What Should Small Businesses Remediate When Hit with a Lawsuit or Demand Letter in California?

When a small business in California gets hit with an ADA letter or lawsuit, the first reaction is usually panic:

·       “Do I have to rebuild my whole building?”

·       “Which standard am I supposed to follow, 2010 ADA or CBC 11B?”

·       “What if the building is old and I’ve never remodeled anything?”

Let’s walk through this in plain, conversational terms, using the same framework I use as a CASp when I’m writing reports and helping owners make practical decisions.

Two Sets of Rules You Need to Know

Think of accessibility rules in California as two overlapping systems:

1.      Federal ADA (2010 ADA Standards) – civil rights law, enforced through lawsuits and DOJ.

2.     California Building Code Chapter 11B (CBC 11B) – building code, enforced by local building departments.

They often point in the same direction, but they kick in at different times and for different reasons. (Note: other applicable codes may kick in based on the date of construction or alteration)

1. What the ADA Cares About

If you’re a private business open to the public (retail, restaurant, professional office, auto repair, etc.), you’re a “public accommodation” under ADA Title III.

Under Title III, you have an ongoing duty to remove architectural barriers in an existing facility when it’s “readily achievable” – meaning it’s easily accomplishable without much difficulty or expense for your business.

The U.S. Department of Justice makes it very clear that the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design are the measuring stick for this:

“Adoption of the 2010 Standards also establishes a revised reference point… for Title III entities undertaking readily achievable barrier removal.”

In plain English:

·       The 2010 ADA Standards (Chapters 2–10) are what we use to define what a “barrier” is and what “fixing it” looks like.

·       When you choose how to remediate, the question is: “Can I reasonably bring this element into compliance with the 2010 ADA Standards given my current resources?”

2. What CBC 11B Cares About

CBC 11B is a building code requirement. Local plan checkers and inspectors enforce it when:

·       You build something new, or

·       You alter an existing building under a permit.

CBC 11B is not a free‑floating “retrofit everything” mandate. It’s tied to construction and alteration activity. It also has its own path‑of‑travel rules and 20% disproportionality concepts that mirror ADA’s.

So:

·       ADA follows you all the time (even if you never pull a permit).

·       CBC 11B “turns on” whenever you do permitted work.

Existing Building, No Permit, Demand Letter in Your Hand

Let’s start with the situation most small businesses are in:

·       Older building.

·       No active remodel.

·       You just got a letter or lawsuit alleging barriers.

Here’s the good news: you are not automatically required to bring the entire site up to brand‑new construction standards tomorrow.

Here’s the real obligation:

1.      ADA Title III is in play right now.

2.     You must remove barriers that are readily achievable – not everything, but everything that’s reasonably doable for your situation.

3.     When you do fix something, we look to the 2010 ADA Standards to define what “fixed correctly” means.

In this pure “barrier removal” mode:

·       The legal standard is federal (ADA).

·       The technical target is 2010 ADA Standards.

·       CBC 11B is not automatically triggered, but it’s still a useful reference and often lines up with ADA anyway.

“If you’re not remodeling and not pulling a permit, your immediate job under ADA is to remove barriers that are readily achievable, using the 2010 ADA Standards as the benchmark for your fixes.” (I still recommend complying with the CBC regardless)

What About “Maximum Extent Feasible” and “Technically Infeasible”?

You’ll see these phrases pop up in ADA and CBC language, but they’re often misunderstood.

Under ADA’s alteration rules (28 CFR 36.402(c)):

“To the maximum extent feasible” applies when the nature of an existing facility makes it virtually impossible to fully meet the Standards in an alteration, and in that case “any altered features… that can be made accessible shall be made accessible.”

And Chapter 2 of the 2010 Standards says that where full compliance is technically infeasible in an alteration, you must comply “to the maximum extent feasible.”

Important nuance:

·       These phrases are about physical or structural limitations, not just “it’s expensive.”

·       They apply mainly when you’re altering under a permit (rebuilding a restroom, cutting in a ramp, etc.).

·       They are not a blanket excuse to do nothing.

For a straight barrier‑removal project (no permit) in an existing facility, the more relevant concept is still “readily achievable” – what’s reasonably doable in terms of cost and effort for your business.

When You Do Pull a Permit: ADA + CBC Together

Now let’s say, after getting a letter, you decide to remodel the restroom or sales area under a permit.

At that moment, the rules change a bit:

·       CBC 11B now clearly applies to the altered work and any required path‑of‑travel upgrades (with a 20% disproportionality limit in many cases).

·       2010 ADA Standards still apply as the federal standard for new construction and alterations under Title III.

ADA’s path‑of‑travel rule (28 CFR 36.403) says:

·       If you alter an area containing a primary function, you must also improve the path of travel (entrance, route, restroom, drinking fountains, phones) to be accessible, unless the path‑of‑travel work would be “disproportionate” – defined as costing more than 20% of the primary alteration.

CBC 11B uses the same 20% idea on the building‑code side in California. So, in a permitted alteration:

·       You’re designing to satisfy both ADA and CBC.

·       You follow the 20% rule for path‑of‑travel spending.

·       Where CBC is stricter, you follow CBC for permit purposes, and ADA remains your floor.

The Rear‑Lot Mechanic Shop Example

Let’s take a real‑world type scenario: a mechanic shop tucked at the back of a long, narrow lot, with cars parked along both sides of the driveway and no sidewalk or clear path from the street to the entrance.

What the ADA Says About Routes

The 2010 ADA Standards require accessible routes:

·       From site arrival points (parking, public streets/sidewalks, transit stops) to accessible building entrances (Section 206.2.1).

·       Between accessible elements on the same site (Section 206.2.2).

There’s an exception in 206.2.2 when the only connection is a vehicular way that doesn’t provide pedestrian access, but there’s an important advisory: if people walk along that drive aisle, it’s effectively a pedestrian route, and it needs to meet accessible route requirements.

So, in our rear‑lot auto shop:

·       If customers park and walk through the same driveway where cars are queued, that “makeshift” route is supposed to function as an accessible route – width, slopes, cross‑slope, and surface all matter.

·       If the lot is very tight, carving out a fully compliant route may require re‑striping, moving parking, or even small curbs or wheel‑stops to protect the path.

What’s Reasonable for an Existing Shop?

If you’re not remodeling and no permit is in play, we’re strictly in “readily achievable barrier removal” territory:

·       Low‑cost items like adding or restriping an accessible stall, signage, and simple striping to define a 36‑inch/48-inch clear walking route along one side of the lot are typically readily achievable.

·       Major regrading, moving buildings, or losing substantial revenue‑producing parking may not be readily achievable for a small shop. Those larger changes might belong in a future capital project or permitted alteration where CBC 11B and ADA alteration standards would come into play more fully.

The key is to:

·       Improve what you can now using the 2010 ADA Standards as your target. (recommend complying with CBC, since more stringent)

·       Document where physical or financial realities mean full compliance isn’t yet readily achievable.

·       Plan phased improvements as your resources allow.

So Which Standard Do You Use for Remediation Decisions?

If You’re Just Doing Readily Achievable Barrier Removal (No Permit)

·       The legal standard is ADA Title III.

·       The technical benchmark is the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design.

·       Your question is: “Is it readily achievable to bring this element into 2010 ADA compliance now?”

CBC 11B isn’t formally triggered, but if you can easily meet both ADA and CBC requirements, that’s usually smart and reccomended.

If You’re Altering Under a Permit

·       You now need to satisfy both:

o   CBC Chapter 11B (for code enforcement and inspections), and

o   2010 ADA Standards (for federal civil‑rights compliance).

·       You apply path‑of‑travel and 20% disproportionality rules on both sides.

·       Where there’s a conflict, you design to the more stringent requirement, because

ADA still applies regardless of what the permit says.

For existing California businesses, your first obligation is ADA Title III readily achievable barrier removal, and the yardstick for each fix is the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. When you eventually remodel under a permit, CBC Chapter 11B joins the picture and you must comply with both state code and federal ADA—designing to the stricter requirement where they differ. In summary, "it depends" but I always recommend in California to comply with both the CBC and ADA.

DISCLAIMER: The information provided in this post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified attorney or consultant for advice tailored to your situation.