Who is submitting the proposal?
|
Directorate:
|
Place |
|
Service Area:
|
Planning and Transport |
|
Name of the proposal :
|
Planning application 21/02793/REMM - Reserved matters application for layout, scale, appearance, landscaping and access for the construction of Central Hall (F1 use class) including entrance hall, exhibition space and café with associated access, parking, landscaping and external works following the demolition of the mess room and other structures pursuant to 18/01884/OUTM |
|
Lead officer:
|
The planning application was submitted by the National Railway Museum which is part of the Science Museum Group. CYC officers: - Development Management Officer: Louise Milnes
- |
|
Date assessment completed:
|
22 July 2022 |
|
Names of those who contributed to the assessment : |
|||
|
Name |
Job title |
Organisation |
Area of expertise |
|
Helene Vergereau |
Traffic and Highway Development Manager |
CYC |
Highways and Transport |
|
Tony Clarke |
York Central Highway Authority Lead |
CYC |
Highways and Transport |
|
Louise Milnes |
Development Management Officer |
CYC |
Planning |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Becky Eades |
Head of Planning and Development Services |
CYC |
Planning |
|
James Gilchrist |
Director of Environment, Transport and Planning |
CYC |
Highways and Transport |
|
Heidi Lehane |
Senior Solicitor Planning |
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. |
|
|
This reserved matters application is for the development of Central Hall, an extension to the National Railway Museum to be located across Leeman Road, following the closure of the road. The new building will connect the museum’s two main galleries at surface level. It will also provide a route for pedestrians through the Museum during opening hours, linking Leeman Road/Cinder Street to the south/east of the Museum to Leeman Road and the residential areas to the north/west of the Museum. |
|
1.2 |
Are there any external considerations? (Legislation/government directive/codes of practice etc.) |
|
|
The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impacts of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. The established planning consents are: - 18/01884/OUTM for the redevelopment of York Central to provide a mixed-use development of up to 379,729 m2 of floorspace Gross External Area (GEA) primarily comprising up to 2,500 homes (Class C3), between 70,000 m2 and 87,693 m2 of office use (Class B1a), up to 11,991 m2 GEA of retail and leisure uses (Classes A1-A5 or D2), hotel with up to 400 bedrooms (Class C1), up to 12,120 m2 GEA of non-residential institutions (Class D1) for expansion of the National Railway Museum, multi-storey car parks and provision of community uses all with associated works including new open space, ancillary car parking, demolition of and alterations to existing buildings and associated vehicular, rail, cycle and pedestrian access improvements. 18/01884/OUTM includes the principle of the closure of Leeman Road, the provision of alternative routes around the Museum through Cinder Lane (all users) and Hudson Boulevard (for pedestrians and cyclists), the provision of a pedestrian access through the National Railway Museum extension during hours of opening (Condition 45), and the upgrade of the riverside path between Scarborough Bridge and Jubilee Terrace (S106 funding). - 20/00710/REMM for layout, scale, appearance, landscaping and access for the construction of the primary vehicle route and associated roads, infrastructure, landscaping and alterations to the existing road network pursuant to outline planning permission 18/01884/OUTM 20/00710/REMM includes the layout of Leeman Road and Cinder Lane, including the pedestrian and cycle routes and facilities on Leeman Road to the south of the Museum, Cinder Lane and Hudson Boulevard. The Leeman Road stopping up order is dated 23 September 2021 and includes the Secretary of State decision and associated Inspector’s report
Legislation, Government guidance, standards - Highways Act 1980, Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Equality Act 2010, Human Rights Act 1998 - Inclusive Mobility, A Guide to Best Practice on Access to Pedestrian and Transport Infrastructure
- |
|
1.3 |
Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests? |
|
|
National Railway Museum (NRM) visitors People passing through the NRM, for example: local residents and people travelling to/from the Leeman Road area to the north/west of the Museum. Future users of the York Central development Specifically, within these user groups: people with reduced mobility, people using a wheelchair or mobility aid, people with sensory impairments, people with pushchairs or with young children and people with other protected characteristics Cyclists including users of adapted cycles |
|
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 objectives are set out in the planning application documents for Central Hall (21/02793/REMM) and form part of the wider strategy for the York Central development site approved under 18/01884/OUTM. In relation to the closure of Leeman Road, paragraph 16.65 of the Committee Report for outline application 18/01884/OUTM confirms that: With respect to pedestrians, the acceptance (in principle) of the closure and requirement for a subsequent stopping up order, is made on the clear proviso that, during the hours of opening of the NRM, passage for the public on foot will be freely and directly available in perpetuity, through the NRM (buildings/land) from Leeman Road on its north side to Marble Arch This is secured by outline planning condition 45, which states that Prior to the closure of Leeman Road for pedestrians and cyclists a scheme for a new alternative route for pedestrians and cyclists and details of a pedestrian access through the National Railway Museum extension shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved alternative new access for pedestrian and cyclists shall be implemented before Leeman Road is closed for pedestrians and cyclists. The pedestrian access through the National Railway Museum shall be implemented on the opening of the extension and made available during hours of opening. 18/01884/OUTM Page 20 of 35 The NRM’s Vision Statement submitted as part of the reserved matters application explains the museum’s aspirations for Central Hall, stating that: “Central Hall is not just about a better arrival and visitor experience for the museum. It has a fundamental role as the cultural heart of the York Central development.” - “The key gallery space of the current estate, the vast Great Hall will continue to present and interpret the world the railways made, but in a more engaging and immersive way so that its central story and showpiece collection items are truly brought to life”. - “Central Hall will unite the core museum buildings at ground level combining a new entrance experience with public-facing spaces for exhibition, orientation and reception, eating, museum shop and events. The building will remove the need for the existing underpass which restricts free access between the exhibition halls and in its place will provide seamless level access between the existing exhibition halls, creating a unified integrated museum”. - “The key aims of Central Hall are to create a new public face to the museum and to provide an appropriate forecourt to, and entrance sequel from, York Railway Station and beyond. The ambition is to provide a compelling and appealing public-facing welcome and arrival space for orientation and reception. Central hall will be very much the catalyst that connects. Rationalises and integrates the museum estate”.
|
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 |
|
|
Representations received in response to the NRM planning application (available on the CYC planning portal under planning reference 21/02793/REMM) |
Members of the public were able to view the planning application proposals and comment on them during the consultation period. Some of the representations received identify issues which are relevant to this assessment. These can be summarised as follows: · Issues considered as part of the NRM application o Access to the first floor gallery for wheelchair users - a passenger lift is provided to access the first floor gallery, which is suitable for wheelchair users and pushchairs (double) i.e. through lift with space to turn o Navigating Central Hall, particularly for less able pedestrians o Safety for lone women travelling along the walkway route o Queuing and delays entering the building for disabled users and the elderly o Increased journey lengths along the Walkway Route for the less able o Use of mobility scooters o Access through the museum for disabled cyclists / hand bikes o Level access o Lighting along the walkway route · Issues outside the scope of this assessment o Alternative routes – comments on the primary vehicle route, riverside path and pedestrian / cycle links all introducing longer travel times and presenting safety issues with a lack of natural / passive surveillance. These issues are compounded for disabled users, women and the elderly o Blue badge spaces - the number of blue badge spaces (14) was considered as part of the outline planning application and the related traffic modelling. The reserved matters application is pursuant to the outline consent o The availability of the route during opening hours impacts more significantly on vulnerable groups - Outline planning condition 45 specifies that the route should be available during opening hours and the reserved matters application has been brought forward in line with that requirement. o Temporary closures of walkway route for events – the number of closures is managed through the Walkway Agreement o Location of bus stops - The location of bus stops along the primary vehicle route is defined by the reserved matters approval for the proposed infrastructure works under reference 20/00710/REMM |
|
|
Documents submitted with the planning application 21/02793/REMM (e.g. Transport Assessment and plans submitted) Additional document submitted by the NRM for this assessment “Central Hall Walkway Route – Signpost to the relevant accessibility features of application 21/02793/REMM” |
These documents provide information on the proposed route to/from and through the museum, expected flows, times of operation, design of the route, etc |
|
|
Leeman Road stopping up Inspector report |
The Inspector’s report for the Leeman Road stopping up order summarised the issues linked to the stopping up of Leeman Road within paragraphs 9.97 and 9.98 of his report: “With the mitigation proposed as part of the Phase 1 Infrastructure works in place, no one would be unable to make any of the journeys that they currently make via Leeman Road. For vehicle users, journey distances would not be significantly greater and users would benefit from being able to use the high quality highway infrastructure proposed. There would, however, be a financial penalty on taxi users and, potentially, on taxi and private hire drivers, at least over the short term, if this led to a reduction in taxi use by existing residents in the area. Cyclists would experience slightly longer journey times but would be able to use purpose-designed infrastructure which would make their journeys safer and which would be likely to encourage increased use of cycles. The pedestrian route through Central Hall would provide limited mitigation for the loss of Leeman Road as a direct pedestrian route to and from the City Centre and Railway Station. Although not as direct, the alternative route via Foundry Way and Hudson Boulevard would provide a suitable alternative for most pedestrian journeys. This would involve an increase in travel distance and journey time but, in the long term, those disbenefits would be offset by the ability to use a new high quality route, with landscaping and resting places, that passes through and gives access to the new facilities and amenities to be developed as part of the YC scheme”
|
|
|
Census 2011 data |
Review of data for the two Lower Super Output Areas (LSOA) closest to the application site (York 017A which covers the Salisbury Terrace area and York 017B which cover the York Central area). This shows that York 017B has: · a higher percentage of residents identified as Black/ African/ Caribbean/ Black British in the 2011 Census (2.4% of usual residents in the York Central area compared to 0.6% of usual York residents - LC2109EWls dataset) · a higher percentage of residents identifying as Muslim in the 2011 Census (2.6% of usual residents in the York Central area compared to 1% of usual York residents - LC2107EW dataset) No significant differences between these two LSOAs and York as a whole were identified when reviewing data on age, sex, long term health problems and disability or provision of unpaid care. |
|
|
Media reports, articles and research on the private security industry and discriminatory behaviours |
Key documents/links reviewed: www.voice-online.co.uk/news/features-news/2022/03/31/shopping-while-black/ Islamophobia Defined – all Parliamentary Group on British Muslims www.enar-eu.org/about/islamophobia/ https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/1133-Guide-ethnic-profiling_EN.pdf https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1043986219890205 www.asisonline.org/security-management-magazine/articles/2017/04/surveillance-and-stereotypes/ |
|
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 |
|
|
No data or knowledge gaps were identified |
If additional data or information is identified at a later stage, this can be included in a revised Impact Assessment. |
|
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 proposed pedestrian route through the NRM (21/02793/REMM) will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The route through the Museum has been designed to remain close to the current alignment of Leeman Road. The additional journey length for pedestrians utilising the route through the Museum is 34 metres if using the stepped access and 97 metre if using the ramp. The route through the museum has been designed to offer level surfaces or moderate gradients in line with guidance. The route is 2.4m wide enabling people to pass and meet each other, including people using wheelchairs or mobility aids (including Class 3) with localised reductions for gates and street furniture. This improves on BS8300 guidance of a minimum of 1800mm clear width and a preferred access route of 2000mm width to accommodate users of larger mobility scooters. A minimum 25mm upstand is to be provided along the pavement length to enable those with mobility canes or similar to identify the pavement edge. The route will be lit and open to pedestrians (including wheelchair users but excluding cyclists who have dismounted and are pushing a bike) during the NRM’s opening hours. A direct route is to be provided from the walkway to a set of stairs –level landings and tactile flooring will be present at the top and bottom of the stairs, and handrails will be provided throughout at a height of 900-1000mm from floor level in accordance with BS8300. Steps are to be uniform to provide a consistent and predictable means of access. There are to be two sets of seven steps with a landing in the middle to provide a rest point and sightline break, if necessary.
The proposed ramp is longer in design in order to achieve a maximum 1:20 gradient for ease of independent use by wheelchair users and those with mobility equipment, in particular. Level landings are to be provided at the top and bottom of the ramp and at every rise of 500mm, in alignment with BS8300. Two benches, with backrests and with and without armrest provision, are to be provided on ramp landings (approximately 10 metres apart from one another) to provide dwell space. A minimum 1200mm transfer space will also be provided for wheelchair users wishing to transfer onto the bench.
In terms of materiality and colour contrast, a consideration of legibility, identification and ease of use has been provided between trafficked areas and pedestrianised areas, which will be of particular benefit to visitors and staff who are registered blind or partially sighted. High contrast elements will also be provided for tactile flooring and on stair nosings. There may be delays for people wanting to walk through the NRM at peak times, as they have to share the route with visitors to the Museum and comply with security measures in place for the NRM (for example, they will need to submit to bag searches if these are in place). This could have a negative impact for older people and young children who may not be able to stand and wait in a queue for a prolonged period of time. The route may be subject to security checks. Security operatives are required to meet national standards of behaviour for security operatives. This includes the obligation to “act fairly and not discriminate on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, marital status, race, nationality, ethnicity, religion or beliefs, disability, or any other difference in individuals which is not relevant to the security operatives’ responsibility”. Some young people, especially from minority ethnic groups or people identifying as Muslim (or perceived as such), may however be discouraged from using a route with checkpoints if they fear that they might be subject to discriminatory behaviour as such issues have been reported in the national media. However, without the route through the Museum, pedestrians would have to use the longer route around the Museum, along Hudson Boulevard and Foundry Way, at all times. As noted in the Inspector’s report for the Leeman Road stopping up order, the pedestrian route through Central Hall provides limited mitigation for the loss of Leeman Road as a direct pedestrian route to and from the City Centre and Railway Station. The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impacts of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. |
Positive and negative |
Medium |
|
|
Disability
|
The proposed pedestrian route through the NRM will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The route through the Museum has been designed to remain close to the current alignment of Leeman Road. The additional journey length for pedestrians utilising the route through the Museum is 34 metres if using the stepped access and 97 metre if using the ramp. The route through the museum has been designed to offer level surfaces or moderate gradients in line with guidance. The route is 2.4m wide enabling people to pass and meet each other, including people using wheelchairs or mobility aids (including Class 3) with localised reductions for gates and street furniture. This improves on BS8300 guidance of a minimum of 1800mm clear width and a preferred access route of 2000mm width to accommodate users of larger mobility scooters. A minimum 25mm upstand is to be provided along the pavement length to enable those with mobility canes or similar to identify the pavement edge. The route will be lit and open to pedestrians (including wheelchair users but excluding cyclists who have dismounted and are pushing a bike) during the NRM’s opening hours. A direct route is to be provided from the walkway to a set of stairs –Level landings and tactile flooring will be present at the top and bottom of the stairs, and handrails will be provided throughout at a height of 900-1000mm from floor level in accordance with BS8300. Steps are to be uniform to provide a consistent and predictable means of access. There are to be two sets of seven steps with a landing in the middle to provide a rest point and sightline break, if necessary.
The proposed ramp is longer in design in order to achieve a maximum 1:20 gradient for ease of independent use by wheelchair users and those with mobility equipment, in particular. Level landings are to be provided at the top and bottom of the ramp and at every rise of 500mm, in alignment with BS8300. Two benches, with backrests and with and without armrest provision, are to be provided on ramp landings (approximately 10 metres apart from one another) to provide dwell space. A minimum 1200mm transfer space will also be provided for wheelchair users wishing to transfer onto the bench.
In terms of materiality and colour contrast, a consideration of legibility, identification and ease of use has been provided between trafficked areas and pedestrianised areas, which will be of particular benefit to visitors and staff who are registered blind or partially sighted. High contrast elements will also be provided for tactile flooring and on stair nosings.
The route offers level access into the Museum on the Cinder Lane side and includes stairs and a ramp on the other side of the Museum. By comparison, Leeman Road currently has high volumes of traffic, a narrow 1.5m footway, lacks resting places, natural overlooking and has a gradient of 1:16 in some sections To the north of the Museum, the route is designed to be identified clearly, using the stairs or ramp option, and then following a kerbed footway (opposite the disabled car parking spaces) to the site boundary to the north-west. The approach from Cinder Lane is not yet fully designed as the detail design for this area is not part of this planning application. As the route crosses an open plaza area, the needs of disabled users will need to be considered when this design is developed, particularly the need of users who are blind or visually impaired. The route inside Central Hall does not provide any tactile guidance for users who are blind or visually impaired. The route through Central Hall may also be difficult to navigate, especially at busy times, for people who suffer from mental health conditions, neurodevelopmental disorders, or learning disabilities. The NRM has indicated that suitable signage would be provided and that staff would be available to direct users through the building. There may be delays for people wanting to walk through the NRM at peak times, as they have to share the route with visitors to the Museum and comply with security measures in place for the NRM (for example, they will need to submit to bag searches if these are in place). This could have a negative impact for some people with disabilities, who may not be able to stand and wait in a queue for a prolonged period of time. Some people may also be discouraged from using the route due to the journey time uncertainty associated with possible queues and security measures. However, without the route through the Museum, pedestrians would have to use the longer route around the Museum, along Hudson Boulevard and Foundry Way, at all times. As noted in the Inspector’s report for the Leeman Road stopping up order, the pedestrian route through Central Hall provides limited mitigation for the loss of Leeman Road as a direct pedestrian route to and from the City Centre and Railway Station.
The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impacts of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. Cyclists (even dismounted and pushing their bike) and people who use their cycle as a mobility aid will not be permitted to use the route through Central Hall. This is however not considered here as the principle of the route through the Museum being available only to pedestrians was set under 18/01884/OUTM. |
Positive and negative |
Medium |
|
|
Gender
|
The proposed pedestrian route through the NRM will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The walkway route will be well lit and will benefit from natural surveillance during the Museum’s opening hours, when visitors to the Museum will also be coming and going. There will also be a security presence at the building and CCTV surveillance. The proposals were found to be acceptable by North Yorkshire Police Designing Out Crime Officer. No positive of negative impacts have been identified in relation to gender characteristics. The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impact of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. |
Neutral |
n/a |
|
|
Gender Reassignment |
The proposed pedestrian route through the NRM will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The walkway route will be well lit and will benefit from natural surveillance during the Museum’s opening hours, when visitors to the Museum will also be coming and going. There will also be a security presence at the building and CCTV surveillance. The proposals were found to be acceptable by North Yorkshire Police Designing Out Crime Officer. The route may be subject to security checks. Security operatives are required to meet national standards of behaviour for security operatives. This includes the obligation to “act fairly and not discriminate on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, marital status, race, nationality, ethnicity, religion or beliefs, disability, or any other difference in individuals which is not relevant to the security operatives’ responsibility”. Some users who have received gender reassignment surgery or are in a gender reassignment process may however be discouraged from using a route with checkpoints if they fear that they might be subject to discriminatory behaviour as such issues have been reported in the national media. However, without the route through the Museum, pedestrians would have to use the longer route around the Museum, along Hudson Boulevard and Foundry Way, at all times. As noted in the Inspector’s report for the Leeman Road stopping up order, the pedestrian route through Central Hall provides limited mitigation for the loss of Leeman Road as a direct pedestrian route to and from the City Centre and Railway Station.
The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impact of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. |
Positive and negative |
Medium |
|
|
Marriage and civil partnership |
The proposed pedestrian route through the NRM will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The route will be lit and open to pedestrians (including wheelchair users but excluding cyclists who have dismounted and are pushing a bike) during the NRM’s opening hours. No positive of negative impacts have been identified in relation to marriage and civil partnership characteristics. The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impacts of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. |
Neutral |
n/a |
|
|
Pregnancy and maternity |
The proposed pedestrian route through the NRM (21/02793/REMM) will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The route through the Museum has been designed to offer level surfaces or moderate gradients in line with guidance. The route is 2.4m wide with localised reductions for gates and street furniture enabling people to pass and meet each other, including people using wheelchairs, mobility aids, and pushchairs. The route will be lit and open to pedestrians (including wheelchair users but excluding cyclists who have dismounted and are pushing a bike) during the NRM’s opening hours. By comparison, Leeman Road currently has high volumes of traffic, a narrow 1.5m footway, lacks resting places, natural overlooking and has a gradient of 1:16 in some sections There may be delays for people wanting to walk through the NRM at peak times, as they have to share the route with visitors to the Museum and comply with security measures in place for the NRM (for example, they will need to submit to bag searches if these are in place). This could have a negative impact for users with reduced mobility due to pregnancy and for those with babies and very young children as they may not be able to stand and wait in a queue for a prolonged period of time. However, without the route through the Museum, pedestrians would have to use the longer route around the Museum, along Hudson Boulevard and Foundry Way, at all times. As noted in the Inspector’s report for the Leeman Road stopping up order, the pedestrian route through Central Hall provides limited mitigation for the loss of Leeman Road as a direct pedestrian route to and from the City Centre and Railway Station.
The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impacts of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. |
Positive and negative |
Medium |
|
|
Race |
The review of the Census 2011 data for the two Lower Super Output Areas (LSOA) closest to the application site (York 017A which covers the Salisbury Terrace area and York 017B which cover the York Central area) shows that York 017B has a higher percentage of residents identified as Black/ African/ Caribbean/ Black British in the 2011 Census (2.4% of usual residents in the York Central area compared to 0.6% of usual York residents - LC2109EWls dataset). The proposed pedestrian route through the NRM will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The walkway route will be well lit and will benefit from natural surveillance during the Museum’s opening hours, when visitors to the Museum will also be coming and going. There will also be a security presence at the building and CCTV surveillance. The proposals were found to be acceptable by North Yorkshire Police Designing Out Crime Officer. The route may be subject to security checks. Security operatives are required to meet national standards of behaviour for security operatives. This includes the obligation to “act fairly and not discriminate on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, marital status, race, nationality, ethnicity, religion or beliefs, disability, or any other difference in individuals which is not relevant to the security operatives’ responsibility”. Some minority ethnic users may however be discouraged from using a route with checkpoints the route through Central Hall if they fear that they might be subject to discriminatory behaviour as such issues have been reported in the national media. However, without the route through the Museum, pedestrians would have to use the longer route around the Museum, along Hudson Boulevard and Foundry Way, at all times. As noted in the Inspector’s report for the Leeman Road stopping up order, the pedestrian route through Central Hall provides limited mitigation for the loss of Leeman Road as a direct pedestrian route to and from the City Centre and Railway Station.
The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impacts of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. |
Positive and negative |
Medium |
|
|
Religion and belief |
The review of the Census 2011 data for the two Lower Super Output Areas (LSOA) closest to the application site (York 017A which covers the Salisbury Terrace area and York 017B which cover the York Central area) shows that York 017B has a higher percentage of residents identifying as Muslim in the 2011 Census (2.6% of usual residents in the York Central area compared to 1% of usual York residents - LC2107EW dataset). The proposed pedestrian route through the NRM will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The walkway route will be well lit and will benefit from natural surveillance during the Museum’s opening hours, when visitors to the Museum will also be coming and going. There will also be a security presence at the building and CCTV surveillance. The proposals were found to be acceptable by North Yorkshire Police Designing Out Crime Officer. The route may be subject to security checks. Security operatives are required to meet national standards of behaviour for security operatives. This includes the obligation to “act fairly and not discriminate on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, marital status, race, nationality, ethnicity, religion or beliefs, disability, or any other difference in individuals which is not relevant to the security operatives’ responsibility”. Some users from the Muslim community may however be discouraged from using the route through Central Hall a route with checkpoints if they fear that they might be subject to discriminatory behaviour as such issues have been reported in the national media. However, without the route through the Museum, pedestrians would have to use the longer route around the Museum, along Hudson Boulevard and Foundry Way, at all times. As noted in the Inspector’s report for the Leeman Road stopping up order, the pedestrian route through Central Hall provides limited mitigation for the loss of Leeman Road as a direct pedestrian route to and from the City Centre and Railway Station.
The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impacts of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. |
Positive and negative |
Medium |
|
|
Sexual orientation |
The proposed pedestrian route through the NRM will enable people who want to travel through the Museum to do so via a direct route from Cinder Lane to Leeman Road to the north-west of the Museum. The walkway route will be well lit and will benefit from natural surveillance during the Museum’s opening hours, when visitors to the Museum will also be coming and going. There will also be a security presence at the building and CCTV surveillance. The proposals were found to be acceptable by North Yorkshire Police Designing Out Crime Officer. The route may be subject to security checks. Security operatives are required to meet national standards of behaviour for security operatives. This includes the obligation to “act fairly and not discriminate on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, marital status, race, nationality, ethnicity, religion or beliefs, disability, or any other difference in individuals which is not relevant to the security operatives’ responsibility”. Some LGBTQ+ users may however be discouraged from using a route with checkpoints if they fear that they might be subject to discriminatory behaviour as such issues have been reported in the national media. However, without the route through the Museum, pedestrians would have to use the longer route around the Museum, along Hudson Boulevard and Foundry Way, at all times. As noted in the Inspector’s report for the Leeman Road stopping up order, the pedestrian route through Central Hall provides limited mitigation for the loss of Leeman Road as a direct pedestrian route to and from the City Centre and Railway Station.
The closure of Leeman Road was approved under 18/01884/OUTM and through the stopping up process and is therefore not considered in this assessment. The same applies to the alignment of the new roads, and the pedestrian and cycle route - their design is covered by 20/00710/REMM. The impacts of these decisions are therefore not assessed here. |
Positive and negative |
Medium |
|
|
Other Socio-economic groups including : |
Could other socio-economic groups be affected e.g. carers, ex-offenders, low incomes? |
|
||
|
Carer |
Impacts on carers are similar to those noted above for people living with disabilities. |
|
|
|
|
Low income groups |
No identified impacts. |
|
|
|
|
Veterans, Armed Forces Community |
No identified impacts. |
|
|
|
|
Impact on human rights: |
||||
|
List any human rights impacted. |
No human rights impacts identified. |
|
|
|
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? |
|
In addition to the design features of the proposals for Central Hall and the associated walkway route identified above, the following measures are proposed: Queuing - Upon opening the museum, a dedicated member of staff is assigned to meet and greet visitors. This will include local residents seeking a passage through Central Hall. Their role is to implement queue-busting techniques, which will include identifying residents and enabling them to pass quickly through the building, along with catering for any specific user needs e.g. toilet visits, seating for the elderly or pregnant women as they do now. Wayfinding and navigation - Visitors planning a trip to Central Hall will be able to familiarise themselves with the layout of Central Hall and adjoining areas on the museum’s website prior to arrival. The aim of this is to encourage confidence and autonomy for those with sensory and cognitive impairments and access requirements, in particular. Multimedia videos will be described via audio and also captioned to support D/deaf and hard of hearing users. Signage within Central Hall will follow the ‘two-sense’ approach, providing both visual and tactile access to visitors and staff. The wayfinding scheme will ensure legibility (with strong contrast and of appropriate scale and clarity of content). Where appropriate, key services will also be indicated with proximity markers. Mapping will be supported with access to further information in other formats through QR code or similar online. Contrast elements between walls, floors and furniture have been intrinsically considered within the internal design of Central Hall, promoting an ease of identification and navigation for partially sighted and neurodivergent individuals, in particular. The frequent availability, inclusive design and materiality of seating - at appropriate heights and with back and armrests is also being incorporated to provide a comfortable experience for those who may require frequent dwell points. Staff training - The operational elements of the experience will also be vital to ensure inclusivity to D/deaf and disabled people and those with other protected characteristics. An ongoing disability and equality training programme is currently utilised for all front-facing staff members, and includes impairment and access requirement specific modules such as dementia friendly training etc. Staff will always be on hand within Central Hall to support D/deaf and disabled people, if required, whether they are visiting the museum or passing through Route availability - The opening hours of NRM will revert to seven days a week by May 2023 Planning Conditions - recommended conditions of the reserved matters application will ensure that mitigation is delivered: · Condition 6 (Hard landscaping and street furniture) · Condition 8 (signage strategy) · Condition 11 (lighting strategy)
|
|
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 |
|
|
Continue with the proposal |
This Equality Impact Assessment report presents the equality issues potentially arising from the planning application 21/02793/REMM, focusing on the proposed route through the Museum. It reports committed and reasonable proposed mitigation measures to mitigate negative effects and positive actions to enhance equality outcomes. These are described above and include: · The route through the museum has been designed to offer level surfaces or moderate gradients in line with guidance; · The route is 2.4m wide enabling people to pass and meet each other, including people using wheelchairs or mobility aids (including Class 3) with localised reductions for gates and street furniture. This improves on BS8300 guidance of a minimum of 1800mm clear width and a preferred access route of 2000mm width to accommodate users of larger mobility scooters; · A minimum 25mm upstand is to be provided along the pavement length to enable those with mobility canes or similar to identify the pavement edge; · A direct route is to be provided from the walkway to a set of stairs –level landings and tactile flooring will be present at the top and bottom of the stairs, and handrails will be provided throughout at a height of 900-1000mm from floor level in accordance with BS8300; · Steps are to be uniform to provide a consistent and predictable means of access. There are to be two sets of seven steps with a landing in the middle to provide a rest point and sightline break, if necessary;
·
The proposed ramp is longer in design
in order to achieve a maximum 1:20 gradient for ease of independent
use by wheelchair users and those with mobility equipment, in
particular. Level landings are to be provided at the top and bottom
of the ramp and at every rise of 500mm, in alignment with BS8300.
Two benches, with backrests · The route will be lit and open to pedestrians (including wheelchair users but excluding cyclists who have dismounted and are pushing a bike) during the NRM’s opening hours; · The additional journey length for pedestrians utilising the route through the Museum is 34 metres if using the stepped access and 97 metre if using the ramp. The route offers level access into the Museum on the Cinder Lane side and includes stairs and a ramp on the other side of the Museum. By comparison, Leeman Road currently has high volumes of traffic, a narrow 1.5m footway, lacks resting places, natural overlooking and has a gradient of 1:16 in some sections; · Dedicated staff assigned to meet and greet visitors, including local residents; · Wayfinding and navigation measures both online and within Central Hall; · Frequent availability of seating along the route; · Disability and equality training programme for all front-facing staff members. |
|