City of York Council

Equalities Impact Assessment

Who is submitting the proposal?

Directorate:		Place
Service Area:		Transport
Name of the proposal :		Access Control Barrier Review
Lead officer:		Greg Morgan
Date assessment completed:		February 2024
Names of those who contributed to the assessment :
Name	Job title		Organisation	Area of expertise
Clare Zara Davies	Senior Transport Project Manager		CoYC	Project management, planning and appraisal.
Andy Vose	Transport Policy Manager		CoYC	Transport policy
Greg Morgan	Transport		CoYC	Active travel

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 is to adopt a new Access Control Barrier Policy for York based on a review which was completed during 2023.  Once adopted the policy will then be used to assess existing barriers against current design guidance and legislation to check which are compliant.  Non-compliant barriers will then be sorted into a priority list and either removed or redesigned on a rolling programme as funding permits. The new policy will also be used by council staff for any new sites which are put forward for potential access barriers and will be distributed to other agencies (developers, parish councils etc) who might also be considering installing barriers.

1.2	Are there any external considerations? (Legislation/government directive/codes of practice etc.)
	Yes. · Equalities Act 2010 and Public Sector Equality Duty · Local Transport Note 1/20 (Department for Transport) · Inclusive Mobility 2021 (Department for Transport) · British Standard 8300/1 Design of an Accessible and Inclusive Built Environment · Town and Country Planning Act · Manual for Streets · National Planning Policy Framework/Guidance · Highways Act

1.3	Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests?
	1. The direct stakeholders are members of the public who want (or need) to walk, wheel, use a wheelchair or cycle along a particular route 2. Landowners or bodies who control the use of the land, roads, paths upon which group 1 want to walk, wheel or cycle.

1.4

What results/outcomes do we want to achieve and for whom?  The primary aim of this project is to make access for pedestrians, wheelers, wheelchair-users and cyclists easier and to contribute towards the council’s Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010.  Currently several groups struggle to fully access parts of the walking and cycling networks or are physically prevented from accessing them.  By reviewing then either removing, or relaxing barriers we can open up access to legitimate user-groups and give all users equal access.

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
York Access Control Barrier Review Report		This report was produced by consultants following a review of existing guidance and legislation and two rounds of engagement with stakeholder groups.  The evidence presented in the report details the issues experienced by user groups and suggests solutions to address any discrimination which barriers present to several of the groups with protected characteristics under the Equality Act.
Access Control Barrier Review Audit		This audit provides data on the scale of the problem and the wide-ranging number of different designs of barrier which are currently in use across the city.

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
Numbers of walkers, wheelers, wheelchair-users and cyclists that currently use the networks.		Manual surveys / numbers of complaints
Potential increase in usage of the networks as a result of changes to the barriers		Manual surveys / numbers of complaints

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		Routes will be easier to use and negotiate with safer layouts and more space.  This will be particularly relevant to users at both ends of the age spectrum.	+	M
Disability		Barriers currently make journeys more difficult (or impossible) and measures to remove or relax barriers so that they are compliant with design guidance will have a huge impact and will open up new travel opportunities for many people.  In a similar vein standardisation of barrier design will also make journey planning much easier and predictable.	+	H
Gender		Several designs of barrier require the user to lift cycles or squeeze through narrow gaps which may be more of a deterrent from either a physical or personal safety point of view.  Relaxing or removing barriers will even up access.	+	L
Gender Reassignment		No impacts identified.	0
Marriage and civil partnership		No impacts identified.	0
Pregnancy and maternity		Many barrier designs present significant obstacles to manoeuvre prams or pushchairs through and tight squeezes or potential trip hazards for pregnant women or those with young children, removal or redesign of them will make access much easier, safer and potentially open up new route options	+	M
Race		No impacts identified.	0
Religion and belief		No impacts identified.	0
Sexual orientation		No impacts identified.	0
Other Socio-economic groups including :		Could other socio-economic groups be affected e.g. carers, ex-offenders, low incomes?
Carer		Carers whose duties involve pushing wheelchairs or pushchairs will be hindered or hugely inconvenienced by access barriers.  Removal or redesign of those barriers will make access much easier.	+	M
Low income groups		May be more encouraged to use active travel for utility or recreational purposes which in most cases are the most affordable means of travel.	+	M
Veterans, Armed Forces Community		No impacts identified.	0
Other		Encouraging more use of the walking, wheeling and cycling networks will have a positive impact on users’ physical and mental health and will make switching from vehicular travel to non-vehicular modes easier or more realistic for some.	+	M
Impact on human rights:
List any human rights impacted.		There may be some residents whose human rights are affected negatively under Article 8: Right to a private and family life, where their home may be negatively impacted by anti-social behaviour which is being tackled by installation of access control barriers.  However, removal or relaxation of those barriers may be permissible for the legitimate aim of protecting the rights and freedom of others.	-	L

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?

As many barriers have been installed previously as a means of tackling anti-social behaviour there is the prospect that anti-social behaviour will increase if the barrier is either removed or redesigned.  In this case it will be necessary to engage with the local policing teams to ensure this is discouraged.  The following is an extract from Local Transport Note 1/20 Cycle Infrastructure Design “There should therefore be a general presumption against the use of access controls unless there is a persistent and significant problem of antisocial moped or motorcycle access that cannot be controlled through periodic policing.” Previous research by Sustrans has shown that anti-social behaviour reduces as use of a route increases therefore maximising the uptake of the route by legitimate users has the potential to discourage anti-social behaviour.

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 positive benefits of the proposal to remove or relax barriers far outweigh the negative impacts and also help the council discharge its’ Public Sector Equality Duty.

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
Safety of users of the active travel networks		Monitor casualty statistics	Greg Morgan / Transport Safety Engineers	Annually
Changes in anti-social behaviour		Liaise with North Yorkshire Police to identify issues and tackle hot-spots which are related to barrier removal/relaxation	Greg Morgan	Quarterly

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?
	An advisory panel will be set up whose initial purpose will be to prioritise the non-compliant sites so they can be tackled in a logical order.  That panel can also be used to gauge the impacts of barrier removal and relaxation through feedback from users or reduction in complaints.