City of York Council and Centre for Applied Human Rights

Human Rights and Equality Assessment (HREA)

Who is submitting the proposal?

Directorate		Environmental and Regulatory Services
Service Area		Highways
Name of proposal		Review of CYC community car park and on-street parking charges in response to petitions
Lead Officer		Dave Atkinson
Date Assessment Started		2025/26
Date Assessment Completed		August 2026
Names of those who contributed to the assessment
Name	Job Title		Organisation	Area of Expertise
Helene Vergereau	Head of Highway Management		City of York Council	Transport and Highways
Jav Safder	Parking Services Manager		City of York Council	Transport and Highways
Darren Hobson	Traffic Management Team Leader		City of York Council	Transport and Highways
Laura Swiszczowski	Head of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion		City of York Council	Equity, Diversity & Inclusion
David Smith	Access Officer		City of York Council	Equity, Diversity & Inclusion

1.1

What is the purpose of the proposal

Please explain your proposal in plain English avoiding acronyms and jargon. Consider using Age 9 English.

This assessment accompanies a report to the Executive following a review of CYC community car park and on-street parking charges in response to petitions in four areas: Bishopthorpe Road, Micklegate, The Groves and East Parade car park in Heworth.

The changes recommended for approval by the Executive are:

· changes to parking charges: changes to the Minster Badge, from the current charge of £45 for two years, to an annual charge of £15, and increased discount for Minster Badge holders parking in community parking areas from the current 30% discount to 50% discount

· introduction of an informal consultation stage before a decision is made on significant (substantially above inflation) increases to Council parking charges; and

· publication of the annual parking account report in a revised format, to provide more detail on parking revenue and how it is reinvested into transport and environmental improvements.

Only the first of the recommendations listed above is assessed here as it is the only recommendation which is likely to have an impact on Equity and Human Rights.

Step 1 – Aims and intended outcomes

1.2

Are there any external considerations?

Legislation / government directive / codes of practice etc.

Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (including Sections 35C and 46A)

Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 Part V)

Traffic Management Act 2004 Right to challenge parking policies

1.3

Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests?

Consider both internal and external stakeholders.

Car parking users including York residents and visitors in the four areas covered by the review, including Blue Badge holders parking in the car parks or on street and people with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010

Businesses, groups and organisations in the four areas covered by the review

Other highway users, including people travelling by bus, cycling and walking

In the context of this report, stakeholders’ interests are mainly around access, cost of parking, availability and cost of other modes of transport, ability to load and service properties, safety and convenience.

1.4

What results / outcomes do we want to achieve and for whom?

Explain what outcomes you want to achieve for stakeholders, staff and the wider community. Demonstrate how the proposal links to the Council Plan (2023- 2027) and other corporate strategies and plans. Highlight how the proposal meets the objectives of Equalities, Affordability, Climate and Health.

The recommended changes to parking charges aim to acknowledge the feedback and recommendations received through the independent review and continue to balance competing priorities to deliver the Local Transport Strategy’s objectives.

How this relates to the Council’s strategies is presented in the main report.

Step 2 – Resources utilised

3.1	What sources of data, evidence and consultation feedback have you used to help 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 this source
	Budget consultation	Starting back in May 2024, the council has undertaken a comprehensive budget consultation which concluded in December 2024. This is summarised from Paragraph 38 here: https://democracy.york.gov.uk/documents/s181127/Executive%20Financial%20Strategy.pdf Data from the consultation is available here: https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/aedff60d99e5-4d67-ba8e-13dc0b6cf931/budget-consultation
	Economic assessment	The council commissions and publishes independent economic data about spend and transactions, and footfall data. Parking transaction data where available.
	Petitions and feedback submitted to the Council	The petitions initiated the review and the feedback received separately from the independent review is summarised in Annex B
	Independent review consultation and feedback	Presented in Annexes C and C1 to C4, the questionnaire used for the review is included in Annex E

Step 3 – Screening the impacts or effects.

3.1

Equality-related obligations derive from the Equality Act of 2010 and the Human Rights Act of 1998.

Once you have engaged with stakeholders you will need to identify how this proposal impacts on their human rights and equalities.

Although table one looks complex, its purpose is to facilitate an initial screening of equalities and human rights impacts of your proposal.

Many human rights and equalities will not be affected by the decision you are seeking Executive or Council approval for and so can be left blank. The aim here is to identify pressure points regarding human rights and equalities that require attention.

Please see the Appendix for details of the protected characteristics and human rights to consider

The rights listed below in the first column are the relevant ones from the Human Rights Act, and the York Human Rights City Network Indicator Report (non-discrimination, education, health and social care, housing, a decent standard of living). The human rights in the Indicator Report were selected by residents of York as their priority rights. In the first row the protected characteristics under the Equality Act are listed, to which ‘Everyone’ has been added to capture impacts that affect everyone without distinction.

Step 3.1 Table 1 – Screening the impacts or effects

Equalities Human Rights	Everyone	Age including financial, digital exclusion impacts	Disability Including financial, digital exclusion impacts	Gender reassign-ment Including Trans, Non-binary, Intersex	Marriage and civil partnership	Pregnancy and maternity	Race	Religion and belief	Sex	Sexual orientation	Carers inc financial, digital exclusion impacts	Low-income groups inc financial, digital exclusion impacts	Veteran, armed forces community	Those with experience of Care
Right to life*	No differential impact identified
Prohibition of torture*	No differential impact identified
Prohibition of slavery and forced labour*	No differential impact identified
Right to liberty, movement and security (including freedom of movement)***	No differential impact identified
Right to a fair trial*	No differential impact identified
No punishment without law*	No differential impact identified
Right to private and family life***		Mixed impacts	Mixed impacts	No differential impact identified	No differential impact identified	Mixed impacts	No differential impact identified	Mixed impacts	No differential impact identified	No differential impact identified	Mixed impacts	Mixed impacts	No differential impact identified	No differential impact identified
Freedom of thought, conscience, and belief***	No differential impact identified
Freedom of expression***	No differential impact identified
Freedom of assembly***	No differential impact identified
Right to marry***	No differential impact identified
Right to property***	No differential impact identified
Right to education***	No differential impact identified
Right to free elections***	No differential impact identified
Right to housing***	No differential impact identified

Step 3.2 Table 2 – Assessing the impact of your proposal

Here you will need to record the details on all the impacts identified for both Human Rights and those with Protected Characteristics.

Where you have identified an impact on a protected characteristic/human right in the table above, please indicate whether this is positive or negative and give a description of this impact. If you run out of rows, please add as necessary.

Rights clashes and restrictions

Where rights clash or are being restricted, you will need to explain how the decision has been taken, that the limitation on human rights is provided by law, for a legitimate purpose (justified), and proportionate (the minimum necessary restriction on rights).

Use the following guidance to inform your responses:

First, think about what equalities or rights might be engaged by the proposal, and describe the likely impact of the proposal, and provide an evaluation.

Use the following questions to inform your responses if human rights or equalities are limited or qualified in any way:

· Why are a person’s rights being restricted?

· What is the problem being addressed by the restriction on someone’s rights?

· Will the restriction lead to a reduction in the problem?

· Does that restriction involve a blanket policy, or does it allow for different cases to be treated differently?

· Does a less restrictive alternative exist?

· Has sufficient regard been paid to the rights and interests of those affected?

· Do safeguards exist against error or abuse?

Table 2

Protected Characteristics or Human Rights	Key findings / impacts	Positive (+) Negative (-) (Neutral (0)	High (H) Medium (M) Low (L)
Age	The impacts of the recommended changes to parking charges are mixed for this group: - Blue Badge holders will continue to park free of charge for unlimited times - Positive impact due to lower parking charges proposed for residents with a Minster Badge in specific community areas - Current charges remain for those without a Minster Badge and in other areas - The proposed changes to parking charges may result in modest increases in driving and car mileage to/from these areas, making the area less attractive for people who walk and cycle (including older and younger people who may not be able to drive or may not have access to a car)[SL1]	Positive and negative	Low
Disability	The impacts of the recommended changes to parking charges are mixed for this group: - Blue Badge holders will continue to park free of charge for unlimited times. Some disabled people do not hold a Blue Badge and can therefore not benefit from this. - Positive impact due to lower parking charges proposed for residents with a Minster Badge in specific community areas - Current charges remain for those without a Minster Badge and in other areas - The proposed changes to parking charges may result in modest increases in driving and car mileage to/from these areas, making the area less attractive for disabled people who use a mobility aid, walk, and cycle (including those who may not be able to drive or may not have access to a car)	Positive and negative	Low
Gender reassignment	No differential impact identified
Marriage and Civil Partnership	No differential impact identified
Pregnancy and Maternity	The impacts of the recommended changes to parking charges are mixed for this group: - Positive impact due to lower parking charges proposed for residents with a Minster Badge in specific community areas - Current charges remain for those without a Minster Badge and in other areas - The proposed changes to parking charges may result in modest increases in driving and car mileage to/from these areas, making the area less attractive for people who walk, and cycle (including those with babies and young children who may not be able to drive or may not have access to a car)	Positive and negative	Low
Race	No differential impact identified
Religion and Belief	The impacts of the recommended changes to parking charges are mixed for this group: - Positive impact due to lower parking charges proposed for residents with a Minster Badge in specific community areas, which may assist with accessing places of worship by car - Current charges remain for those without a Minster Badge and in other areas - The proposed changes to parking charges may result in modest increases in driving and car mileage to/from these areas, making the area less attractive for people who walk, and cycle (including those accessing places of worship who may not be able to drive or may not have access to a car)	Positive and negative	Low
Sex	No differential impact identified
Sexual Orientation	No differential impact identified

Other social – economic groups
Carer	The impacts of the recommended changes to parking charges are mixed for this group: - Blue Badge holders will continue to park free of charge for unlimited times so if a carer is supporting a Blue Badge holder (providing a lift, helping with shopping, etc) this will apply to them as well. Some disabled people do not hold a Blue Badge and they and their carers can therefore not benefit from this. - Positive impact due to lower parking charges proposed for residents with a Minster Badge in specific community areas. Carers of York residents may not live in York and therefore might not be eligible for a Minster Badge. - Current charges remain for those without a Minster Badge and in other areas - The proposed changes to parking charges may result in modest increases in driving and car mileage to/from these areas, making the area less attractive for disabled people who use a mobility aid, walk, and cycle and their carers (including those who may not be able to drive or may not have access to a car)	Positive and negative	Low
Care Leavers	No differential impact identified
Low income groups	The impacts of the recommended changes to parking charges are mixed for this group: - Positive impact due to lower parking charges proposed for residents with a Minster Badge in specific community areas, - Current charges remain for those without a Minster Badge and in other areas - The proposed changes to parking charges may result in modest increases in driving and car mileage to/from these areas, making the area less attractive for people who walk, and cycle (including those who may not be able to drive or may not have access to a car)	Positive and negative	Low
Veterans and armed Forces	No differential impact identified
Other	Not applicable
Human Rights (list any rights impacted)
Right to private and family life	Parking pricing can have an indirect impact on this right as high prices can result in social isolation, leisure restriction, potentially pricing people out of some areas. Parking prices can however be justified as they can serve legitimate aims like reducing traffic congestion and encouraging the use of more sustainable modes of transport, making travel by bus, cycling and walking and public spaces more attractive for everyone. The impacts of the recommended changes to parking charges are mixed: - Positive due to lower parking charges proposed for residents with a Minster Badge in specific community areas - Charges remain as they are for those without a Minster Badge and in other areas - The proposed reduced charges may result in modest increases in driving and car mileage to/from these areas	Positive and negative	Low

Step 4 – Gaps in data and knowledge

4.1	What are the main gaps in information and understanding of the impact of your proposal?
4.1	When conducting your screening, you may have discovered gaps in data or knowledge that make it difficult to assess whether your proposal had a positive or negative impact on human rights/equalities. Please indicate actions you will take to resolve this gap. As your proposal progresses you may be able to resolve this knowledge gap –please indicate when it was resolved.
	Gaps in data or knowledge	Action to deal with this	Date resolved
	Actual impact of changes proposed on parking behaviour	Continue to monitor parking and transport trends as change is implemented and monitor feedback from stakeholders	Continuous process

Step 5 - Maximising positive impacts

5.1

What has been done to optimise opportunities to advance equality / human rights or foster good relations?

Targeted engagement through the independent review process

Continuous offer of free unlimited parking in Council run off-street car parks

Customer Services Team offers assistance for digital parking permit applications for people who do not have access to the internet or require support for other reasons, offering appointments at West Offices

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.
	Important: If there are any adverse impacts you cannot mitigate, please provide a compelling reason in the justification column. There are four main options you can take:
	No major change to the proposal	The HREAT demonstrates the proposal is robust. There is no potential for unlawful discrimination or adverse impact and you have taken all opportunities to advance equality / human rights and foster good relations, subject to continuing monitor and review.
	Adjust the proposal	The HREAT 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
	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.

Option Selected

Conclusion / justifications

Continue with the proposal (despite the potential for adverse impact)

Reduced parking pricing for residents with a Minster Badge in selected community areas will support those who want or need to access these areas by car. Current parking charges will remain for those without a Minster Badge, with the potential for some negative impacts as listed above.

Parking prices are used as a lever to encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport to achieve the objectives of the Local Transport Strategy and Climate Change Strategy. In this context the current charges serve the legitimate aims of reducing traffic congestion and air pollution and encouraging the use of more sustainable modes of transport, making travel by bus, cycling and walking and public spaces more attractive for everyone.

Blue Badge holders continue to benefit from free unlimited parking in off-street car parks and in on-street bays.

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.
	List below the actions or mitigations that have been identified and who will be responsible to carrying them out. Add as many lines as you need.
	Impact / Issue	Actions to be taken	Person Responsible	Timescale
	Affordability issues for those who are not Blue Badge holders and do not qualify for a Minster Badge	Continue to share information on public transport (including reduced fares, etc) and other modes of transport available Deliver the sustainable transport improvements identified in the LTS and its Implementation Plan	Director of City Development & MCA	On-going

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, other marginalised groups and human rights going forward? How will any learning and enhancements be capitalised on and embedded?

Continue to monitor parking and transport trends as change is implemented and monitor feedback from stakeholders

Parking charges are typically reviewed annually, with the impact monitored at 3,6 and 9 months.