City of York Council

Equalities Impact Assessment

Who is submitting the proposal?

Directorate:		Place
Service Area:		Transport Systems
Name of the proposal :		Traffic Signal Asset Renewal (TSAR) Programme junction of Barbican Road and Paragon Street
Lead officer:		James Williams
Date assessment completed:		10/03/2022
Names of those who contributed to the assessment :
Name	Job title		Organisation	Area of expertise
James Williams	Project Manager		CoYC	Project Management
Michael Banham	Assistant Engineer		CoYC	Traffic Signal Design

Step 1 – Aims and intended outcomes 

1.1	What is the purpose of the proposal? Please explain your proposal in Plain English avoiding acronyms and jargon.
	To refurbish life expired, on-street traffic signalling assets at the junction such that they are reliable, cost effective to maintain and function correctly.  The location currently offers no signal controlled pedestrian or cyclist crossing facilities which this project aims to deliver to improve safety for all users.

1.2

Are there any external considerations? (Legislation/government directive/codes of practice etc.)

Legislation for the design and use of traffic signals is documented in The Traffic Sign Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD.) The guidance prescribes the designs and conditions of use for traffic signs including road markings, traffic signals and pedestrian, cycle and equestrian crossings used on or near roads. Additionally the principal designer of the scheme considers the guidance provided in the following documents to inform design decisions regarding the further adaptation of areas in and around the traffic signal controlled junction: Traffic Signs Manual – Chapter 6 Local Transport Notes e.g. LTN 1/20 Guidance on the use of Tactile Paving surfaces Dec 2021 – DfT publication Inclusive Mobility – Unidentified Author Puffin Crossings Good Practice Guide Release 1 2006 – DFT and County Surveyors Society

1.3

Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests?

CYC Internal stakeholders – Interests include Maintaining the effectiveness of the authorities existing highways infrastructure, Preparing the network for changing future demand, Raising public awareness of upcoming changes, Utilisation of the network during construction periods. Transport Planning , Sustainable Transport Service, Road Safety, Network Management, Network Monitoring, Streetworks , Public Protection – Air Quality, Development Management, Communications, Highways, Major Transport Projects, Design, Conservation and Sustainable Development, Parks and Open Spaces, Waste Services, Finance External stakeholders – Interests include User experience of junction and crossing sites, Impact of works on network operation, Heritage impact of junction/crossing installations. General Public Transport Operators - York Pullman Bus,  First Bus, Transdev, East Yorkshire Buses, Connexions Buses, Arriva Buses, Glenn Coaches, Reliance Buses, Stephensons of Easingwold, The Ghost Bus Tours, York Pullman Bus, East Yorkshire Motor Services, Utopia Coaches Emergency Services - North Yorkshire Police, Yorkshire Ambulance Service, North Yorkshire Fire Service, York Hospital Transport Groups - York Civic Trust, Sustrans, WalkYork, York Environment Forum Transport Group, York Bike Belles, York Cycling Campaign Equalities Groups - Age UK York, Mysight York, Be Independent, Pocklington Trust, York Blind and Partially Sighted Society, Wilberforce Trust, York Disability Rights Forum, York People First Industry Body’s - York Archaeological Trust, Visit York, Road Haulage Association

1.4

What results/outcomes do we want to achieve and for whom?  This section should explain what outcomes you want to achieve for service users, staff and/or the wider community. Demonstrate how the proposal links to the Council Plan (2019- 2023) and other corporate strategies and plans.

Continued operation of this signal controlled junction and associated pedestrian crossing assets contribute towards the Council Plan’s key priorities for ‘getting around sustainably’ and ‘Creating a greener and cleaner city.’ The increased technological efficiency of the traffic signal equipment leads to: · opportunity for real time operational timing changes in an effort to reduce congestion, journey times and tail pipe emissions from vehicles · reduction in energy consumption and maintenance costs · enhanced pedestrian crossing facilities which provide adaptable crossing times based on the individual using the crossing · improved user experience of crossing facilities with appropriate surrounding footway infrastructure

Step 2 – Gathering the information and feedback 

2.1	What sources of data, evidence and consultation feedback do we have to help us understand the impact of the proposal on equality rights and human rights? Please consider a range of sources, including: consultation exercises, surveys, feedback from staff, stakeholders, participants, research reports, the views of equality groups, as well your own experience of working in this area etc.
Source of data/supporting evidence		Reason for using
Preliminary Stakeholder Consultation with the groups indicated at section 1.3 completed from the 18^th February to the 7^th March 2022. Stakeholders were contacted via email and provided with details of the proposed changes to the junction along with an annotated preliminary design drawing.  Feedback was requested for inclusion in an upcoming Executive Member for Transport Decision Session Report.		Direct response to preliminary design option from a range of groups who may have existing knowledge of specific issues at the location for their organisation/members. Feedback is used to inform potential further revision of the preliminary design before permissions are sought through either the executive member for transport or Transport Board to move the project forward into a detailed design stage.
Road Safety Assessment and Local Accident Data		Preliminary and detailed designs for the scheme are assessed by Highways Safety Engineers to ensure recommended guidance is adhered to and that considerations have been made for existing safety concerns recorded in location Accident Data.
On site meeting with representatives from groups representing members of the public with Visual Impairments.		To identify issues which arise from the use of pedestrian crossing technology in a wider context across the city, clarify how existing technology works and gather opinion on potential for further technological adoptions.

Step 3 – Gaps in data and knowledge

3.1	What are the main gaps in information and understanding of the impact of your proposal?  Please indicate how any gaps will be dealt with.
Gaps in data or knowledge		Action to deal with this
Stakeholder groups focus on the Age and Disability characteristics noted in the Equality Act 2010		Identification of potential local groups/organisations representing members of the public with additional protected characteristics who may be interested in becoming stakeholders for future TSAR consultations.

Step 4 – Analysing the impacts or effects.

4.1	Please consider what the evidence tells you about the likely impact (positive or negative) on people sharing a protected characteristic, i.e. how significant could the impacts be if we did not make any adjustments? Remember the duty is also positive – so please identify where the proposal offers opportunities to promote equality and/or foster good relations.
Equality Groups and Human Rights.		Key Findings/Impacts	Positive (+) Negative (-) Neutral (0)	High (H) Medium (M) Low (L)
Age		The Near Side Puffin pedestrian crossing technology introduced as part of the proposal provides adaptable crossing times for all pedestrians moving across the junction and removes the ambiguity of flashing green man symbols.  Under this technology type, carriageway traffic will be held at a red signal until the detection equipment identifies that no pedestrians remain on the crossing, extending the red light which holds traffic as required. This provides reassurance to crossing users that their individual circumstances can be accommodated. The evidence obtained during consultation suggests adoption of these new pedestrian crossing technologies can be confusing for users who have grown used to previous technology styles therefore this should be taken into consideration and provisions made for better understanding of the new equipment – e.g. provision of information materials on the CYC website/handouts to be shared with stakeholder groups/road safety training offered etc.	Positive	High
Disability		The comments made above for the Age characteristic are equally applicable here. Interactions with several groups have indicated that the adoption of near side pedestrian signals can cause issues with users crowding around signal poles which makes it difficult for those impacted by sight loss or reduced mobility to see the signal or utilise tactile cones which are located on the demand button unit. The TSAR programme has taken steps to reduce this issue by providing high level secondary signals at 2 metres at all sites, increasing the visibility of the green man symbol and by also installing tactile cone devices on all push button demand units across a site. The introduction of separated space for pedestrians and cyclists around the junction produces potential impacts and conflicts for members of the public with visual impairment or mobility issues.  Although this separated provision is considered a better option than the use of shared space, clear differentiation of the areas using split levels or contrasting surfacing materials can prove difficult to navigate for some disabled members of the public. The project will have to be clear in the delineation of this shared space and provide appropriate indication to all users by the use of appropriate visual and tactile indicators around the site. Consideration should also be made during any construction phase of the project for the impact diversion routes or temporary structures may have on the ability of those moving through the site to proceed safely.  Safe set out of a site should be discussed with both the principal contractor and the Traffic Management contractor to ensure movement across the site is not impeded for those members of the public who may require assistance or use of adapted vehicles.	Positive	High
Gender		Street lighting provision across the junction should be assessed to provide an environment in which all users moving through the location feel safe regardless of the time of day.  This can be further supported by the adoption of CCTV coverage of the location.	Positive	High
Gender Reassignment		No reference to this characteristic was made as part of our information gathering process	Neutral	High
Marriage and civil partnership		No reference to this characteristic was made as part of our information gathering process	Neutral	High
Pregnancy and maternity		Consideration should be made regarding the impact which the layout of crossings and the use of pedestrian railings has on members of the general public who use pushchairs or are attempting to traverse junction sites with small children.  The provision of central islands/refuge’s and offset waiting areas in carriageways between crossing points can leave members of this group in precarious situations as they try and manoeuvre pushchairs through crowded areas. The TSAR programme looks to reduce the use of in carriage way islands/refuges wherever possible and in this scheme all crossing points are included as single stage removing the need for users to pause in the centre of the carriageway.	Positive	High
Race		No reference to this characteristic was made as part of our information gathering process	Neutral	High
Religion and belief		No reference to this characteristic was made as part of our information gathering process	Neutral	High
Sexual orientation		No reference to this characteristic was made as part of our information gathering process	Neutral	High
Other Socio-economic groups including :		Could other socio-economic groups be affected e.g. carers, ex-offenders, low incomes?
Carer		No reference to this characteristic was made as part of our information gathering process	Neutral	High
Low income groups		No reference to this characteristic was made as part of our information gathering process	Neutral	High
Veterans, Armed Forces Community		No reference to this characteristic was made as part of our information gathering process	Neutral	High
Other
Impact on human rights:
List any human rights impacted.

Use the following guidance to inform your responses:

Indicate:

- Where you think that the proposal could have a POSITIVE impact on any of the equality groups like promoting equality and equal opportunities or improving relations within equality groups

- Where you think that the proposal could have a NEGATIVE impact on any of the equality groups, i.e. it could disadvantage them

- Where you think that this proposal has a NEUTRAL effect on any of the equality groups listed below i.e. it has no effect currently on equality groups.

It is important to remember that a proposal may be highly relevant to one aspect of equality and not relevant to another.

High impact (The proposal or process is very equality relevant)	There is significant potential for or evidence of adverse impact The proposal is institution wide or public facing The proposal has consequences for or affects significant numbers of people The proposal has the potential to make a significant contribution to promoting equality and the exercise of human rights.
Medium impact (The proposal or process is somewhat equality relevant)	There is some evidence to suggest potential for or evidence of adverse impact The proposal is institution wide or across services, but mainly internal The proposal has consequences for or affects some people The proposal has the potential to make a contribution to promoting equality and the exercise of human rights
Low impact (The proposal or process might be equality relevant)	There is little evidence to suggest that the proposal could result in adverse impact The proposal operates in a limited way The proposal has consequences for or affects few people The proposal may have the potential to contribute to promoting equality and the exercise of human rights

Step 5 - Mitigating adverse impacts and maximising positive impacts

5.1

Based on your findings, explain ways you plan to mitigate any unlawful prohibited conduct or unwanted adverse impact. Where positive impacts have been identified, what is been done to optimise opportunities to advance equality or foster good relations?

Continue to adopt best practice guidance in the design, installation and application of all traffic signal and pedestrian crossing technologies across the authority. Enhance/Increase the availability of information regarding the operation of Puffin Crossing technology through CYC channels so that users are fully aware of how they operate and the benefits provided.  Make this information available to stakeholders to share with their members/customers. Organise further site meetings with other impacted stakeholder groups to gather further feedback on user experience of traffic signal sites and identify suggestions for possible adaptations which would make pedestrian crossings easier for those with protected characteristics to use. Further investigation into the potential for adoption of smart signal demand options which allow for touchless/remote operation through smart button/phone app/smart watch technology.

Step 6 – Recommendations and conclusions of the assessment

6.1	Having considered the potential or actual impacts you should be in a position to make an informed judgement on what should be done. In all cases, document your reasoning that justifies your decision. There are four main options you can take:
- No major change to the proposal – the EIA demonstrates the proposal is robust.  There is no                         potential  for unlawful discrimination or adverse impact and you have taken all opportunities to    advance equality and foster good relations, subject to continuing monitor and review.
- Adjust the proposal – the EIA identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. This involves taking steps to remove any barriers, to better advance quality or to foster good relations. - Continue with the proposal (despite the potential for adverse impact) – you should clearly set out the justifications for doing this and how you believe the decision is compatible with our obligations under the duty - Stop and remove the proposal – if there are adverse effects that are not justified and cannot be mitigated, you should consider stopping the proposal altogether. If a proposal leads to unlawful discrimination it should be removed or changed. Important: If there are any adverse impacts you cannot mitigate, please provide a compelling reason in the justification column.
Option selected		Conclusions/justification
No major change to the proposal		The project demonstrates that suitable consideration has been taken into account with regards the junction design and its impact on those users who share a protected characteristic and does not lead to unlawful discrimination.  The project is part of a wider programme of traffic signal renewal which will continually monitor developments in available technology which could further enhance the user experience of crossing users.  This will also be informed by continued interaction with stakeholders representing equalities groups and the establishment of new feedback gathering methods including site visits with these groups. Each project proposed for construction is subject to road safety assessment and where recommended, Road Safety Audit which will lead to further considerations as part of the design and installation process.

Step 7 – Summary of agreed actions resulting from the assessment

7.1	What action, by whom, will be undertaken as a result of the impact assessment.
Impact/issue		Action to be taken	Person responsible	Timescale
Additional Stakeholder Identification		Appropriate groups/individuals representing protected characteristics other than Age and Disability to be identified and added to our established stakeholder consultation address book	James Williams working in conjunction with the CYC Communications Team	ASAP
Further investigation of pedestrian crossing smart technology		Identify examples of other local authorities who are adopting these kind of technologies to assess their effectiveness. Speak to technology manufacturers to gather first hand experience of their operation.  Speak to potential user groups about their opinions on these technologies and identify potential audience for trial of use.	The TSAR programme team.	ASAP

Step 8 - Monitor, review and improve

8. 1

How will the impact of your proposal be monitored and improved upon going forward?   Consider how will you identify the impact of activities on protected characteristics and other marginalised groups going forward? How will any learning and enhancements be capitalised on and embedded?

Traffic Signal replacement across the authority is a rolling programme and therefore consultation at the feasibility stage of each proposed scheme is a key requirement. This allows our stakeholder groups to inform us of experience of previous installations and how further adaptations may be considered both retrospectively and on future schemes. Members of the general public who are users of the traffic signal equipment installed on site are free to provide feedback through any of the authority’s communication channels and where required and possible, officers will undertake further steps to improve user experience of these sites.