Amparo for lack of sidewalks for persons with disabilitiesAmparo por falta de aceras para personas con discapacidad

“I.- On previous occasions, the Court has addressed the problem of access to the public physical space for persons with disabilities related to the ability to move from one place to another. For example, in judgment #2008-10096 of 7:00 p.m. on June 17, 2008, it was stated:

“…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 Constitution (Carta Magna), and at the legal level by a series of norms, among which Law 7948 'Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities' (Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad), and Law 7600 'Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities' (Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las personas con discapacidad) stand out. Regarding the foregoing, it is worth highlighting what was stated in judgment number: 2005-15751 of ten twenty-eight hours on November seventeenth, two thousand five, which stated, as relevant:

III.- On the merits. First of all, it is important to note that the 'Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities' (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 'Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities' (Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad), No. 7600, as well as the 'Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities' (Normas Uniformes para la equiparación de Oportunidades de las personas con discapacidad), constitute the cornerstone of protection of the rights of persons with disabilities.

The American Convention on Human Rights and the Political Constitution 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 Discrimination in its Article 1 as follows:

'The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on a disability, record of disability, consequence of previous or present 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.' Likewise, it enshrines the obligation of the States that signed it to adopt:

'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, and activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities.' IV.- From a reading of the preceding recital (considerando), it is apparent that there is a general duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including the municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, by eliminating any type of barriers that may prevent the full inclusion of these persons in society. In the specific case of the municipalities, one of the obligations derived from the foregoing consists of eliminating any type of physical barrier on the streets of their canton (cantón) that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who reside or simply travel through its jurisdiction. This duty is developed by Law 7600 in its Article 41, and by the Regulation (Reglamento) to the cited law, in its Articles 103, 125, and 126, by providing, as relevant:

Article 41.- Regulatory technical specifications (Especificaciones técnicas reglamentarias) New constructions, expansions, or remodeling of buildings, parks, sidewalks, gardens, plazas, roadways, 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.

Private buildings that involve public attendance and provide service to the public must have the same characteristics established in the preceding paragraph.

The same obligations mentioned shall apply to housing projects of any nature, financed totally or partially with public funds. In this type of project, 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 easy access.

Article 103.- Oversight (Fiscalización) The Ministry of Public Works and Transport (Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes), the Ministry of Housing and Human Settlements (Ministerio de Vivienda y Asentamientos Humanos), the Ministry of Public Health (Ministerio de Salud Pública), the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism (Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo), the Municipalities, and other entities competent to review plans and grant construction and remodeling permits or any other similar authorization, must control and monitor that the pertinent provisions contained in this regulation are fully complied with.

Article 125.- Characteristics of sidewalks (aceras) Sidewalks must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts., a non-slip (antiderrapante) finish, and must not have steps; in the event of a change in level (desnivel), it shall be overcome with a ramp.

The transversal cuts or ramps made along the property line shall not be larger than 1.20 mts., and must comply with gradient (gradiente) requirements, surface, and free passage of water. They may be made in these cases without the need for municipal approval (visto bueno municipal).

In the event the cuts are larger or the separation distance is less as stated, their maximum distance over the building line shall be that which exists for the entry or parking area. These areas must comply with the requirements indicated by the regulation in this regard and, in this case, municipal approval (visto bueno) of the locality must be obtained for their execution.

Sidewalks must have a height (gradient) (gradiente) between 15 and 25 cms. measured from the curb (cordón del caño). If 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.

The gradient (gradiente) in the transversal direction shall be a maximum of 3%.

Article 126.- Ramps on sidewalks (aceras). On sidewalks (aceras), at all corners there shall be a ramp with a maximum gradient (gradiente) of 10% to overcome the existing change in level (desnivel) between the sidewalk (acera) and the street. This ramp shall have a minimum width of 1.20 mts. and be constructed with a non-slip (antiderrapante) surface.

V.- On the other hand, it is also appropriate to mention that the aforementioned duty is not only grounded 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 within their jurisdiction have the infrastructure necessary to guarantee the safety of the inhabitants of the canton (cantón), such as sidewalks (acercas), curbs (cordones), gutters (caños), and ditches (cunetas), and that there are no obstacles on them that could hinder the transit of persons, especially those suffering from some type of disability. This duty is developed by Articles 75 subsections d) and g) and 76 of the Municipal Code (Código Municipal), which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers in order to guarantee compliance with their provisions, by stating, as relevant:

'Article 75.

In accordance with the Municipal Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador Municipal), natural or legal persons, owners or possessors, by any title, of real estate, must comply with the following obligations: (...)

• d)Build the sidewalks in front of their properties and maintain them.

(...)

• g)Refrain from obstructing passage on sidewalks with entrance steps to dwellings, posts, 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, suitable deposit equipment must be used. The municipality may acquire them to rent to the residents (munícipes).

(...)

Except as ordered in the General Health Law (Ley General de Salud), when the residents (munícipes) fail to comply with the above obligations, the municipality is empowered to remedy the omission of those duties, directly carrying out the works or providing the corresponding services. For the executed works, the municipality shall charge the owner or possessor of the property the effective cost of the service or work. The resident (munícipe) 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.

Based on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council (Concejo Municipal) shall set prices by agreement emanating from its body, which must be published in 'La Gaceta' to enter into force. Municipalities shall review and update these prices annually and they shall be published by regulation.

When dealing with the omissions included in the paragraph before the immediately preceding one of this article and the municipality has become aware of the dangerous situation by any means, the municipality is obliged to remedy the inaction of the owner, after prior notice to the resident (munícipe) 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 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 (responsable solidariamente) with the owner or possessor of the property for the damages caused.

Article 76.- When the obligations established in the previous article are breached, the municipality shall collect quarterly as a fine:

• a)For not cleaning the vegetation from their plots located on the edges of public roads nor trimming that which harms or hinders the passage of persons, three hundred colones (¢300.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.
• b)For not fencing lots where there are no constructions or there are constructions in a state of demolition, four hundred colones (¢400.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property.
• c)For not separating, collecting, and 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 disposal systems approved by the Directorate for the 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.
• d)For not building the sidewalks in front of their properties nor maintaining them, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property.
• e)For not removing 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.
• f)For not having a system for the separation, collection, accumulation, and final disposal of solid waste, approved by the Directorate for the Protection of the Human Environment (Dirección de Protección al Ambiente Humano) of the Ministry of Health, in agricultural, livestock, industrial, commercial, and tourist 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, due to the nature or volume of the waste, it is not sanitary acceptable.
• g)For obstructing passage on sidewalks with entrance steps to dwellings, posts, 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.
• h)For not installing downspouts (bajantes) and gutters 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.
• i)For not carrying out conservation works on the facades of houses or buildings visible from the public road 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.' VI.- In the specific case, the petitioner claims that in the San Martín neighborhood (Barrio San Martín) of San Gabriel de Aserrí there are no sidewalks, a situation that generates a series of problems for the protected party (amparado), who is a blind person. In their report, the respondent authorities inform that after making a visit to the aforementioned place, it could be verified that only some sectors have sidewalks; however, they explain that they are unable to act until the protected party (amparado) indicates the places where the lack of sidewalk generates a problem for them. In view of the foregoing, this Court considers that in this appeal the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the protected party (amparado) is verified, since from the respondents' own statement it is deduced that in various sectors of the San Martín neighborhood (Barrio San Martín) there are no sidewalks, a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the rights of the protected party (amparado), but also of the obligation of the respondent Municipality to ensure that the streets of the canton (cantón) have the infrastructure necessary to guarantee the free transit of persons with disabilities, as provided by Law 7600 and the Municipal Code (Código Municipal). Likewise, it is appropriate to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation of the protected party (amparado) to inform which are the sites where they believe that the lack of sidewalks creates a problem for them, this, because the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the governed its obligation to monitor and ensure compliance with the law on the lands that form part of its jurisdiction. Therefore, for the reasons set forth above, the appropriate course is to grant the appeal filed, as is indeed done.” A decision in which it is insisted that the freedom to move in public spaces without obstacles is part of the right to equality of persons with disabilities.

II.- In the present case, the petitioner explains that he must move about in a wheelchair and that near his place of residence (Monte Carlo neighborhood (barrio), La Emilia, Guápiles, Pococí) the absence of sidewalks hinders his mobility. As stipulated in the ruling transcribed above, the construction of sidewalks is primarily the obligation of the owners of the various properties, but it is up to the municipalities to monitor compliance with that duty, and eventually substitute the owners, to later recover those amounts. Although the respondent municipal officials argue that a plan is being developed in the canton (cantón) to remedy the noted deficiency and that, in the specific case of the protected party (amparado), the Municipal Council (Concejo Municipal) approved agreement #2095, Article VI, record #93, of November 10, 2008, so that within one month the Mayor coordinates with the Department of Development and Urban Control (Departamento de Desarrollo y Control Urbano) the economic and technical feasibility of building a sidewalk to fulfill what is required, no specific concrete action has been taken to satisfy the duty derived from Article 33 of the Constitution. Therefore, the amparo is granted, ordering the respondents, immediately, to begin the works to solve the problem generated by the lack of sidewalks in the Monte Carlo neighborhood (barrio) in La Emilia, Guápiles de Pococí, in the zone that corresponds to the Municipality, and, in 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 #7600 and its regulation. The 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 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).” and built with a non-slip surface. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>V.- </i></b><i>On the other hand, it is also worth mentioning that the aforementioned duty is not only grounded in the provisions of the regulations that specifically protect the rights of persons with disabilities, as is the case with Law 7600, but also in the obligation of the municipalities to ensure that the streets within their jurisdiction have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the safety of the canton's inhabitants, such as sidewalks (aceras), curbs, gutters, and ditches, and also that there are no obstacles on them that could hinder the transit of people, especially those suffering from some type of disability. This duty is developed by Articles 75 subsections d) and g) and 76 of the Municipal Code (Código Municipal), which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers in order to guarantee compliance with their provisions, by stating, in what is relevant: </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>"Article 75. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>In accordance with the Municipal Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador Municipal), natural or legal persons, owners or possessors, by any title, of real estate, must comply with the following obligations: (... )</i> <o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>d) Build the sidewalks (aceras) in front of their properties and maintain them. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>(....) </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>g) Refrain from obstructing passage on sidewalks (aceras) with steps for access to dwellings, barriers, chains, signs, construction materials, or security devices at garage entrances. When, due to urgency or the impossibility of physical space, construction materials must be placed on sidewalks (aceras), adequate storage equipment must be used. The municipality may acquire such equipment to lease it to the residents (munícipes). </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>(... )</i> <o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>Except as ordered in the General Health Law (Ley General de Salud), when residents (munícipes) fail to comply with the foregoing obligations, the municipality is empowered to make up for 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 work. The resident (munícipe) must reimburse the effective cost within a maximum period of eight business days; otherwise, they must pay a fine of fifty percent (50%) of the value of the work or service, without prejudice to the collection of default interest. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>Based on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council (Concejo Municipal) shall set the prices by means of an agreement issued from its body, which must be published in “La Gaceta” to enter into force. The municipalities shall review and update these prices annually, and they shall be published by regulation. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>When dealing with the omissions included in the paragraph three paragraphs prior to this article and the municipality has become aware by any means of the dangerous situation, the municipality is obliged to make up for the owner's inaction, after prior warning to the resident (munícipe) in accordance with due process and without prejudice to charging the price indicated in the preceding paragraph. If the municipality does not make up for it and the omission causes damage to the health, physical integrity, or property of third parties, the omissive municipal official shall be jointly and severally liable with the owner or possessor of the property for the damages caused. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>Article 76.- </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>When the obligations set forth in the preceding article are breached, the municipality shall charge quarterly as a fine: </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>a) For not clearing vegetation from their properties located along the edges of public roads and for not trimming that which harms or hinders the passage of people, three hundred colones (¢300.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>b)</i></b><i> 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. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>c)</i></b><i> 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, except through the final disposal systems approved by the Directorate for the 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. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>d)</i></b><i> For not building sidewalks (aceras) in front of properties and for not maintaining them, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>e)</i></b><i> For not removing objects, materials, or similar items from sidewalks (aceras) or their own properties that contaminate the environment or obstruct passage, two hundred colones (¢200.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>f)</i></b><i> For not having a system for the separation, collection, accumulation, and final disposal of solid waste, approved by the Directorate for the 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, due to the nature or volume of the waste, it is not sanitary acceptable. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>g)</i></b><i> For obstructing passage on sidewalks (aceras) 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. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>h)</i></b><i> For not installing downspouts or 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. </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>i)</i></b><i> For not carrying out conservation works on the facades of houses or buildings visible from the public thoroughfare 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." </i><o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>VI.-</i></b><i> In the specific case, the petitioner claims that in the Barrio San Martín of San Gabriel de Aserrí there are no sidewalks (aceras), a situation that generates a series of problems for the amparo beneficiary (amparado), who is a blind person. In their report, the respondent authorities report that after conducting a visit to the aforementioned place, it was confirmed that only some sectors have sidewalks (aceras); however, they explain that they are unable to act until the amparo beneficiary (amparado) indicates the places where the lack of a sidewalk (acera) creates a problem for him. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that in this amparo action (recurso), the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the amparo beneficiary (amparado) is confirmed, since the respondents' own statement indicates 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 amparo beneficiary (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 Law 7600 and the Municipal Code (Código Municipal). Likewise, it is pertinent to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation for the amparo beneficiary (amparado) to report which are the sites where he believes the lack of sidewalks (aceras) creates a problem for him, this being because the sued Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to supervise and ensure compliance with the law on the lands that are part of its jurisdiction. Thus, based on the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the amparo action (recurso) filed, as is hereby done.”</i> <o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'>A decision in which it is emphasized that the possibility of moving through public spaces without obstacles forms part of the right to equality of persons with disabilities. <o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b>II.- </b>In the present case, the petitioner explains that he must get around in a wheelchair and that near his place of residence (barrio Monte Carlo, la Emilia, Guápiles, Pococí) the absence of sidewalks (aceras) makes his mobility difficult. As stipulated in the pronouncement transcribed above, the construction of sidewalks (aceras) is primarily the obligation of the owners of the various properties, but it is up to the municipalities to supervise compliance with that duty, and eventually to substitute for the owners, to later recover those amounts. Although the sued municipal officials claim that a plan is being developed in the canton to resolve the noted deficiency and that, in the specific case of the amparo beneficiary (amparado), the Municipal Council approved agreement #2095, article VI, minutes #93, of November 10, 2008, so that within one month the Mayor coordinates with the Department of Development and Urban Control the economic and technical feasibility of building a sidewalk (acera) to fulfill what is required, no specific concrete action has been taken to satisfy the duty derived from Article 33 of the Constitution. Therefore, the amparo action (amparo) is granted, ordering the respondents to immediately begin the work to solve the problem generated by the lack of sidewalks (aceras) in the barrio Monte Carlo in la Emilia, Guápiles de Pococí, in the area that corresponds to the Municipality and, in those that correspond 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 Law #7600 and its regulations. The foregoing, without prejudice to the fact that in the event of the omission of the respective owner or possessor to fulfill the indicated obligations, the Municipality shall make up for the works and apply the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Municipal Code (Código Municipal).”<o:p></o:p></p>\r\n\r\n<p class=MsoNormal><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>\r\n\r\n</div>\r\n\r\n</body>\r\n\r\n</html> </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>Article 126.- Ramps on sidewalks. On sidewalks, at every corner there shall be a ramp with a maximum gradient of 10% to overcome the existing difference in level between the sidewalk and the street. This ramp shall have a minimum width of 1.20 meters and be constructed with a non-slip surface. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>V.- </i></b><i>On the other hand, it is also worth mentioning that the aforementioned duty is not only grounded in the provisions of the regulations that specifically protect the rights of persons with disabilities, as is the case with Law 7600, but also in the obligation of the municipalities to ensure that the streets within their jurisdiction have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the safety of the canton's inhabitants, such as sidewalks (aceras), curbs, gutters, and ditches, and furthermore, that there are no obstacles on them that could hinder the transit of people, especially those suffering from any type of disability. This duty is developed by articles 75, subsections d) and g), and 76 of the Municipal Code, which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers to guarantee compliance with their provisions, by stipulating, as relevant: </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>"Article 75. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>In 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: (... )</i> <o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>d) Build the sidewalks in front of their properties and maintain them. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>(....) </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>g) Refrain from obstructing passage on sidewalks with access steps to dwellings, retaining posts, chains, signs, construction materials, or security devices in 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 such equipment to lease it to the residents. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>(... )</i> <o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>Except 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 those 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 a fine of fifty percent (50%) of the value of the work or service, without prejudice to the collection of default interest. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>Based on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council shall set the prices by agreement emanating from its body, 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. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>When dealing with the omissions included in the antepenultimate paragraph of this article and the municipality has become aware by any means of the dangerous situation, the municipality is obliged to remedy the inaction of the owner, after prior notice 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 damage to the health, physical integrity, or property of third parties is caused by the omission, the negligent municipal official shall be jointly and severally liable with the owner or possessor of the property for the damages caused. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>Article 76.- </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>When the obligations set forth in the preceding article are breached, the municipality shall collect the following on a quarterly basis as a fine: </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><i>a) For failing to clear vegetation from their properties located on the edges of public roads or to trim vegetation that harms or hinders the passage of people, three hundred colones (¢300.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>b)</i></b><i> For failing to fence lots where there are no buildings or where there are buildings in a state of demolition, four hundred colones (¢400.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>c)</i></b><i> For failing to separate, collect, or accumulate, for transport and final disposal, solid waste from personal, family, public, or community activities, or from agricultural, livestock, industrial, commercial, and tourist operations, except through the final disposal systems approved by the Directorate for the 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. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>d)</i></b><i> For failing to build sidewalks in front of properties or to maintain them, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per square meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>e)</i></b><i> For failing to remove objects, materials, or similar items from sidewalks or their own properties that contaminate the environment or obstruct passage, two hundred colones (¢200.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>f)</i></b><i> For not having a system for the separation, collection, accumulation, and final disposal of solid waste, approved by the Directorate for the 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, due to the nature or volume of the waste, it is not sanitarily acceptable. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>g)</i></b><i> For obstructing passage on sidewalks with access steps to dwellings, retaining posts, chains, signs, construction materials, or security devices in garage entrances, five hundred colones (¢500.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>h)</i></b><i> For failing to install downspouts or gutters to collect rainwater from buildings whose external walls immediately border the public road, eight hundred colones (¢800.00) per linear meter of the total frontage of the property. </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>i)</i></b><i> For failing to carry out conservation works on the facades of houses or buildings visible from the public road 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." </i><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><i>VI.-</i></b><i> In the specific case, the appellant claims that in the 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 appealed authorities state that after conducting a visit to the aforementioned place, it was confirmed that only some sectors have sidewalks; however, they explain that they are unable to act until the protected party identifies the places where the lack of a sidewalk causes him a problem. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the protected party is confirmed in this appeal, since from the very statement of the appealed parties, it is deduced that in several sectors of Barrio San Martín there are no sidewalks, a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the rights of the protected party, but also of the obligation of the appealed Municipality 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 pertinent to clarify to the appealed parties that there is no obligation for the protected party to report which are the sites where he believes the lack of sidewalks causes him a problem, this because the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to supervise and ensure compliance with the law on the land that forms part of its jurisdiction. Thus, based on the foregoing, the appropriate course of action is to grant the appeal filed, as is hereby done."</i> <o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'>A decision 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. <o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b>II.- </b>In the present case, the appellant explains that he must travel in a wheelchair and that near his place of residence (Barrio Monte Carlo, La Emilia, Guápiles, Pococí) the absence of sidewalks hinders his mobility. As stipulated in the pronouncement transcribed above, the construction of sidewalks is primarily the obligation of the owners of the various 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. Although the respondent municipal officials argue that a plan is being developed in the canton to resolve the noted deficiency and that, in the specific case of the protected party, the Municipal Council approved agreement #2095, article VI, minutes #93, of November 10, 2008, so that within one month the Mayor coordinates with the Department of Development and Urban Control the economic and technical feasibility of building a sidewalk to fulfill what is required, no specific concrete action has been taken to satisfy the duty derived from Article 33 of the Constitution. Therefore, the amparo appeal is granted, ordering the respondents to immediately begin the work to solve the problem caused by the lack of sidewalks in the Barrio Monte Carlo in La Emilia, Guápiles de Pococí, in the area corresponding to the Municipality, and, in those corresponding to owners or possessors of real estate, 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 regulation. The foregoing, without prejudice to the fact that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to comply with the indicated obligations, the Municipality shall take over the works and apply the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of articles 75 and 76 of the Municipal Code.”<o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p> </div> </body> </html>

“ I.- En anteriores oportunidades la Sala se ha referido al problema del acceso al espacio físico público para personas con discapacidades relacionadas con la posibilidad de trasladarse de un lugar a otro. Por ejemplo, por sentencia #2008-10096 de las 19:00 horas del 17 de junio de 2008 se indicó:

“…el tema de los derechos de las personas con discapacidad, los cuales se encuentran tutelados a nivel constitucional por el principio de igualdad desarrollado por el artículo 33 de la Carta Magna, y a nivel legal por una serie de normas, entre las que destaca la Ley 7948 "Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad", y la Ley 7600 "Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las personas con discapacidad". Sobre lo anterior, conviene destacar lo dicho en la sentencia número: 2005- 15751 de las diez horas con veintiocho minutos del diecisiete de noviembre del dos mil cinco, en la que se señaló en lo que interesa:

III.- Sobre el fondo. En primer término es importante señalar que con la "Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad", aprobada por la Asamblea Legislativa por ley N°7948 y la "Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad", N°7600, así como las “Normas Uniformes para la equiparación de Oportunidades de las personas con discapacidad” consisten en la piedra angular de protección de los derechos de las personas con discapacidad.

La Convención Americana Sobre Derechos Humanos y la Constitución Política de Costa Rica, consagran el principio de igualdad de la persona y la prohibición de hacer distinciones contrarias a su dignidad -artículos 24 y 33 respectivamente-. Adicionalmente, La Convención define en su artículo 1 la Discriminación de la siguiente manera:

"El término discriminación contra las personas con discapacidad, significa toda distinción, exclusión o restricción basada en una discapacidad, antecedente de discapacidad, consecuencia de discapacidad presente o pasada, que tenga el efecto o el propósito de impedir o anular el reconocimiento, goce o ejercicio por parte de las personas con discapacidad, de sus derechos humanos y libertades fundamentales " Asimismo, consagra la obligación de los Estados que la suscribieron, a adoptar:

"las medidas para eliminar progresivamente la discriminación y promover la integración por parte de las autoridades gubernamentales y/o entidades privadas en la prestación o suministro de bienes, servicios, instalaciones, programas, actividades, tales como el empleo, el transporte, las comunicaciones, la vivienda, la recreación, la educación, el deporte, el acceso a la justicia y los servicios policiales y las actividades políticas y de administración" 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:

Artículo 41.- Especificaciones técnicas reglamentarias Las construcciones nuevas, ampliaciones o remodelaciones de edificios, parques, aceras, jardines, plazas, vías, servicios sanitarios y otros espacios de propiedad pública, deberán efectuarse conforme a las especificaciones técnicas reglamentarias de los organismos públicos y privados encargados de la materia.

Las edificaciones privadas que impliquen concurrencia y brinden atención al público deberán contar con las mismas características establecidas en el párrafo anterior.

Las mismas obligaciones mencionadas regirán para los proyectos de vivienda de cualquier carácter, financiados total o parcialmente con fondos públicos. En este tipo de proyectos, las viviendas asignadas a personas con discapacidad o familias de personas en las que uno de sus miembros sea una persona con discapacidad deberán estar ubicadas en un sitio que garantice su fácil acceso.

Artículo 103.- Fiscalización El Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, el Ministerio de Vivienda y Asentamientos Humanos, el Ministerio de Salud Pública, el Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, las Municipalidades y demás entidades competentes de revisar planos y conceder permisos de construcción y remodelación o cualquier otra autorización similar, deberán controlar y fiscalizar que las disposiciones pertinentes contenidas en el presente reglamento se cumplan en todos sus extremos.

Artículo 125.- Características de las aceras Las aceras deberán tener un ancho mínimo de 1.20 mts., un acabado antiderrapante y sin presentar escalones; en caso de desnivel éste será salvado con rampa.

Los cortes transversales o rampas que se hagan a lo largo de la línea de propiedad, no será de un tamaño mayor a 1,20 mts., deberán cumplir con los requisitos de gradiente, superficie y libre paso de aguas. Podrán hacerse en estos casos sin necesidad de visto bueno municipal.

En caso de ser mayores los cortes o menor la distancia de separación según dicho, su distancia máxima sobre la línea de construcción será la que exista de área de entrada o de estacionamiento. Estas áreas deberán cumplir con los requisitos que indique el reglamento al respecto y deberá contarse en este caso con el visto bueno de la municipalidad del lugar para su ejecución.

Las aceras deberán tener una altura (gradiente) de entre 15 y 25 cms. medida desde el cordón del caño. En caso de que la altura de la línea de propiedad sea menor a la señalada, se salvará por gradiente que deberá cumplir con lo establecido a continuación.

La gradiente en sentido transversal, tendrá como máximo el 3%.

Artículo 126.- Rampas en las aceras. En las aceras, en todas las esquinas deberá haber una rampa con gradiente máxima de 10% para salvar el desnivel existente entre la acera y la calle. Esta rampa deberá tener un ancho mínimo de 1.20 mts. y construidas en forma antiderrapante.

V.- Por otra parte, también conviene mencionar que el deber antes mencionado, no sólo tiene asidero en lo dispuesto por la normativa que tutela específicamente los derechos de las personas con discapacidad, tal y como es el caso de la Ley 7600, sino además en la obligación de las municipalidades de velar por que las calles de su jurisdicción cuenten con la infraestructura necesaria para garantizar la seguridad de los habitantes del cantón, tales como acercas, cordones, caños y cunetas, y que además no existan sobre ellas obstáculos que puedan dificultar el tránsito de las personas, especialmente de aquellas que sufran algún tipo de discapacidad. Este deber es desarrollado por los artículos 75 incisos d) y g) y 76 del Código Municipal, los cuales a su vez otorgan a la Municipalidad una serie de potestades con el fin de garantizar el cumplimiento de lo dispuesto por ellos, al disponer en lo que interesa:

"Artículo 75.

De conformidad con el Plan Regulador Municipal, las personas físicas o jurídicas, propietarias o poseedoras, por cualquier título, de bienes inmuebles, deberán cumplir las siguientes obligaciones: (... )

• d)Construir las aceras frente a sus propiedades y darles mantenimiento.

(....)

• g)Abstenerse de obstaculizar el paso por las aceras con gradas de acceso a viviendas, retenes, cadenas, rótulos, materiales de construcción o artefactos de seguridad en entradas de garajes. Cuando por urgencia o imposibilidad de espacio físico deben de colocarse materiales de construcción en las aceras, deberá utilizarse equipos adecuados de depósito. La municipalidad podrá adquirirlos para arrendarlos a los munícipes.

(... )

Salvo lo ordenado en la Ley General de Salud, cuando los munícipes incumplan las obligaciones anteriores, la municipalidad está facultada para suplir la omisión de esos deberes, realizando en forma directa las obras o prestando los servicios correspondientes. Por los trabajos ejecutados, la municipalidad cobrará, al propietario o poseedor del inmueble, el costo efectivo del servicio o la obra. El munícipe deberá rembolsar el costo efectivo en el plazo máximo de ocho días hábiles; de lo contrario, deberá cancelar por concepto de multa un cincuenta por ciento (50%) del valor de la obra o el servicio, sin perjuicio del cobro de los intereses moratorios.

Con base en un estudio técnico previo, el Concejo Municipal fijará los precios mediante acuerdo emanado de su seno, el cual deberá publicarse en "La Gaceta" para entrar en vigencia. Las municipalidades revisarán y actualizarán anualmente estos precios y serán publicados por reglamento.

Cuando se trate de las omisiones incluidas en el párrafo trasanterior de este artículo y la municipalidad haya conocido por cualquier medio la situación de peligro, la municipalidad está obligada a suplir la inacción del propietario, previa prevención al munícipe conforme al debido proceso y sin perjuicio de cobrar el precio indicado en el párrafo anterior. Si la municipalidad no la suple y por la omisión se causa daño a la salud, la integridad física o el patrimonio de terceros, el funcionario municipal omiso será responsable, solidariamente con el propietario o poseedor del inmueble, por los daños y perjuicios causados.

Artículo 76.- Cuando se incumplan las obligaciones dispuestas en el artículo anterior, la municipalidad cobrará trimestralmente con carácter de multa:

• a)Por no limpiar la vegetación de sus predios situados a orillas de las vías públicas ni recortar la que perjudique el paso de las personas o lo dificulte, trescientos colones (¢300,00) por metro lineal del frente total de la propiedad.
• b)Por no cercar los lotes donde no haya construcciones o existan construcciones en estado de demolición, cuatrocientos colones (¢400,00) por metro lineal del frente total de la propiedad.
• c)Por no separar, recolectar ni acumular, para el transporte y la disposición final, los desechos sólidos provenientes de las actividades personales, familiares, públicas o comunales, o provenientes de operaciones agrícolas, ganaderas, industriales, comerciales y turísticas solo mediante los sistemas de disposición final aprobados por la Dirección de Protección al Ambiente Humano de l Ministerio de Salud, cien colones (¢100,00) por metro cuadrado del área total de la propiedad.
• d)Por no construir las aceras frente a las propiedades ni darles mantenimiento, quinientos colones (¢500,00) por metro cuadrado del frente total de la propiedad.
• e)Por no remover los objetos, materiales o similares de las aceras o los predios de su propiedad, que contaminen el ambiente u obstaculicen el paso, doscientos colones (¢200,00) por metro lineal del frente total de la propiedad.
• f)Por no contar con un sistema de separación, recolección, acumulación y disposición final de los desechos sólidos, aprobado por la Dirección de Protección al Ambiente Humano del Ministerio de Salud, en las empresas agrícolas, ganaderas, industriales, comerciales y turísticas, doscientos colones (¢200,00) por metro lineal del frente total de la propiedad, cuando el servicio público de disposición de desechos sólidos es insuficiente o inexistente o si por la naturaleza o el volumen de los desechos, este no es aceptable sanitariamente.
• g)Por obstaculizar el paso por las aceras con gradas de acceso a viviendas, retenes, cadenas, rótulos, materiales de construcción o artefactos de seguridad en entradas de garajes, quinientos colones (¢500,00) por metro lineal del frente total de la propiedad.
• h)Por no instalar bajantes ni canoas para recoger las aguas pluviales de las edificaciones, cuyas paredes externas colinden inmediatamente con la vía pública, ochocientos colones (¢800,00) por metro lineal del frente total de la propiedad.
• i)Por no ejecutar las obras de conservación de las fachadas de casas o edificios visibles desde la vía pública cuando, por motivos de interés turístico, arqueológico o patrimonial, lo exija la municipalidad, quinientos colones (¢500,00) por metro cuadrado del frente total de la propiedad." VI.- 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 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 efecto se hace.” Decisión en la que se insiste en que forma parte del derecho de igualdad de las personas con discapacidad la posibilidad de desplazarse en los espacios públicos sin obstáculos.

II.- En el presente caso, el recurrente explica que debe trasladarse en silla de ruedas y que cerca de su lugar de residencia (barrio Monte Carlo, la Emilia, Guápiles, Pococí) la ausencia de aceras le dificulta su movilidad. Como se estipula en el pronunciamiento arriba transcrito, 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. Aunque los funcionarios municipales accionados aducen que se está desarrollando en el cantón un plan para solventar la deficiencia anotada y que, en el caso específico del amparado, el Concejo Municipal aprobó el acuerdo #2095, artículo VI, acta #93, del 10 de noviembre de 2008, para que en el plazo de un mes el Alcalde coordine con el Departamento de Desarrollo y Control Urbano la viabilidad económica y técnica de la construcción de una acera para cumplir lo que se requiere, no se ha tomado ninguna acción concreta específica para satisfacer el deber derivado del artículo 33 constitucional. Por ello, se estima el amparo, ordenando a los accionados, de forma inmediata, iniciar los trabajos para solucionar el problema generado por la falta de aceras en el barrio Monte Carlo en la Emilia, Guápiles de Pococí, en la zona que le corresponda a la Municipalidad 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 #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 supla los trabajos y aplique las multas correspondientes, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en los artículos 75 y 76 del Código Municipal ”