal Regulatory Plan, natural or legal persons, owners or possessors, by any title, of real estate, must comply with the following obligations: (… )\n\nd) Build the sidewalks in front of their properties and maintain them.\n\n(....)\n\ng) Refrain from obstructing passage on sidewalks with entrance steps to homes, barriers, chains, signs, construction materials, or security devices at garage entrances. When, due to urgency or impossibility of physical space, construction materials must be placed on the sidewalks, adequate deposit equipment must be used. The municipality may acquire them to rent them to the residents.\n\n(... )\n\nExcept as ordered in the General Health Law, when residents fail to comply with the foregoing obligations, the municipality is empowered to remedy the omission of these duties by directly carrying out the works or providing the corresponding services. For the works executed, the municipality shall charge the owner or possessor of the property the effective cost of the service or the work. The resident must reimburse the effective cost within a maximum period of eight business days; otherwise, they must pay as a fine fifty percent (50%) of the value of the work or service, without prejudice to the collection of default interest.\n\nBased on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council shall set the prices by agreement issued within its body, which must be published in “La Gaceta” to come into force. Municipalities shall review and update these prices annually, and they shall be published by regulation.\n\nIn the case of the omissions included in the paragraph preceding the previous one of this article, and when the municipality has learned of the dangerous situation by any means, the municipality is obligated to remedy the inaction of the owner, after prior warning to the resident in accordance with due process and without prejudice to charging the price indicated in the previous paragraph. If the municipality does not remedy it and due to the omission damage is caused to the health, physical integrity, or property of third parties, the negligent municipal official shall be jointly and severally liable, with the owner or possessor of the property, for the damages caused.\n\nArticle 76.-\n\nWhen the obligations set forth in the previous article are breached, the municipality shall charge quarterly as a fine:\n\na) For not clearing the vegetation from their plots located at the edges of public roads nor trimming the vegetation that harms or hinders the passage of persons, three hundred colones (¢300.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nb) For not fencing lots where there are no constructions or where there are constructions in a state of demolition, four hundred colones (¢400.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nc) For not separating, collecting, or accumulating, for transport and final disposal, solid waste from personal, family, public, or community activities, or from agricultural, livestock, industrial, commercial, and tourist operations, solely through the final disposal systems approved by the Directorate for Protection of the Human Environment of the Ministry of Health, one hundred colones (¢100.00) per square meter of the total area of the property.\n\nd) For not building the sidewalks in front of the properties nor maintaining them, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\ne) For not removing objects, materials, or similar items from the sidewalks or their property grounds that contaminate the environment or obstruct passage, two hundred colones (¢200.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nf) For not having a system for separation, collection, accumulation, and final disposal of solid waste, approved by the Directorate for Protection of the Human Environment of the Ministry of Health, in agricultural, livestock, industrial, commercial, and tourist businesses, two hundred colones (¢200.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property, when the public solid waste disposal service is insufficient or non-existent, or if, due to the nature or volume of the waste, this is not sanitarily acceptable.\n\ng) For obstructing passage on sidewalks with entrance steps to homes, barriers, chains, signs, construction materials, or security devices at garage entrances, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nh) For not installing downspouts or canoes to collect rainwater from buildings whose external walls immediately adjoin the public road, eight hundred colones (¢800.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\ni) For not executing conservation works on the facades of houses or buildings visible from the public road when, for reasons of tourist, archaeological, or heritage interest, the municipality so requires, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property.” .\n\n\nVI.- In the specific case, the appellant claims that in Barrio San Martín of San Gabriel de Aserrí there are no sidewalks, a situation that generates a series of problems for the protected party, who is a blind person. In their report, the respondent authorities report that after visiting the aforementioned place, it was verified that only some sectors have sidewalks; however, they explain that they are unable to act until the protected party indicates the places where the lack of sidewalks creates a problem for him. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that in this appeal the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the protected party is confirmed, since from the respondents’ own statements it follows that in several sectors of Barrio San Martín there are no sidewalks, a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the protected party's rights, but also of the obligation of the respondent Municipality to ensure that the streets of the canton have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the free transit of persons with disabilities, as provided by Ley 7600 and the Código Municipal. Likewise, it is appropriate to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation on the part of the protected party to report which sites he deems the lack of sidewalks creates a problem for him, because the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to oversee and ensure compliance with the law on the lands that are part of its jurisdiction. Thus, by reason of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the appeal filed, as is hereby done.”\n\nA decision in which it is insisted that the possibility of moving in public spaces without obstacles is part of the right to equality of persons with disabilities.\n\nV.- On the merits. As stipulated in the partially transcribed ruling, the construction of sidewalks is primarily the obligation of the owners of the various properties, but it is the responsibility of the municipalities to oversee compliance with that duty, and eventually to substitute for the owners, in order to subsequently recover those amounts. Therefore, the amparo appeal is granted, ordering the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin the work to solve the problem generated by the lack of sidewalks in the Villa Lico sector of San Joaquín de Flores and, for those corresponding to owners or possessors of real estate, to warn them to begin the necessary works on the sidewalk in front of their properties, adjusting the works to the specifications contained in Law number 7600 and its regulation. The foregoing, without prejudice that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to fulfill the indicated obligations, the Municipality of Flores shall remedy the works and apply the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Código Municipal.”\n\nAdditionally, the Convention defines \"Discrimination\" in its article 1 as follows:\n\n \"The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion or restriction based on a disability, record of disability, consequence of present or past disability, which has the effect or purpose of preventing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms \"\n\n Likewise, it enshrines the obligation of the States that signed it to adopt:\n\n \"the measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities\"\n\n IV.- From the reading of the preceding considerando, it follows that there is a generic duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including the municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, through the elimination of any type of barriers that may prevent the full entry of these persons into society. In the specific case of municipalities, one of the obligations arising from the foregoing consists of eliminating any type of physical barrier on the streets of their canton that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who reside or simply transit through their jurisdiction. This duty is developed by Ley 7600 in its article 41, and by the Regulation to the cited law, in its articles 103, 125, and 126, by providing as relevant:\n\nArticle 41.- Regulatory technical specifications\n\nNew constructions, expansions, or remodeling of buildings, parks, sidewalks (aceras), gardens, plazas, roads, sanitary services, and other public-owned spaces must be carried out in accordance with the regulatory technical specifications of the public and private bodies in charge of the matter.\n\nPrivate buildings that involve public attendance and provide public service must have the same characteristics established in the preceding paragraph.\n\nThe same mentioned obligations shall apply to housing projects of any nature, totally or partially financed with public funds. In this type of project, housing assigned to persons with disabilities or families of persons where one of its members is a person with a disability must be located in a site that guarantees their easy access.\n\nArticle 103.- Oversight (Fiscalización)\n\nThe Ministry of Public Works and Transport, the Ministry of Housing and Human Settlements, the Ministry of Public Health, the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, the Municipalities, and other entities competent to review plans and grant construction and remodeling permits or any other similar authorization, must control and oversee that the pertinent provisions contained in this regulation are complied with in all their extremes.\n\nArticle 125.- Characteristics of sidewalks (aceras)\n\nSidewalks (aceras) must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts., a non-slip finish, and without presenting steps; in case of unevenness, it shall be overcome with a ramp.\n\nTransversal cuts or ramps made along the property line shall not be larger than 1.20 mts., and must comply with gradient, surface, and free flow of water requirements. These may be made in these cases without the need for municipal approval.\n\nIn case the cuts are larger or the separation distance is less than stated, their maximum distance on the building line shall be that which exists for the entrance or parking area. These areas must comply with the requirements indicated by the respective regulation and, in this case, must have the approval of the municipality of the place for their execution.\n\nSidewalks (aceras) must have a height (gradient) of between 15 and 25 cms., measured from the gutter curb. In the event the property line height is less than indicated, it shall be overcome by a gradient that must comply with the provisions set forth below.\n\nThe cross-sectional gradient shall have a maximum of 3%.\n\nArticle 126.- Ramps on sidewalks (aceras). On sidewalks (aceras), at all corners, there must be a ramp with a maximum gradient of 10% to overcome the unevenness existing between the sidewalk (acera) and the street. This ramp must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts. and be built with a non-slip finish.\n\nV.- On the other hand, it is also convenient to mention that the aforementioned duty not only has a basis in the provisions of the regulations that specifically protect the rights of persons with disabilities, such as the case of Ley 7600, but also in the obligation of the municipalities to ensure that the streets of their jurisdiction have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the safety of the inhabitants of the canton, such as sidewalks (acercas), curbs, gutters, and ditches (cunetas), and that there are also no obstacles on them that may hinder the transit of persons, especially those who suffer from some type of disability. This duty is developed by articles 75 subsections d) and g) and 76 of the Código Municipal, which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers to guarantee compliance with the provisions therein, by providing as relevant:\n\n\"Article 75.\n\nIn accordance with the Municipal Regulatory Plan, natural or legal persons, owners or possessors, by any title, of real estate, must comply with the following obligations: (... )\n\nd) Build the sidewalks (aceras) in front of their properties and maintain them.\n\n(....)\n\ng) Refrain from obstructing passage on sidewalks (aceras) with access steps to homes, retainers, chains, signs, construction materials, or safety devices at garage entrances. When due to urgency or impossibility of physical space, construction materials must be placed on the sidewalks (aceras), adequate deposit equipment must be used. The municipality may acquire them to lease to the citizens.\n\n(... )\n\nExcept as ordered by the General Health Law, when the citizens fail to comply with the previous obligations, the municipality is empowered to make up for the omission of those duties, directly carrying out the works or providing the corresponding services. For the works executed, the municipality shall charge the owner or possessor of the property the effective cost of the service or the work. The citizen must reimburse the effective cost within a maximum period of eight business days; otherwise, they must pay as a fine fifty percent (50%) of the value of the work or service, without prejudice to the collection of late payment interest.\n\nBased on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council shall set the prices by agreement issued from its chamber, which must be published in \"La Gaceta\" to enter into force. The municipalities shall review and annually update these prices and they shall be published by regulation.\n\nWhen dealing with the omissions included in the preceding paragraph of this article and the municipality has become aware by any means of the dangerous situation, the municipality is obliged to make up for the inaction of the owner, after prior warning to the citizen in accordance with due process and without prejudice to charging the price indicated in the previous paragraph. If the municipality does not make up for it and due to the omission damage is caused to the health, physical integrity, or property of third parties, the omitting municipal official shall be liable, jointly and severally with the owner or possessor of the property, for the damages caused.\n\nArticle 76.-\n\nWhen the obligations set forth in the previous article are breached, the municipality shall charge quarterly as a fine:\n\na) For not clearing the vegetation of their lands located on the edges of public roads nor trimming that which impairs or hinders the passage of persons, three hundred colones (¢300.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nb) For not fencing lots where there are no constructions or where there are constructions in a state of demolition, four hundred colones (¢400.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nc) For not separating, collecting, or accumulating, for transport and final disposal, solid waste from personal, family, public, or communal activities, or from agricultural, livestock, industrial, commercial, and tourist operations solely through the final disposal systems approved by the Directorate of Protection of the Human Environment of the Ministry of Health, one hundred colones (¢100.00) per square meter of the total area of the property.\n\nd) For not building the sidewalks (aceras) in front of properties nor maintaining them, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\ne) For not removing objects, materials, or similar from the sidewalks (aceras) or their own property lands, which contaminate the environment or obstruct passage, two hundred colones (¢200.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nf) For not having a system for separation, collection, accumulation, and final disposal of solid waste, approved by the Directorate of Protection of the Human Environment of the Ministry of Health, in agricultural, livestock, industrial, commercial, and tourist companies, two hundred colones (¢200.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property, when the public solid waste disposal service is insufficient or non-existent or if by the nature or volume of the waste, it is not sanitarily acceptable.\n\ng) For obstructing passage on sidewalks (aceras) with access steps to homes, retainers, chains, signs, construction materials, or safety devices at garage entrances, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nh) For not installing downspouts or canoes to collect rainwater from buildings whose external walls immediately adjoin the public thoroughfare, eight hundred colones (¢800.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\ni) For not executing the conservation works on the facades of houses or buildings visible from the public thoroughfare when, for reasons of touristic, archaeological, or heritage interest, the municipality so requires, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property.\" .\n\nVI.- In the specific case, the appellant claims that in Barrio San Martín of San Gabriel de Aserrí there are no sidewalks (aceras), a situation that generates a series of problems for the amparado, who is a blind person. In their report, the respondent authorities report that after making a visit to the aforementioned place, it was possible to verify that only some sectors have sidewalks (aceras); however, they explain that they are unable to act until the amparado identifies the places where the lack of a sidewalk (acera) causes him a problem. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that in the present recurso, the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the amparado is verified, since from the respondents' own words it follows that in several sectors of Barrio San Martín there are no sidewalks (aceras), a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the rights of the amparado, but also of the obligation of the respondent Municipality to ensure that the streets of the canton have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the free transit of persons with disabilities, as provided by Ley 7600 and the Código Municipal. Likewise, it is convenient to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation for the amparado to inform which sites the lack of sidewalks (aceras) causes him a problem, this, because the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to oversee and ensure compliance with the law on the lands that form part of its jurisdiction. Thus, for the reasons set forth above, the appropriate course is to grant the recurso filed, as is hereby done.”\n\nDecision in which it is insisted that the possibility of moving in public spaces without obstacles forms part of the right to equality of persons with disabilities.\n\nV.- On the merits. As stipulated in the partially transcribed ruling, the construction of sidewalks (aceras) is primarily an obligation of the owners of the various properties, but it is incumbent upon the municipalities to oversee compliance with that duty, and eventually to substitute the owners, in order to later recover those amounts. Therefore, the amparo is granted, ordering the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin the works to solve the problem generated by the lack of sidewalks (aceras) in the Villa Lico sector of San Joaquín de Flores and, in those corresponding to owners or possessors of real estate, to warn them to begin the necessary works on the sidewalk (acera) in front of their properties, adjusting the works to the specifications contained in Ley number 7600 and its regulation.\n\nThe foregoing, without prejudice to the fact that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to fulfill the stated obligations, the Municipality of Flores may perform the work and apply the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Código Municipal.\"\n\n**I.- Purpose of the appeal.** The appellant considers that the fundamental rights of the protected person have been violated, particularly those contained in Article 33 of the Constitution, by virtue of the fact that he is a blind person and that the neighbors of the place where he resides in Urbanización Villa Lico have built ramps over one meter high, which is known to the respondent Municipality, and despite this it does not intervene or do anything to solve the problem, since it is practically impossible for him to move freely on the sidewalks without endangering his life. He alleges that the ward has made multiple telephone and in-person efforts, as well as through the Director of the Patronato Nacional de Ciegos, before the Mayor of the Municipality of Flores, in that regard, without obtaining positive results, all of the foregoing in violation of Law 7600.\n\n**IV.- On the law.** On previous occasions, this Chamber has referred to the problem of access to public physical space for persons with disabilities related to the possibility of moving from one place to another. For example, in judgment number 2008-10096 of 7:00 p.m. on June 17, 2008, it was stated:\n\n“…the issue of the rights of persons with disabilities, which are protected at the constitutional level by the principle of equality developed by Article 33 of the Carta Magna, and at the legal level by a series of norms, among which Law 7948 \"Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad\", and Law 7600 \"Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las personas con discapacidad\" stand out. Regarding the foregoing, it is worth highlighting what was said in judgment number: 2005-15751 of ten hours and twenty-eight minutes on November seventeenth, two thousand five, in which it was stated, in relevant part:\n\nIII.- On the merits. Firstly, it is important to note that the \"Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad\", approved by the Asamblea Legislativa through Law No. 7948, and the \"Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad\", No. 7600, as well as the “Normas Uniformes para la equiparación de Oportunidades de las personas con discapacidad”, constitute the cornerstone of the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities.\n\n The Convención Americana Sobre Derechos Humanos and the Constitución Política of Costa Rica enshrine the principle of equality of the person and the prohibition of making distinctions contrary to their dignity - Articles 24 and 33 respectively. Additionally, the Convention defines in its Article 1 Discrimination as follows:\n\n \"The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion or restriction based on a disability, antecedent of disability, consequence of present or past disability, which has the effect or purpose of impeding or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms.\"\n\n Likewise, it enshrines the obligation of the States that signed it, to adopt:\n\n \"measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities.\"\n\n **IV.-** From the reading of the preceding recital, it follows that **there is a generic duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, *including the municipalities*, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, *through the elimination of any type of barrier*, that may prevent the full entry of these persons into society.** ***In the specific case of the municipalities* one of the obligations** that derive from the foregoing, ***consists of eliminating any type of physical barrier on the streets of their canton*, that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who reside in or simply transit through their jurisdiction.** This duty is developed by Law 7600 in its Article 41, and by the Regulation to the cited law, in its Articles 103, 125 and 126, by providing, in relevant part:\n\nArticle 41.- Regulatory technical specifications.\n\nNew constructions, expansions or remodeling of buildings, parks, sidewalks (aceras), gardens, plazas, roads, sanitary services and other publicly owned spaces must be carried out in accordance with the regulatory technical specifications of the public and private entities in charge of the matter.\n\nPrivate buildings that involve public attendance and provide service to the public must have the same characteristics established in the preceding paragraph.\n\nThe same obligations mentioned shall govern housing projects of any nature, totally or partially financed with public funds. In this type of projects, housing assigned to persons with disabilities or families in which one of its members is a person with a disability must be located in a site that guarantees easy access.\n\nArticle 103.- Oversight.\n\nThe Ministry of Public Works and Transport, the Ministry of Housing and Human Settlements, the Ministry of Public Health, the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, **the Municipalities** and other entities competent to review plans and grant construction and remodeling permits or any other similar authorization, ***must control and oversee*** that the pertinent provisions contained in this regulation are complied with in all their extremes.\n\n**Article 125.- Characteristics of sidewalks (aceras).**\n\nSidewalks (aceras) must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts., a non-slip finish and present no steps; in the event of a difference in level, this shall be overcome with a ramp.\n\nTransverse cuts or ramps made along the property line shall not be larger than 1.20 mts., and must comply with the requirements of gradient, surface and free flow of water. They may be made in these cases without the need for municipal approval.\n\nIn the event that the cuts are larger or the separation distance is less as stated, their maximum distance on the building line shall be that which exists for the entrance or parking area. These areas must comply with the requirements indicated by the respective regulation and must have, in this case, the approval of the municipality of the place for their execution.\n\nSidewalks (aceras) must have a height (gradient) of between 15 and 25 cms. measured from the curb. In the event that the height of the property line is less than that indicated, it shall be overcome by a gradient that must comply with what is established below.\n\nThe transverse gradient shall have a maximum of 3%.\n\n**Article 126.- Ramps on sidewalks (aceras).** On the sidewalk (acera), at all corners there must be a ramp with a maximum gradient of 10% to overcome the existing difference in level between the sidewalk (acera) and the street. This ramp must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts. and be built with a non-slip finish.\n\n**V.-** On the other hand, it is also worth mentioning that the aforementioned duty not only has a basis in the provisions of the regulations that specifically protect the rights of persons with disabilities, as is the case of Law 7600, but also in the obligation of the municipalities to ensure that the streets of their jurisdiction have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the safety of the inhabitants of the canton, such as sidewalks (aceras), curbs, gutters and ditches, and that there are no obstacles on them that could hinder the transit of persons, especially those who suffer from some type of disability. This duty is developed by Articles 75, subsections d) and g), and 76 of the Código Municipal, which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers in order to guarantee compliance with the provisions thereof, by providing, in relevant part:\n\n\"Article 75.-\n\nIn accordance with the Municipal Master Plan (Plan Regulador Municipal), natural or legal persons, owners or possessors, by any title, of real estate, must fulfill the following obligations: (...)\n\nd) Build the sidewalks (aceras) in front of their properties and maintain them.\n\n(....)\n\ng) Refrain from obstructing passage on sidewalks with steps for access to dwellings, barriers, chains, signs, construction materials, or security devices at garage entrances. When due to urgency or impossibility of physical space, construction materials must be placed on sidewalks, adequate storage containers shall be used. The municipality may acquire them to lease to the residents.\n\n(... )\n\nExcept as ordered by the General Health Law (Ley General de Salud), **when residents breach the foregoing obligations, the municipality is empowered to remedy the omission of those duties, by directly performing the works or providing the corresponding services**. For the works performed, the municipality shall charge the owner or possessor of the property the effective cost of the service or the work. The resident must reimburse the effective cost within a maximum period of eight business days; otherwise, they must pay, as a fine, fifty percent (50%) of the value of the work or the service, without prejudice to the collection of default interest.\n\nBased on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council shall set the prices by resolution adopted within its body, which must be published in \"La Gaceta\" to enter into force. Municipalities shall annually review and update these prices, and they shall be published by regulation.\n\nWhen it involves the omissions included in the preceding paragraph of this article and the municipality has learned by any means of the dangerous situation, the municipality is obligated to remedy the owner’s inaction, after prior warning to the resident in accordance with due process and without prejudice to charging the price indicated in the preceding paragraph. If the municipality does not remedy it and the omission causes damage to the health, physical integrity, or property of third parties, the negligent municipal official shall be jointly and severally liable with the owner or possessor of the property for the damages and losses caused.\n\nArticle 76.-\n\nWhen the obligations set forth in the preceding article are breached, the municipality shall charge quarterly, as a fine:\n\na) For failing to clear vegetation from their properties situated at the edges of public roads or to trim that which impedes or hinders the passage of persons, three hundred colones (¢300.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nb) For failing to fence lots where there are no constructions or where there are constructions in a state of demolition, four hundred colones (¢400.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nc) For failing to separate, collect, or accumulate, for transport and final disposal, solid waste originating from personal, family, public, or community activities, or originating from agricultural, livestock, industrial, commercial, and tourism operations, except through final disposal systems approved by the Directorate of Protection of the Human Environment (Dirección de Protección al Ambiente Humano) of the Ministry of Health, one hundred colones (¢100.00) per square meter of the total area of the property.\n\nd) For failing to build sidewalks in front of the properties or to maintain them, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\ne) For failing to remove objects, materials, or similar items from sidewalks or their properties that contaminate the environment or obstruct passage, two hundred colones (¢200.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nf) For lacking a system of separation, collection, accumulation, and final disposal of solid waste, approved by the Directorate of Protection of the Human Environment (Dirección de Protección al Ambiente Humano) of the Ministry of Health, in agricultural, livestock, industrial, commercial, and tourism enterprises, two hundred colones (¢200.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property, when the public solid waste disposal service is insufficient or nonexistent or if, by the nature or volume of the waste, it is not sanitaryly acceptable.\n\ng) For obstructing passage on sidewalks with steps for access to dwellings, barriers, chains, signs, construction materials, or security devices at garage entrances, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\nh) For failing to install downspouts and gutters to collect rainwater from buildings whose external walls immediately adjoin the public thoroughfare, eight hundred colones (¢800.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.\n\ni) For failing to carry out the conservation works on the facades of houses or buildings visible from the public thoroughfare when, for reasons of touristic, archaeological, or patrimonial interest, the municipality so requires, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property.\"\n\nVI.- In the specific case, the appellant claims that in Barrio San Martín of San Gabriel de Aserrí, sidewalks are nonexistent, a situation that generates a series of problems for the petitioner, who is a blind person. In their report, the respondent authorities state that after conducting a site visit to the aforementioned location, it was confirmed that only some sectors have sidewalks; however, they explain that they are unable to act until the petitioner indicates the places where the lack of a sidewalk generates a problem for him. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that in the present appeal, the alleged violation of the petitioner’s fundamental rights is verified, since from the respondents’ own statements it follows that in several sectors of Barrio San Martín, sidewalks are nonexistent, a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the petitioner’s rights, but also of the respondent Municipality’s obligation to ensure that the canton’s streets have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the free transit of persons with disabilities, as provided by Law 7600 and the Municipal Code (Código Municipal). Likewise, it is pertinent to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation on the petitioner to inform which are the sites where he considers the lack of sidewalks generates a problem for him, this being because the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to supervise and ensure compliance with the law on the lands that form part of its jurisdiction. Thus, by reason of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the appeal filed, as is hereby done.\"\n\nA decision that insists that the possibility of moving about in public spaces without obstacles forms part of the right to equality of persons with disabilities.\n\nV.- On the merits. As stipulated in the partially transcribed pronouncement, the construction of sidewalks is primarily an obligation of the owners of the different properties, but it is the responsibility of the municipalities to supervise compliance with that duty, and eventually to substitute for the owners, in order to later recover those amounts. Therefore, the appeal is granted, ordering the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin the works to resolve the problem generated by the lack of sidewalks in the Villa Lico sector of San Joaquín de Flores, and, for those that correspond to owners or possessors of real property, to warn them so that they begin the necessary works on the sidewalk in front of their properties, adjusting the works to the specifications contained in Law 7600 and its regulations. The foregoing, without prejudice to the fact that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to fulfill the indicated obligations, the Municipality of Flores shall remedy the works and apply the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Municipal Code (Código Municipal).\"" }