City of York Council

Equalities Impact Assessment

Who is submitting the proposal?

Directorate:		Place
Service Area:		Transport
Name of the proposal :		City Centre Access Hostile Vehicle Mitigation
Lead officer:		Catherine Higgins
Date assessment completed:		05 January 2022
Names of those who contributed to the assessment :
Name	Job title		Organisation	Area of expertise
Catherine Higgins	Senior Transport Project Manager		CYC	Transport
James Gilchrist	Director of Transport, Environment and Planning		CYC	Transport, Environment and Planning
Heidi Lehane	Senior Solicitor		CYC	Legal

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.

Protection of the core foot streets (pedestrianised area) and event locations from hostile vehicle attack. The scheme will physically close the main footstreets area during the pedestrianised hours by means of remotely operated barriers at Parliament Street, Spurriergate, Lendal, Blake Street, High Petergate, Goodramgate, Colliergate and The Shambles.  There will also be static bollards to complete the secure perimeter at Minster Gates, St Andrewgate and the path between Coppergate and High Ousegate.  This provides effect to the Traffic Regulation Order changes approved at the November 2021 Executive and previously at the August 2019 Executive. Further changes to the Traffic Regulation Order, including to timing and to exemptions, are separate projects.  The operation of the measures is key to the security of the city centre areas with the highest footfall.  Vehicles will only be permitted access in limited circumstances.  Emergency services access will be retained as will Dial a Ride access.

1.2

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

The proposal is based on Counter Terrorism / Police advice to protect the city centre crowded spaces from vehicle as a weapon attack at the times when the area is busiest. · Protect Duty consultation documents (www.gov.uk/government/consultations/protect-duty) · Hostile Vehicle Mitigation guidance (www.gov.uk/government/publications/crowded-places-guidance/hostile-vehiclemitigation-hvm#vehicle-as-a-weapon-vaw)

1.3	Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests?
	All users of the core city centre area – businesses, service providers, residents and visitors – who will benefit from increased protection from terrorist attack.

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 primary outcome is the security of the city centre - to reduce as far as possible the risk and impact of a terrorist act involving a vehicle in the city centre’s crowded places. The Council Plan has a key priority that includes safe communities.  In addition the physical exclusion of the majority of vehicles in the core city centre foot streets at the busiest times will also contribute to a cleaner greener city.

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
Consultation exercises related to the traffic restrictions (Traffic Regulation Orders)		This has informed the decision making regarding changes to the legal restrictions on vehicular access to the city centre.  The project aims to implement physical measures that will enforce the legal restrictions meaning that the impact is now limited to the installation of street furniture.  The operation of the secure access system will be reported at a future Executive Member for Transport meeting.
Analysis of collision data		To determine the possible impact of physically excluding vehicles from the city centre.
Surveys of traffic including blue badge parking and access.		Surveys were carried out to determine the numbers and types of vehicles accessing the footstreets, this included blue badge holders parking legitimately and where/how far they travelled from the parking location.  Surveys also determined the proportion of those parking who were local. This has informed the decision making regarding changes to the legal restrictions.

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
The procedures and protocols for access through the barriers are being finalised.  The requirements for booking essential access and the procedures to check the vehicle and driver identity are being developed.		As the procedures are finalised the security system will be tested.  Once the measures are installed the operation will be tested before the operational procedures are fully adopted.
Medium and long term impact on stakeholders		Review of terror threat levels and consideration of adjustment to restrictions if threat level allows.

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 a mixed impact, particularly on older people. Positive impacts - Pedestrians of all ages will benefit from the physical exclusion of the majority of vehicles, not just those with hostile intent, making the city centre streets safer and more comfortable to use.  Negative impacts – As identified In the Equalities Impact Assessment included in the November 2021 Executive report older people are more likely to hold a Blue Badge and to have used the footstreets for access and to park in the city centre. Physically removing the ability to drive and park in these streets will increase the distance people with reduced mobility have to travel on foot or using a wheelchair or mobility scooter, making shops and services in the footstreet area less accessible during footstreet hours. This is also applicable to families with young children where a family member is a Blue Badge holder. The Dial a Ride vehicle will continue to benefit from an exemption, guaranteeing access to the St Sampson’s Centre.	Mixed:  + & -	Positive – high Negative - high
Disability		The proposals have been identified as having a mixed impact on people living with a disability/mobility impairment primarily through the Traffic Regulation Order changes as detailed in the Equalities Impact Assessment included in the November 2021 Executive report.   Positive impacts - All pedestrians will benefit from the physical exclusion of the majority of vehicles making the city centre streets safer and more comfortable to use.  The measures have a positive impact for the blind & partially sighted by the exclusion of moving vehicles, particularly as technology changes and vehicles become quieter.  The physical measures may assist with way-finding. Negative impacts – Vehicular access for blue badge holders will be physically prevented during footstreets hours as opposed to legal exclusion through the Traffic Regulation Order. For those who are not able to walk the greater distances, and are not able to use alternative solutions, the removal of the ability to park in these footstreets has had and will continue to have a significant impact, and could reduce the prospects of them visiting the city centre. The measures may have a negative impact for the blind & partially sighted as they are physical obstructions.	Mixed:  + & -	Positive – high Negative - high
Gender		No differential impact anticipated.
Gender Reassignment		No differential impact anticipated.
Marriage and civil partnership		No differential impact anticipated.
Pregnancy and maternity		No differential impact anticipated but see also the Equalities Impact Assessment included in the November 2021 Executive report for the impact of the TRO changes.
Race		No differential impact anticipated.
Religion and belief		No differential impact anticipated but see also the Equalities Impact Assessment included in the November 2021 Executive report for the impact of the TRO changes.
Sexual orientation		No differential impact anticipated.
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.	Mixed:  + & -	Positive – high Negative - high
Low income groups		No differential impact anticipated.
Veterans, Armed Forces Community		No differential impact anticipated.
Other		Not applicable
Impact on human rights:
List any human rights impacted.		The Convention rights applicable are Article 2 - protects the right to life. In this case, its applicability relates to the requirement placed on the Government to take appropriate measures to safeguard life by making laws to protect people. Public authorities should also consider the right to life when making decisions that might put people in danger or that affect their life expectancy	Positive (Article 2)	HIgh

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 being done to optimise opportunities to advance equality or foster good relations?

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		This proposal physically enforces the Traffic Regulation Order changes approved at the November 2021 Executive and previously at the August 2019 Executive and also the proposed further changes to exemptions. Impacts on blue badge holders are considered separately in the MY CITY CENTRE project though originally some of the changes to the restrictions were made as part of this project. Mitigation measures are being developed further and will be reported later this year. The procedures and protocols for access through the barriers are being finalised.  The requirements for booking essential access and the procedures to check the vehicle and driver identity are being developed.  This work will be reported to the Executive Member for Transport later this year.

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
City centre access for vehicles		Procedures and protocols to be finalised and then tested once the physical measures are installed.	Catherine Higgins	November 2022

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?
	Once operational the physical measures will be monitored and access arrangements reviewed in line with counter terrorism police advice.