Guidance on equality analysis

City of York Council

Equalities Impact Assessment

Who is submitting the proposal?

Directorate:		Place
Service Area:		Transport
Name of the proposal :		Piccadilly city living neighbourhood – Highway changes
Lead officer:		Dave Atkinson, Head of Highways and Transport
Date assessment completed:		Last reviewed on 29.04.22
Names of those who contributed to the assessment :
Name	Job title		Organisation	Area of expertise
Helene Vergereau	Traffic and Highway Development Manager		City of York Council	Transport
David Atkinson	Head of Highways and Transport		CYC	Transport
Heidi Lehane	Senior Solicitor		CYC	Legal
TBC

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.

The proposal aims to make changes to the highway on Piccadilly, in the centre of York, to support the Castle Gateway Masterplan’s vision.

For Piccadilly, the masterplan’s vision was to “turn Piccadilly in to a new city living neighbourhood, with wide pedestrian streets and spaces for independent traders at ground floor level and apartments above”.

Assessment undertaken for Option B+C – to be reviewed if different option selected

Based on consultation and design work undertaken previously and described in the main report, the recommended option is Option B & C. Option B proposes to continue to work with developers and Council led projects in the area to implement the “preferred option” as set out above, with the following elements added:

· Creation of an additional “integrated”, on carriageway bus stop (with associated facilities and Kassel kerbs) in front of the Banana Warehouse site;

· Further work to assess the feasibility of implementing an alternative cycle route through quieter streets or segregated cycling provision on Piccadilly (linked to work being undertaken through the City Centre Bus Routing Study/LCWIP/LTP4 processes); and

· Review opportunities to provide additional public seating within the “preferred option”;

· Implementation of a 20mph speed limit on Piccadilly.

Option C adds a Review of on street parking provision aiming to maximise Blue Badge parking provision, and to provide a taxi rank and motorcycle parking if possible.

1.2

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

Legislation:

· Highways Act 1980, Traffic Management Act 2004, Road Traffic Act 1984, Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2016

· Equality Act 2010

Guidance

· Buses in Urban Developments, CIHT, January 2018 (link)

· Cycle infrastructure design LTN 1/20 (link)

· National Design Guide (link) and National Model Design Code (link)

· Inclusive Mobility A Guide to Best Practice on Access to Pedestrian and Transport Infrastructure (link)

1.3

Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests?

Residents and businesses on Piccadilly, Mill Street, George Street and Walmgate, as well as Merchangate and Fossgate

People/businesses accessing properties and businesses on Piccadilly and on surrounding streets (including access to St Denys’s Church, hotels, retail and hospitality venues)

Bus operators and bus users – Piccadilly provide a main bus route and interchange facility near the centre of York

Highway users on Piccadilly, including pedestrians, cyclists, vehicle drivers and passengers (including Blue Badge holders and other drivers using the existing on street parking facilities and the Coppergate mutli-storey car park), taxis and private hire, motorcycle users (including those using the existing motorcycle parking facility)

Shopmobility users – the service is located at Piccadilly car park, adjacent to the Coppergate Shopping Centre

Emergency services

Utility services

Focusing on the interests of stakeholders with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010, the following groups are specifically considered in this EIA. Their interests are summarised as follows:

· Older people – Mixed interests. Some support for a car free/low car environment in the city centre but also support for vehicular access/parking, especially for those living with a disability or with reduced mobility.

· Young people and children (and families) - Mixed interests. Some support for a car free/low car environment in the city centre but also support for vehicular access/parking, especially for those living with a disability or with reduced mobility or with very young children.

· Pregnancy and maternity - Mixed interests. Some support for a car free/low car environment in the city centre but also support for vehicular access/parking, especially for those living with reduced mobility as a result of pregnancy related conditions or with very young children.

· People who live with a disability, including, but not limited to, Blue Badge holders – Significant support for vehicular access and parking in or close to the city centre to access shops, services, leisure, events and hospitality venues, dwellings and places of employment and worship. Some limited support for a car free/low car environment in the city centre.

· People who may want to access a place of worship near Piccadilly (St Denys’s Church) or in the city centre (protected characteristic: religion or belief). Mixed interests. Some support for a car free/low car environment in the city centre but some also support vehicular access/parking, especially for those living with a disability or with reduced mobility

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.

The intended outcomes are those of the Castle Gateway Masterplan, which was approved by the Council’s Executive in April 2018 (https://democracy.york.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?AIId=48509).

For Piccadilly, the masterplan’s vision is to “turn Piccadilly in to a new city living neighbourhood, with wide pedestrian streets and spaces for independent traders at ground floor level and apartments above”.

The vision for Piccadilly was described as:

· New heart of a thriving city centre neighbourhood

· Capitalise on Area for City Centre living;

· Pedestrian (and cyclist) friendly environment; and

· Green and ‘healthy’ Street.

In order to deliver the vision, the following interventions were identified by the consultants commissioned to develop the design:

· Improve pedestrian movements by incorporating wider footpaths, designated crossing points, improved wayfinding and reducing vehicle speeds along street

· Create more opportunities for introducing ‘green’ along the street and spaces for activity / lingering;

· Break up the mass of buildings and create visual and seasonal interest along the street and deliver an uplifted, higher quality streetscape;

· Create safer / more legible cycling routes;

· Continue to provide for bus services on the route (on carriageway stopping areas);

· Rationalise servicing requirements for businesses on the street.

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
Traffic data (presented in main report)		To understand traffic conditions on Piccadilly
Road safety data (presented in main report)		To understand traffic conditions and possible safety issues on Piccadilly
Consultation feedback from My Castle Gateway and Piccadilly: A new kind of street · Piccadilly: A new kind of street (with Streets Reimagined) https://www.flickr.com/photos/149815510@N05/albums/72157667002213718 · Let’s make Piccadilly: Festival of Castle Gateway February 2019 events https://mycastlegateway.org/2019/02/10/lets-make-piccadilly-festival-of-castle-gateway-february-events/ · Piccadilly general comments https://www.flickr.com/photos/149815510@N05/albums/72157676968953397 · Reallocating road space https://www.flickr.com/photos/149815510@N05/albums/72157703913256642 · Moving and lingering: Getting to and through Piccadilly – 19th February, https://www.flickr.com/photos/149815510@N05/albums/72157690154533583 · A Gyratory, a junction and a Supercrossing: Exploring the nitty gritty of Castle Gateway transport planning – 20th February, https://mycastlegateway.org/2019/03/04/a-gyratory-a-junction-and-a-supercrossing-exploring-the-nitty-gritty-of-castle-gateway-transport-planning/ · Green and the City – 13th February, https://mycastlegateway.org/2019/02/19/green-and-the-city-shaping-the-brief-for-castle-gateway/ & https://www.flickr.com/photos/149815510@N05/albums/72157707131348195 · What would the best bus stop in York be like? – 26th February, https://mycastlegateway.org/2019/03/01/the-best-bus-stop-in-york-notes-from-our-event/ & https://www.flickr.com/photos/149815510@N05/albums/72157705831852371 · The Foss and Piccadilly – how can they be friends? – 27th February, https://www.flickr.com/photos/149815510@N05/albums/72157703821658392 · Draft Open Brief March 2019 https://mycastlegateway.org/2019/03/12/piccadilly-my-castle-gateway-draft-open-brief/ · Walking and cycling on Castle Gateway May 2019 https://mycastlegateway.org/2019/05/12/walking-and-cycling-in-castle-gateway-2/ · Implementing the open brief July 2021 https://mycastlegateway.org/2021/07/06/implementing-the-open-brief-to-redesign-piccadilly/		To consider feedback provided by consultees on equality issues. Feedback included the need to consider equality and access issues in the detailed design (kerbs, tactile paving, issues with shared spaces, seating provision, blue badge parking provision, obstructions, lighting, controlled crossing points, etc)

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
Impact of existing Pay & Display parking removal on people with protected characteristics, and more specifically on Blue Badge users		The recommendation is to undertake a review of the preferred option design to consider where parking can be provided for Blue Badge holders as well as a taxi rank.
Equality considerations for detailed design stage		Review to be conducted at detailed design stage when developers present proposed designs to the Council teams

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 proposals have been identified as having mixed impacts on older and young people. Positive impacts – As evidenced by the consultation responses, some older people generally support improvements to pedestrian facilities, including the provision of additional footway space, seating and pavement cafe areas. For those who are slower or unsure on their feet, the proposed changes would offer a safer, more pleasant environment. Younger people, especially young children and families are also likely to benefit from an improved pedestrian environment on Piccadilly. Younger and older people are likely to benefit from a reduction in the speed limit on Piccadilly, making it easier and safer to cross the road. The provision of an additional taxi rank facility on Piccadilly (if possible) is likely to benefit older or younger people who may use taxis/private hire more as they may not be able to drive or may not own a car. The provision/retention of bus stops on Piccadilly is likely to benefit older or younger people who may use buses more as they may not be able to drive or may not own a car. The review of parking provision to maximise Blue Badge parking (where possible) is likely to benefit older people who are more likely to hold a Blue Badge. Negative impacts – Older people are more likely to be living with reduced mobility or a disability and are also more likely to hold a Blue Badge. They would therefore be more likely to make use of the existing on street parking facilities on Piccadilly (Pay and Display bays are currently available in two locations between Tower Street and Merchangate). Although this option aims to retain some on street parking through the review of parking, the total provision is likely to be reduced and reserved for Blue Badge holders only (at least during footstreet/business hours). This is also applicable to families with young children where a family member is a Blue Badge holder. The provision of parallel loading bays and/or parking spaces off carriageway may be confusing for some older or younger users, especially if the permitted use of the space changes during the day (for example between loading bay, parking, taxi rank, pavement café).	Positive and negative	Medium
Disability		The proposals have been identified as having mixed impacts on people living with a disability/mobility impairment. Positive impacts – As evidenced by the consultation responses, some people living with a disability/mobility impairment support improvements to pedestrian facilities, including the provision of additional footway space, seating and pavement cafe areas. For those who use a wheelchair or mobility aid, are slower or unsure on their feet, or suffer from sensory impairments, the proposed changes would offer a safer, more pleasant environment when moving on the wider footways. People living with a disability/mobility impairment are likely to benefit from a reduction in the speed limit on Piccadilly, making it easier and safer to cross the road. The provision of an additional taxi rank facility on Piccadilly is likely to benefit people living with a disability/mobility impairment who may use taxis/private hire more as they may not be able to drive or may not own a car. The provision/retention of bus stops on Piccadilly is likely to benefit people living with a disability/mobility impairment who may use buses more as they may not be able to drive or may not own a car. The review of parking provision to maximise Blue Badge parking (where possible) will benefit living with a disability/mobility impairment who are more likely to hold a Blue Badge. Negative impacts – People living with a disability/mobility impairment are more likely to hold a Blue Badge. They would therefore be more likely to make use of the existing on street parking facilities on Piccadilly (Pay and Display bays are currently available in two locations between Tower Street and Merchangate ). Although this option aims to retain some on street parking through the review of parking provision, total provision is likely to be reduced and reserved for Blue Badge holders only (at least during footstreet/business hours). This is also applicable to families with young children where a family member is a Blue Badge holder. The provision of parallel loading bays and/or parking spaces off carriageway may be confusing for some people living with a disability/mobility impairment, especially if the permitted use of the space changes during the day (for example between loading bay, parking, taxi rank, pavement café) and if the areas are not clearly identifiable for people with sensory impairments. The provision of street furniture, planting and pavement cafes can also cause accessibility and navigation issues for people living with a disability/mobility impairment and will need to be carefully managed to address these issues.	Positive and negative	Medium
Gender		Wider impacts of regeneration scheme, supported by the proposed transport scheme, likely to include: · Positive impacts – the street is likely to be used more by pedestrians and customers, resulting in a safer environment for pedestrians on the street. The reduction in speed limit should make crossing the street easier if needed due to safety concerns. · Negative impacts – depending on future uses of venues on the street, there may be overspill from customers in the evening, using the wider footways to gather and this may feel less safe for some pedestrians using the street.
Gender Reassignment		Wider impacts of regeneration scheme, supported by the proposed transport scheme, likely to include: · Positive impacts – the street is likely to be used more by pedestrians and customers, resulting in a safer environment for pedestrians on the street. The reduction in speed limit should make crossing the street easier if needed due to safety concerns. · Negative impacts – depending on future uses of venues on the street, there may be overspill from customers in the evening, using the wider footways to gather and this may feel less safe for some pedestrians using the street.
Marriage and civil partnership		No differential impact anticipated
Pregnancy and maternity		The proposals have been identified as having mixed impacts on pregnancy and maternity. · Positive impacts – Women in pregnancy or parents of infants (maternity/paternity) are likely to benefit from an improved pedestrian environment on Piccadilly. The provision of an additional taxi rank facility on Piccadilly is likely to benefit women in pregnancy or parents of infants who may use taxis/private hire more as they may not be able to drive or may not own a car. The reduction in the speed limit on Piccadilly should make crossing the road easier and safer. The provision/retention of bus stops on Piccadilly is likely to benefit women in pregnancy or parents of infants who may use buses more as they may not be able to drive or may not own a car. · Negative impacts – When considering the potential impact on women who may experience pregnancy related mobility impairments, especially in later stages of pregnancy, and may be eligible for a Blue Badge, impacts identified are the same as those identified above for people living with a disability/mobility impairment.	Positive and negative	Medium
Race		Wider impacts of regeneration scheme, supported by the proposed transport scheme, likely to include: · Positive impacts – the street is likely to be used more by pedestrians and customers, resulting in a safer environment for pedestrians on the street. The reduction in speed limit should make crossing the street easier if needed due to safety concerns. · Negative impacts – depending on future uses of venues on the street, there may be overspill from customers in the evening, using the wider footways to gather and this may feel less safe for some pedestrians using the street.
Religion and belief		The proposals have been identified as having mixed impacts on access to places of worship in the area. · Positive impacts – Those walking or cycling to places of worship in the area are likely to benefit from an improved pedestrian environment on Piccadilly. The provision/retention of bus stops on Piccadilly is likely to benefit those accessing local places of worship by bus. · Negative impacts – When considering the potential impact on access to local places of worship for people who live with reduced mobility or a disability and have a Blue Badge, the negative impacts of the proposals are as identified above.	Positive and negative	Medium
Sexual orientation		Wider impacts of regeneration scheme, supported by the proposed transport scheme, likely to include: · Positive impacts – the street is likely to be used more by pedestrians and customers, resulting in a safer environment for pedestrians on the street. The reduction in speed limit should make crossing the street easier if needed due to safety concerns. · Negative impacts – depending on future uses of venues on the street, there may be overspill from customers in the evening, using the wider footways to gather and this may feel less safe for some pedestrians using the street.
Other Socio-economic groups including :		Could other socio-economic groups be affected e.g. carers, ex-offenders, low incomes?
Carer		The impact on carers, considering carers who may care for an adult or child living with a disability or impairment and eligible for a Blue Badge, reflects the impacts (both positive and negative) on those living with disabilities, as described above.	Positive and negative	Medium
Low income groups		No differential impact anticipated
Veterans, Armed Forces Community		No differential impact anticipated
Other		No other groups identified as affected by the proposal.
Impact on human rights:
List any human rights impacted.		The Convention rights applicable are: · Article 8 - protects the right of the individual to respect for their private and family life, their home and their correspondence. The private life part of this right covers things like wellbeing, autonomy, forming relationships with others and taking part in our community. · Article 14 - protects the right to be free from discrimination when enjoying other rights, such as Article 8. The removal of some on street parking could have an impact on people’s ability to live independently, attend appointments, see people who are important to them, and be part of their community.

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?

Positive impacts are mainly around the wider footways and the provision of additional crossing points on a 20mph road. Additionally, the recommended option proposes a review of parking provision, aiming to maximise Blue Badge provision and provide a taxi rank. It also proposes to review public seating provision.

Negative impacts are mainly linked to the removal of on street parking provision, currently through Pay & Display bays. The recommended option proposes a review of parking provision, aiming to maximise Blue Badge provision and provide a taxi rank, to mitigate these impacts.

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 assessment shows that this proposal has mixed impacts on some groups with protected characteristics. Positive impacts are mainly linked to the wider footways and the provision of additional crossing points on a 20mph road. Negative impacts are mainly linked to the removal of on street parking provision, currently through Pay & Display bays as well as the need to consider equality and access issues in the detailed design phases (loading bays, parking bays, crossing points, street furniture, planting and pavement café licences).Overall, the proposal is considered to deliver significant benefits for groups with protected characteristics by improving the street space and the pedestrian experience whilst maintaining good service levels for bus users.. The recommended option aims to further improve the proposal by proposing a review of parking provision, aiming to maximise Blue Badge provision and provide a taxi rank and a review of the public seating provision currently proposed to improve provision.

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
Car parking provision		Review of parking provision	Dave Atkinson	2022/23
Public seating		Review of public seating provision	Dave Atkinson	2022/23
Cycling provision		Feasibility study for improved cycling provision	Dave Atkinson	To be confirmed, linked to Bus study, LCWIP and LTP4
Detailed design and implementation phases		Consideration of equality and access issues at detailed design and implementation stages	Dave Atkinson	As and when required through planning process and Highways Act 1908 Section 278 process

Step 8 - Monitor, review and improve

Next review - Assessment to be reviewed once car parking and public seating provision have been reviewed (as part of the recommended option)

City of York Council

Equalities Impact Assessment

- 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.