Piers Elias Date

Economic Strategy & Intelligence

Author : Piers Elias th Date : 19 February 2013

Dwelling and Household Change in the Tees Valley Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

1 Introduction

1.1 This note looks at the change in the numbers of Dwellings and Households at Local Authority and Ward level over the 10 year period between the 2001 and 2011. For equivalence purposes the Mid Year figures will be used.

1.2 Figures are compared based on the current Wards so for Darlington, Middlesbrough, Redcar & Cleveland these are 2003 boundaries, for Stockton-on-Tees 2005 boundaries and for Hartlepool, 2012 boundaries.

1.3 An analysis of changes in population at Ward level was published in January 2013 and is available to download from our web-site here.

1.4 Dwellings are defined by ONS as all Household Spaces and so include vacant dwellings and shared dwellings. Households are defined as a household space with at least one resident. For the purposes of this report the terms Dwellings (Total Household Spaces) and Households (Occupied Household Spaces) will be used. See Appendix 1 for the full ONS definitions.

2 Headline Results for Dwellings and Vacancy

 The largest increases in dwellings between Mid 2001 and Mid 2011 were seen in the two Ingleby Barwick Wards, Stockton-on-Tees (East +1,300, West +900) and Hart Ward, Hartlepool (+1,150). Faverdale Ward, Darlington had the largest percentage rise of 83%. These Wards have all seen significant new housing development over the 10 year period.

 The largest decrease was seen in South Bank Ward in Redcar & Cleveland, with 735 fewer dwellings (down 21% compared to Mid 2001). Victoria Ward in Hartlepool, Grangetown Ward, Redcar & Cleveland and Hardwick Ward, Stockton-on-Tees all decreased by around 400 dwellings between Mid 2001 and Mid 2011.

 Vacancy rates were lower for all the Tees Valley Authorities, with Middlesbrough showing the largest improvement from 6.1% in Mid 2001 to 4.9% in Mid 2011. For Tees Valley as a whole it was 4.1%, down from 4.7% in Mid 2001. This improvement went against the national trend where vacancy rates increased from 3.9% in 2001 to 4.4% in 2011.

 At Ward level, vacancy rates varied from under 2% - (9 Wards) with Coulby Newham Ward, Middlesbrough having the lowest vacancy rate of 1.5% - to a rate of over 10% (2 Wards – both in Middlesbrough) Gresham Ward with 13.0% vacancy and Middlehaven Ward, 10.9%.

Further analyses on dwellings at Ward level are given in Tables 3 and 4 below.

Page 1 of 29

3 Headline Results for Households and Average Household Size

 The results are broadly similar to the Dwellings above; the largest increases in households between Mid 2001 and Mid 2011 were seen in the two Ingleby Barwick Wards, Stockton-on-Tees (East +1,215, West +870) and Hart Ward, Hartlepool (+1,050). Again, Faverdale Ward, Darlington had the largest percentage rise of 83%.

 The largest decrease was seen in South Bank Ward in Redcar & Cleveland, with 555 fewer households (down 17% compared to Mid 2001). Jesmond Ward in Hartlepool, and Grangetown Ward, Redcar & Cleveland, both decreased by around 260 households.

 Average Household Size (AHS) fell for all Tees Valley Local Authorities from 2.39 to 2.31 – a fall of 3.6%. This is a result of the change in the number of households exceeding the change in household population. The fall was largest in Redcar & Cleveland where AHS fell by 6.3%, a combination of declining population (-2.6%) and household growth (+3.8%).

 At Ward level the range of AHS ranged from close to 3 per household (2.92) in Ingleby Barwick West Ward, Stockton-on-Tees to fewer than 2 per household (1.88) in Central Ward, Darlington. Three other Wards had an AHS of below 2 per household; Coatham Ward, Redcar & Cleveland; Headland & Harbour Ward, Hartlepool and Saltburn Ward, Redcar & Cleveland.

Further analyses on Households at Ward level are given in Tables 5 and 6 below.

4 Background

4.1 The Ward dwelling and household estimates are consistent with ONS 2011 Census data and then rolled forwards to Mid Year 2011.

4.2 The move from Census Day to Mid Year 2011 takes into account changes in numbers of postal addresses from the Royal Mail Postcode Address File (PAF) that records the changes to addresses. Extracts were available for dates very close to Census day, 27th March and to 30th June. In practice, the changes were small. Vacancy rates were assumed to remain the same as Census day, as was the proportion of the household population to the total resident population.

4.3 ONS do not produce household estimates at Ward level other than at the Census. CLG publish estimates of households at Local Authority level but not at Ward level. Council Tax counts (equivalent to dwellings) are released by CLG at Census OA level and ONS used the Council Tax registers as a way of quality checking the census results. TVU use a combination of Council Tax and Royal Mail PAF to roll forwards household and dwelling estimates during annual updates and hope to use the vacancy data from the Council tax files to maintain better estimates of vacancy in the intercensal period.

5 Local Authority Dwellings and Vacancy Change

5.1 Table 1 below shows the change in the number of dwellings and change in vacancy rates for the Tees Valley Local Authorities. Both sets of Tees Valley figures relate to the Mid Year Estimate immediately after the Census, with all adjustments included.

Page 2 of 29

Table 1 – Local Authority Dwelling and Vacancy Rate Changes

Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Change 2001-11 % Change 2001-11 Mid 2001 Mid 2011 % Point Change 2001-11 Local Authority Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Vacancy Vacancy Vacancy Darlington 44,420 48,785 4,365 9.8% 4.6% 4.3% -0.3% Hartlepool 40,165 42,090 1,925 4.8% 4.9% 4.0% -0.9% Middlesbrough 60,265 60,180 -85 -0.1% 6.1% 4.9% -1.2% Redcar & Cleveland 59,930 61,985 2,055 3.4% 4.1% 3.8% -0.3% Stockton-on-Tees 77,420 82,265 4,845 6.3% 4.2% 3.8% -0.4% Tees Valley 282,200 295,305 13,105 4.6% 4.7% 4.1% -0.6% England & Wales 22,538,600 24,429,600 1,891,000 8.4% 3.9% 4.4% 0.5% Source : E&W 2001 Census, 2011 Census Estimates. TV Local Authorities: Census based rolled forwards to Mid Year (TVU) - Mid 2001 includes an adjustment following the findings of the Local Authority Studies which added population for Mid 2001 to Hartlepool, Middlesbrough and Stockton-on-Tees. LA Study details here.

5.2 The number of dwellings in Darlington increased faster than England & Wales as a whole, while Middlesbrough experienced a very small decrease.

5.3 Vacancy rates fell in all the Tees Valley Authorities. This was equivalent to 1,100 dwellings moving from being vacant to becoming occupied. This went against the national trend where a 0.5% percentage point rise was seen, equivalent to 185,500 occupied households becoming vacant. The improvement in vacancy rate was highest in Middlesbrough where rates fell from 6.1% to 4.9%; equivalent to an extra 730 occupied households.

6 Local Authority Households and Average Household Size Changes

6.1 Table 2 below shows the change in the number of households and change in average household size (AHS).

Table 2 – Local Authority Household and Average Household Size Change

Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Change 2001-11 % Change 2001-11 Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Change 2001-11 % Change 2001-11 Local Authority Households Households Households Households Household Size Household Size Household Size Household Size Darlington 42,385 46,685 4,300 10.1% 2.27 2.23 -0.04 -1.6% Hartlepool 38,210 40,410 2,200 5.8% 2.34 2.26 -0.08 -3.5% Middlesbrough 56,580 57,225 645 1.1% 2.46 2.38 -0.08 -3.4% Redcar & Cleveland 57,460 59,615 2,155 3.8% 2.40 2.25 -0.15 -6.3% Stockton-on-Tees 74,185 79,135 4,950 6.7% 2.44 2.38 -0.06 -2.6% Tees Valley 268,820 283,070 14,250 5.3% 2.39 2.31 -0.09 -3.6% England & Wales 21,660,500 23,366,044 1,705,544 7.9% 2.36 2.36 0.00 -0.1% Source : E&W 2001 Census, 2011 Census Estimates. TV Local Authorities: Census based rolled forwards to Mid Year (TVU) - Mid 2001 includes an adjustment following the findings of the Local Authority Studies which added population for Mid 2001 to Hartlepool, Middlesbrough and Stockton-on-Tees. LA Study details here.

6.2 The number of households for all Tees Valley Local Authorities increased faster than the numbers of dwellings between 2001 and 2011 and explains why vacancy rates fell – see Table 1 above.

6.3 Average household size fell in all Tees Valley Local Authorities; i.e. the household population has grown slower than the number of households. Nationally, there was virtually no change to AHS so household population grew at the same rate as households.

7 Ward level Dwelling and Household change in the Tees Valley

7.1 Dwellings - Table 3 below shows the 10 Wards which experienced the highest percentage growth in dwelling numbers between Mid 2001 and Mid 2011.

Page 3 of 29

Table 3 – Wards with highest % dwelling growth in the Tees Valley

Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Total Dwellings Total Dwellings Difference in Dwellings % Difference in Dwellings D Faverdale 685 1,255 570 83% S Ingleby Barwick East 2,640 3,945 1,305 49% H Hart 2,325 3,470 1,145 49% S Northern Parishes 935 1,370 435 47% D Middleton St. George 1,490 1,950 460 31% S Ingleby Barwick West 2,880 3,765 885 31% D Heighington and Coniscliffe 1,275 1,660 385 30% R Longbeck 2,395 2,965 570 24% M Linthorpe 3,275 3,930 655 20% R Skelton 2,790 3,335 545 20%

7.2 As expected, the main driver for growth has been new developments. Each Local Authority has had one or two key sites, most of which, though not all, are reflected in the above list.  Darlington saw the largest increase with its main developments in Faverdale (Faverdale Ward) and Firthmoor (Eastbourne Ward). Rural Wards also saw strong growth in Middleton St. George and Heighington & Coniscliffe.  Hartlepool saw increases through large developments such as Throston (Hart Ward) and Wynyard, which is split between Rural West (Hartlepool) and Northern Parishes, Stockton-on-Tees.  Middlesbrough – growth was seen in Linthorpe Ward (old hospital site) and University Ward.  Redcar & Cleveland – Northern Skelton (Skelton Ward) and Mickledales which is mainly in Longbeck Ward.  Stockton-on-Tees - Ingleby Barwick continued to grow and both Wards Ingleby Barwick East and Ingleby Barwick West grew significantly. Wynyard (Northern Parishes Ward) grew mainly on the Stockton-on-Tees side of the Local Authority boundary.

7.3 A full list, by each Local Authority, is available in Appendix 2 and can also be downloaded from the TVU web-site.

7.4 Table 4 below shows the 10 Wards which experienced the largest percentage decline in dwelling numbers between Mid 2001 and Mid 2011.

Table 4 – Wards with largest % dwelling decline in the Tees Valley

Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Total Dwellings Total Dwellings Difference in Dwellings % Difference in Dwellings R South Bank 3,575 2,840 -735 -21% R Grangetown 2,530 2,135 -395 -16% M Ayresome 3,030 2,680 -350 -12% M Beckfield 2,625 2,325 -300 -11% S Hardwick 3,485 3,105 -380 -11% M Clairville 2,590 2,360 -230 -9% H Victoria 4,745 4,330 -415 -9% M Middlehaven 2,495 2,295 -200 -8% M Hemlington 2,870 2,650 -220 -8% M Gresham 4,645 4,330 -315 -7%

Page 4 of 29

7.5 The main areas with a net loss in housing and resulting loss in population between 2001 and 2011 were as follows:-  Hartlepool - North of the Town Centre affecting Jesmond Ward and Victoria Ward.  Middlesbrough – SW of Town Centre (Gresham Ward), Marton Grove (Clairville Ward), Beckfield Ward and Whinney Banks (Ayresome Ward),  Redcar & Cleveland – South Bank and Grangetown.  Stockton-on-Tees – Hardwick and Newtown.

7.6 Clearances have an impact on the location of population. If the cleared sites are not fully redeveloped then there will be a net loss of population, who will move elsewhere. A full list for each Ward by Local Authority is available in Appendix 2 and can also be downloaded from the TVU web-site.

7.7 Households - Table 5 below shows the 10 Wards which experienced the highest percentage growth in household numbers between Mid 2001 and Mid 2011.

Table 5 – Wards with largest % household growth in the Tees Valley

Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Occupied Households Difference in Households % Difference Total Households D Faverdale 660 1,205 545 83% S Ingleby Barwick East 2,615 3,830 1,215 46% H Hart 2,270 3,320 1,050 46% S Northern Parishes 905 1,285 380 42% D Middleton St. George 1,425 1,885 460 32% S Ingleby Barwick West 2,840 3,705 865 30% D Heighington and Coniscliffe 1,230 1,585 355 29% R Longbeck 2,345 2,915 570 24% M University 1,865 2,315 450 24% R Skelton 2,615 3,200 585 22%

7.8 Nine of the 10 Wards with the largest % household growth are the same as those with the largest % dwelling growth. Only Linthorpe Ward, Middlesbrough has dropped out and is replaced by University Ward, Middlesbrough. The same explanation as in 7.2 applies here.

Table 6 – Wards with largest % household decline in the Tees Valley

Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Occupied Households Difference in Households % Difference Total Households R South Bank 3,315 2,760 -555 -17% R Grangetown 2,310 2,050 -260 -11% M Beckfield 2,450 2,235 -215 -9% M Clairville 2,445 2,235 -210 -9% H Jesmond 3,990 3,735 -255 -6% S Hardwick 3,160 2,980 -180 -6% H Victoria 4,230 4,005 -225 -5% M Park End 2,665 2,530 -135 -5% M Gresham 3,955 3,765 -190 -5% M Ayresome 2,700 2,585 -115 -4%

7.9 Eight of the 10 Wards with the largest % household decline are the same as those with the largest % dwelling decline. Middlehaven and Hemlington Wards, Middlebrough have dropped out and are replaced by Jesmond Ward, Hartlepool and Park End Ward, Middlesbrough. The same explanation as in 7.5 applies here.

Page 5 of 29

7.10 A full list for each Ward by Local Authority is available in Appendix 3 and can be downloaded from the TVU web-site here.

8 Vacancy Rates in Tees Valley Wards

8.1 Vacancy rates are calculated as the proportion of household spaces with no usual residents divided by the total number of household spaces. Figures for the Wards with the highest vacancy rates are shown in Table 7 below.

Table 7 – Wards with the highest vacancy rates

Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Total Dwellings Occupied Households Vacant Dwellings Vacancy Rate Vacancy Rate M Gresham 4,330 3,765 565 13.0% 14.9% M Middlehaven 2,295 2,045 250 10.9% 15.2% S Parkfield and Oxbridge 3,605 3,245 360 10.0% 11.9% R Coatham 2,960 2,680 280 9.5% 9.4% S Stockton Town Centre 3,450 3,130 320 9.3% 12.6% M University 2,545 2,315 230 9.0% 16.2% D Northgate 2,430 2,225 205 8.4% 10.2% M North Ormesby and Brambles Farm 3,065 2,825 240 7.8% 8.5% H Victoria 4,330 4,005 325 7.5% 10.9% D Central 2,295 2,125 170 7.4% 8.2%

8.2 Three of the 106 Wards in the Tees Valley had a vacancy rate of over 10% in Mid 2011. Gresham Ward, Middlesbrough Ward had the highest proportion of vacant households with 13%. These Wards are all areas clustered around town centres.

8.3 Areas with high vacancy in Mid 2001 have tended to remain high in Mid 2011. The Ward which had the largest percentage point increase in vacancy since Mid 2001 was Marton Ward, Middlesbrough which increased from 2.3% to 6.9%.

Table 8 – Wards with the lowest vacancy rates

Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Total Dwellings Occupied Households Vacant Dwellings Vacancy Rate Vacancy Rate M Coulby Newham 3,890 3,830 60 1.5% 1.5% S Fairfield 2,560 2,520 40 1.6% 1.6% S Ingleby Barwick West 3,765 3,705 60 1.6% 1.4% D Haughton West 2,185 2,150 35 1.6% 1.8% R Longbeck 2,965 2,915 50 1.7% 2.1% H Fens & Rossmere 3,975 3,905 70 1.8% 1.4% M Ladgate 2,390 2,345 45 1.9% 2.3% R West Dyke 3,145 3,085 60 1.9% 3.3% M Brookfield 2,535 2,485 50 2.0% 2.4% M Nunthorpe 1,940 1,900 40 2.1% 1.4%

8.4 The Wards with the lowest vacancy rates appear to be generally outside the town centres, though not rural areas, and they tend to be Wards with higher proportions of detached and semi-detached houses.

8.5 The Wards with the lowest vacancy rates in Mid 2011 are very similar to those in Mid 2001.

8.6 The Ward with the largest percentage point improvement in vacancy was in Ayresome Ward, Middlesbrough which moved from 10.9% in Mid 2001 down to 3.5% in Mid 2011.

Page 6 of 29

9 Average Household Size in Tees Valley Wards

9.1 Average Household size is the total household population divided by the total number of occupied households.

Table 9 – Wards with the largest Average Household Size

Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Household Population Average Household Size Average Household Size S Ingleby Barwick West 3,705 10,820 2.92 2.83 M University 2,315 6,210 2.68 2.95 S Ingleby Barwick East 3,830 10,240 2.67 2.80 S Northern Parishes 1,285 3,365 2.62 2.61 M Linthorpe 3,755 9,685 2.58 2.60 M Nunthorpe 1,900 4,810 2.53 2.66 M Ayresome 2,585 6,535 2.53 2.58 S Grangefield 2,645 6,665 2.52 2.64 M Thorntree 2,480 6,240 2.52 2.51 H Hart 3,320 8,255 2.49 2.57

9.2 The Wards with the highest AHS are mainly areas with new developments with high proportions of detached and semi-detached houses, which tend to be outside the town centre areas and areas with higher proportions of families with children. University Ward is an exception as it has a high proportion of student households.

9.3 Wards with high AHS in Mid 2001 are still more or less the same Wards in Mid 2011.

Table 10 - Wards with the smallest Average Household Size

Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Household Population Average Household Size Average Household Size D Central 2,125 3,985 1.88 1.93 R Coatham 2,680 5,300 1.98 2.11 H Headland & Harbour 3,795 7,515 1.98 2.04 R Saltburn 2,870 5,720 1.99 2.20 S Stockton Town Centre 3,130 6,325 2.02 1.99 D Pierremont 2,665 5,410 2.03 2.13 D North Road 2,940 5,985 2.04 2.09 D Bank Top 1,875 3,840 2.05 2.11 D Northgate 2,225 4,620 2.08 2.13 R Guisborough 3,555 7,460 2.10 2.23

9.4 These Wards are areas with higher proportions of terraces and flats and therefore single person households.

9.5 Again, Wards with low AHS in Mid 2001 are still more or less the same Wards in Mid 2011. This suggests that changes to the existing mix of housing types within Wards have little impact on AHS over the medium term.

10 Appendix Information

10.1 Appendix 1 gives the ONS definitions for household spaces, dwellings and occupied households.

Page 7 of 29

10.2 Appendix 2 gives a Ward breakdown of the dwelling change and vacancy rate for each of the Tees Valley Local Authorities.

10.3 Appendix 3 gives a Ward breakdown of the household change and average household size for each of the Tees Valley Local Authorities.

10.4 Appendix 4 shows a thematic map for each of the Tees Valley Local Authorities highlighting areas of high and low vacancy rates.

10.5 Appendix 5 shows a thematic map for each of the Tees Valley Local Authorities highlighting areas of high and low average household size.

10.6 All the data presented here can be viewed or downloaded from our “Information Hub” on the TVU web-site.

11 Future work

11.1 ONS released more detailed information at the end of January and TVU will start working on analyses to identify key changes in the Tees Valley between the Censuses of 2001 and 2011. Progress and useful links on the 2011 Census can be found on our web-site here.

Piers Elias Demography and Modelling Officer Tees Valley Unlimited 05/03/2013 F:\I&F Reports\Piers\TVU Changes in Ward Dwell HHld between Censuses.docx

Page 8 of 29

Appendix 1 - ONS Definitions [Back to report]

Household Space  A household space is the accommodation used or available for use by an individual household.  Household spaces are identified separately in census results as those with at least one usual resident, and those that do not have any usual residents.  A household space with no usual residents may still be used by short-term residents, visitors who were present on census night, or a combination of short-term residents and visitors.  Vacant household spaces and household spaces that are used as second addresses are also classified in census results as household spaces with no usual residents.

Dwellings  “A dwelling is a unit of accommodation in which all rooms - including the kitchen, bathroom and toilet - are behind a door that only that household can use.  A dwelling may comprise one or more household spaces (the accommodation used or available for use by an individual household).  A dwelling may be classified as shared or unshared. A dwelling is shared if: o the household spaces it contains have the accommodation type ‘part of a converted or shared house’ o not all of the rooms (including kitchen, bathroom and toilet, if any) are behind a door that only that household can use, and o there is at least one other such household space at the same address with which it can be combined to form the shared dwelling. o Dwellings that do not meet these conditions are unshared dwellings.”

Occupied Households “A household is defined as one person living alone, or a group of people (not necessarily related) living at the same address who share cooking facilities and share a living room or sitting room or dining area

A household must contain at least one person whose place of usual residence is at the address. A group of short-term residents living together is not classified as a household, and neither is a group of people at an address where only visitors are staying.”

Vacancy Rate This is calculated as the ratio of vacant household spaces to the total number of household spaces, usually expressed as a percentage. Total Household Spaces includes Shared dwellings.

Average Household Size (AHS) This is the resident household population (i.e. excluding the Communal Establishment population) divided by the total number of occupied households.

Household Population, and hence AHS, is not only driven by net housing change but is also affected by residents living in communal establishments, such as student accommodation, care homes, hospitals and prisons.

Page 9 of 29

APPENDIX 2 – Darlington Wards - Dwelling and Vacancy Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Total Dwellings Total Dwellings Occupied Households Occupied Households % Difference in Dwellings Vacant Dwellings Vacancy Rate Vacancy Rate D Bank Top 1,845 1,990 1,730 1,875 7.9% 115 5.8% 6.2% D Central 1,950 2,295 1,790 2,125 17.7% 170 7.4% 8.2% D Cockerton East 2,180 2,315 2,110 2,260 6.2% 55 2.4% 3.2% D Cockerton West 1,950 1,960 1,880 1,880 0.5% 80 4.1% 3.6% D College 1,645 1,955 1,550 1,850 18.8% 105 5.4% 5.8% D Eastbourne 2,380 2,840 2,305 2,760 19.3% 80 2.8% 3.2% D Faverdale 685 1,255 660 1,205 83.2% 50 4.0% 3.6% D Harrowgate Hill 2,490 2,595 2,410 2,510 4.2% 85 3.3% 3.2% D Haughton East 1,765 1,830 1,710 1,785 3.7% 45 2.5% 3.1% D Haughton North 1,525 1,585 1,495 1,545 3.9% 40 2.5% 2.0% D Haughton West 2,245 2,185 2,205 2,150 -2.7% 35 1.6% 1.8% D Heighington and Coniscliffe 1,275 1,660 1,230 1,585 30.2% 75 4.5% 3.5% D Hummersknott 1,485 1,470 1,455 1,435 -1.0% 35 2.4% 2.0% D Hurworth 1,490 1,665 1,430 1,610 11.7% 55 3.3% 4.0% D Lascelles 1,630 1,910 1,555 1,850 17.2% 60 3.1% 4.6% D Lingfield 1,605 1,750 1,535 1,705 9.0% 45 2.6% 4.4% D Middleton St. George 1,490 1,950 1,425 1,885 30.9% 65 3.3% 4.4% D Mowden 1,630 1,725 1,610 1,680 5.8% 45 2.6% 1.2% D North Road 3,085 3,115 2,875 2,940 1.0% 175 5.6% 6.8% D Northgate 2,160 2,430 1,940 2,225 12.5% 205 8.4% 10.2% D Park East 2,790 2,935 2,605 2,730 5.2% 205 7.0% 6.6% D Park West 1,605 1,640 1,535 1,580 2.2% 60 3.7% 4.4% D Pierremont 2,690 2,835 2,580 2,665 5.4% 170 6.0% 4.1% D Sadberge and Whessoe 825 895 765 850 8.5% 45 5.0% 7.3% D Darlington Total 44,420 48,785 42,385 46,685 9.8% 2,100 4.3% 4.6% TV Tees Valley Total 282,200 295,305 268,820 283,070 4.6% 12,235 4.1% 4.7% E&W England & Wales 22,538,600 24,429,600 21,660,500 23,366,000 8.4% 1,063,600 4.4% 3.9%

Page 10 of 29

APPENDIX 2 – Hartlepool Wards - Dwelling and Vacancy Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Page 11 of 29

APPENDIX 2 – Middlesbrough Wards - Dwelling and Vacancy Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Total Dwellings Total Dwellings Occupied Households Occupied Households % Difference in Dwellings Vacant Dwellings Vacancy Rate Vacancy Rate M Acklam 2,410 2,560 2,340 2,495 6.2% 65 2.5% 2.9% M Ayresome 3,030 2,680 2,700 2,585 -11.6% 95 3.5% 10.9% M Beckfield 2,625 2,325 2,450 2,235 -11.4% 90 3.9% 6.7% M Beechwood 2,440 2,590 2,300 2,425 6.1% 165 6.4% 5.7% M Brookfield 2,530 2,535 2,470 2,485 0.2% 50 2.0% 2.4% M Clairville 2,590 2,360 2,445 2,235 -8.9% 125 5.3% 5.6% M Coulby Newham 3,715 3,890 3,660 3,830 4.7% 60 1.5% 1.5% M Gresham 4,645 4,330 3,955 3,765 -6.8% 565 13.0% 14.9% M Hemlington 2,870 2,650 2,665 2,585 -7.7% 65 2.5% 7.1% M Kader 2,155 2,185 2,125 2,115 1.4% 70 3.2% 1.4% M Ladgate 2,400 2,390 2,345 2,345 -0.4% 45 1.9% 2.3% M Linthorpe 3,275 3,930 3,175 3,755 20.0% 175 4.5% 3.1% M North Ormesby and Brambles Farm 3,180 3,065 2,910 2,825 -3.6% 240 7.8% 8.5% M Marton 1,980 2,170 1,935 2,020 9.6% 150 6.9% 2.3% M Marton West 2,170 2,260 2,155 2,205 4.1% 55 2.4% 0.7% M Middlehaven 2,495 2,295 2,115 2,045 -8.0% 250 10.9% 15.2% M Nunthorpe 1,835 1,940 1,810 1,900 5.7% 40 2.1% 1.4% M Pallister 2,640 2,555 2,555 2,475 -3.2% 80 3.1% 3.2% M Park, Middlesbrough 2,330 2,445 2,220 2,345 4.9% 100 4.1% 4.7% M Park End 2,760 2,630 2,665 2,530 -4.7% 100 3.8% 3.4% M Stainton and Thornton 1,285 1,280 1,220 1,230 -0.4% 50 3.9% 5.1% M Thorntree 2,680 2,570 2,500 2,480 -4.1% 90 3.5% 6.7% M University 2,225 2,545 1,865 2,315 14.4% 230 9.0% 16.2% M Middlesbrough Total 60,265 60,180 56,580 57,225 -0.1% 2,955 4.9% 6.1% TV Tees Valley Total 282,200 295,305 268,820 283,070 4.6% 12,235 4.1% 4.7% E&W England & Wales 22,538,600 24,429,600 21,660,500 23,366,000 8.4% 1,063,600 4.4% 3.9%

Page 12 of 29

APPENDIX 2 – Redcar & Cleveland Wards - Dwelling and Vacancy Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Total Dwellings Total Dwellings Occupied Households Occupied Households % Difference in Dwellings Vacant Dwellings Vacancy Rate Vacancy Rate R Brotton 2,980 3,145 2,805 2,995 5.5% 150 4.8% 5.9% R Coatham 2,610 2,960 2,365 2,680 13.4% 280 9.5% 9.4% R Dormanstown 3,080 3,035 3,000 2,950 -1.5% 85 2.8% 2.6% R Eston 3,270 3,345 3,180 3,270 2.3% 75 2.2% 2.8% R Grangetown 2,530 2,135 2,310 2,050 -15.6% 85 4.0% 8.7% R Guisborough 3,355 3,705 3,245 3,555 10.4% 150 4.0% 3.3% R Hutton 2,975 3,135 2,925 3,055 5.4% 80 2.6% 1.7% R Kirkleatham 3,200 3,285 3,115 3,165 2.7% 120 3.7% 2.7% R Lockwood 925 985 880 925 6.5% 60 6.1% 4.9% R Loftus 3,045 3,000 2,835 2,795 -1.5% 205 6.8% 6.9% R Longbeck 2,395 2,965 2,345 2,915 23.8% 50 1.7% 2.1% R Newcomen 1,990 1,910 1,950 1,870 -4.0% 40 2.1% 2.0% R Normanby 2,990 3,105 2,920 3,025 3.8% 80 2.6% 2.3% R Ormesby 2,765 2,805 2,655 2,680 1.4% 125 4.5% 4.0% R St. Germain's 2,870 2,955 2,820 2,865 3.0% 90 3.0% 1.7% R Saltburn 2,720 3,075 2,575 2,870 13.1% 205 6.7% 5.3% R Skelton 2,790 3,335 2,615 3,200 19.5% 135 4.0% 6.3% R South Bank 3,575 2,840 3,315 2,760 -20.6% 80 2.8% 7.3% R Teesville 2,935 3,045 2,875 2,955 3.7% 90 3.0% 2.0% R West Dyke 3,015 3,145 2,915 3,085 4.3% 60 1.9% 3.3% R Westworth 1,860 1,985 1,805 1,930 6.7% 55 2.8% 3.0% R Zetland 2,055 2,090 2,010 2,020 1.7% 70 3.3% 2.2% R Redcar & Cleveland Total 59,930 61,985 57,460 59,615 3.4% 2,370 3.8% 4.1% TV Tees Valley Total 282,200 295,305 268,820 283,070 4.6% 12,235 4.1% 4.7% E&W England & Wales 22,538,600 24,429,600 21,660,500 23,366,000 8.4% 1,063,600 4.4% 3.9%

Page 13 of 29

APPENDIX 2 – Stockton-on-Tees Wards - Dwelling and Vacancy Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Total Dwellings Total Dwellings Occupied Households Occupied Households % Difference in Dwellings Vacant Dwellings Vacancy Rate Vacancy Rate S Billingham Central 3,170 3,250 3,090 3,145 2.5% 105 3.2% 2.5% S Billingham East 3,075 3,090 2,985 2,995 0.5% 95 3.1% 2.9% S Billingham North 3,565 3,805 3,495 3,720 6.7% 85 2.2% 2.0% S Billingham South 2,830 2,855 2,695 2,745 0.9% 110 3.9% 4.8% S Billingham West 2,560 2,540 2,535 2,485 -0.8% 55 2.2% 1.0% S Bishopsgarth and Elm Tree 2,705 2,905 2,635 2,845 7.4% 60 2.1% 2.6% S Eaglescliffe 4,105 4,535 4,015 4,370 10.5% 165 3.6% 2.2% S Fairfield 2,570 2,560 2,530 2,520 -0.4% 40 1.6% 1.6% S Grangefield 2,520 2,705 2,475 2,645 7.3% 60 2.2% 1.8% S Hardwick 3,485 3,105 3,160 2,980 -10.9% 125 4.0% 9.3% S Hartburn 2,830 2,830 2,770 2,765 0.0% 65 2.3% 2.1% S Ingleby Barwick East 2,640 3,945 2,615 3,830 49.4% 115 2.9% 0.9% S Ingleby Barwick West 2,880 3,765 2,840 3,705 30.7% 60 1.6% 1.4% S Mandale and Victoria 4,625 4,880 4,365 4,635 5.5% 245 5.0% 5.6% S Newtown 3,290 3,155 3,085 2,990 -4.1% 165 5.2% 6.2% S Northern Parishes 935 1,370 905 1,285 46.5% 85 6.2% 3.2% S Norton North 3,105 3,210 2,965 3,075 3.4% 135 4.2% 4.5% S Norton South 3,155 3,080 2,930 2,965 -2.4% 115 3.7% 7.1% S Norton West 2,670 2,890 2,635 2,810 8.2% 80 2.8% 1.3% S Parkfield and Oxbridge 3,230 3,605 2,845 3,245 11.6% 360 10.0% 11.9% S Roseworth 2,990 3,015 2,935 2,945 0.8% 70 2.3% 1.8% S Stainsby Hill 2,850 2,790 2,775 2,730 -2.1% 60 2.2% 2.6% S Stockton Town Centre 3,400 3,450 2,970 3,130 1.5% 320 9.3% 12.6% S Village 2,775 3,165 2,715 3,070 14.1% 95 3.0% 2.2% S Western Parishes 1,260 1,410 1,190 1,360 11.9% 50 3.5% 5.6% S Yarm 4,200 4,355 4,030 4,145 3.7% 210 4.8% 4.0% S Stockton-on-Tees Total 77,420 82,265 74,185 79,135 6.3% 3,130 3.8% 4.2% TV Tees Valley Total 282,200 295,305 268,820 283,070 4.6% 12,235 4.1% 4.7% E&W England & Wales 22,538,600 24,429,600 21,660,500 23,366,000 8.4% 1,063,600 4.4% 3.9%

Page 14 of 29

APPENDIX 3 – Darlington Wards – Occupied Households and Average Household Size Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Occupied Households % Diff Occupied Households Household Population Average Household Size Average Household Size D Bank Top 1,730 1,875 8.4% 3,840 2.05 2.11 D Central 1,790 2,125 18.7% 3,985 1.88 1.93 D Cockerton East 2,110 2,260 7.1% 5,385 2.38 2.41 D Cockerton West 1,880 1,880 0.0% 4,110 2.19 2.20 D College 1,550 1,850 19.4% 4,090 2.21 2.31 D Eastbourne 2,305 2,760 19.7% 6,490 2.35 2.21 D Faverdale 660 1,205 82.6% 2,975 2.47 2.30 D Harrowgate Hill 2,410 2,510 4.1% 5,990 2.39 2.43 D Haughton East 1,710 1,785 4.4% 4,125 2.31 2.38 D Haughton North 1,495 1,545 3.3% 3,340 2.16 2.30 D Haughton West 2,205 2,150 -2.5% 5,105 2.37 2.47 D Heighington and Coniscliffe 1,230 1,585 28.9% 3,860 2.44 2.37 D Hummersknott 1,455 1,435 -1.4% 3,360 2.34 2.38 D Hurworth 1,430 1,610 12.6% 3,640 2.26 2.35 D Lascelles 1,555 1,850 19.0% 4,105 2.22 2.20 D Lingfield 1,535 1,705 11.1% 3,730 2.19 2.30 D Middleton St. George 1,425 1,885 32.3% 4,455 2.36 2.47 D Mowden 1,610 1,680 4.3% 3,705 2.21 2.26 D North Road 2,875 2,940 2.3% 5,985 2.04 2.09 D Northgate 1,940 2,225 14.7% 4,620 2.08 2.13 D Park East 2,605 2,730 4.8% 6,245 2.29 2.30 D Park West 1,535 1,580 2.9% 3,600 2.28 2.24 D Pierremont 2,580 2,665 3.3% 5,410 2.03 2.13 D Sadberge and Whessoe 765 850 11.1% 1,985 2.34 2.40 D Darlington Total 42,385 46,685 10.1% 104,135 2.23 2.27 TV Tees Valley Total 268,820 283,070 5.3% 653,455 2.31 2.39 E&W England & Wales 21,660,500 23,366,000 7.9% 55,071,113 2.36 2.36

Page 15 of 29

APPENDIX 3 – Hartlepool Wards - Occupied Households and Average Household Size Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Occupied Households % Diff Occupied Households Household Population Average Household Size Average Household Size H Burn Valley 3,730 3,810 2.1% 8,600 2.26 2.36 H De Bruce 3,230 3,385 4.8% 7,850 2.32 2.31 H Fens & Rossmere 3,780 3,905 3.3% 8,670 2.22 2.34 H Foggy Furze 3,645 3,535 -3.0% 8,010 2.27 2.46 H Hart 2,270 3,320 46.3% 8,255 2.49 2.57 H Headland & Harbour 3,295 3,795 15.2% 7,515 1.98 2.04 H Jesmond 3,990 3,735 -6.4% 8,430 2.26 2.39 H Manor House 4,310 4,445 3.1% 9,880 2.22 2.31 H Rural West 2,545 2,885 13.4% 6,940 2.41 2.47 H Seaton 3,185 3,590 12.7% 8,455 2.36 2.38 H Victoria 4,230 4,005 -5.3% 8,530 2.13 2.21 H Hartlepool Total 38,210 40,410 5.8% 91,135 2.26 2.34 TV Tees Valley Total 268,820 283,070 5.3% 653,455 2.31 2.39 E&W England & Wales 21,660,500 23,366,000 7.9% 55,071,113 2.36 2.36

Page 16 of 29

APPENDIX 3 – Middlesbrough Wards - Occupied Households and Average Household Size Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Occupied Households % Diff Occupied Households Household Population Average Household Size Average Household Size M Acklam 2,340 2,495 6.6% 6,010 2.41 2.50 M Ayresome 2,700 2,585 -4.3% 6,535 2.53 2.58 M Beckfield 2,450 2,235 -8.8% 4,730 2.12 2.07 M Beechwood 2,300 2,425 5.4% 5,610 2.31 2.28 M Brookfield 2,470 2,485 0.6% 5,710 2.30 2.50 M Clairville 2,445 2,235 -8.6% 5,265 2.36 2.39 M Coulby Newham 3,660 3,830 4.6% 8,820 2.30 2.43 M Gresham 3,955 3,765 -4.8% 8,530 2.27 2.54 M Hemlington 2,665 2,585 -3.0% 5,920 2.29 2.36 M Kader 2,125 2,115 -0.5% 5,065 2.39 2.44 M Ladgate 2,345 2,345 0.0% 5,535 2.36 2.49 M Linthorpe 3,175 3,755 18.3% 9,685 2.58 2.60 M North Ormesby and Brambles Farm 2,910 2,825 -2.9% 6,275 2.22 2.34 M Marton 1,935 2,020 4.4% 4,700 2.33 2.59 M Marton West 2,155 2,205 2.3% 5,260 2.39 2.46 M Middlehaven 2,115 2,045 -3.3% 4,375 2.14 2.14 M Nunthorpe 1,810 1,900 5.0% 4,810 2.53 2.66 M Pallister 2,555 2,475 -3.1% 6,015 2.43 2.44 M Park, Middlesbrough 2,220 2,345 5.6% 5,790 2.47 2.51 M Park End 2,665 2,530 -5.1% 6,215 2.46 2.52 M Stainton and Thornton 1,220 1,230 0.8% 2,795 2.27 2.33 M Thorntree 2,500 2,480 -0.8% 6,240 2.52 2.51 M University 1,865 2,315 24.1% 6,210 2.68 2.95 M Middlesbrough Total 56,580 57,225 1.1% 136,100 2.38 2.46 TV Tees Valley Total 268,820 283,070 5.3% 653,455 2.31 2.39 E&W England & Wales 21,660,500 23,366,000 7.9% 55,071,113 2.36 2.36

Page 17 of 29

APPENDIX 3 – Redcar & Cleveland Wards - Occupied Households and Average Household Size Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Occupied Households % Diff Occupied Households Household Population Average Household Size Average Household Size R Brotton 2,805 2,995 6.8% 6,970 2.33 2.52 R Coatham 2,365 2,680 13.3% 5,300 1.98 2.11 R Dormanstown 3,000 2,950 -1.7% 6,735 2.28 2.42 R Eston 3,180 3,270 2.8% 6,880 2.10 2.32 R Grangetown 2,310 2,050 -11.3% 5,035 2.46 2.56 R Guisborough 3,245 3,555 9.6% 7,460 2.10 2.23 R Hutton 2,925 3,055 4.4% 7,115 2.33 2.55 R Kirkleatham 3,115 3,165 1.6% 6,935 2.19 2.24 R Lockwood 880 925 5.1% 2,010 2.17 2.38 R Loftus 2,835 2,795 -1.4% 6,300 2.25 2.47 R Longbeck 2,345 2,915 24.3% 7,055 2.42 2.56 R Newcomen 1,950 1,870 -4.1% 4,340 2.32 2.48 R Normanby 2,920 3,025 3.6% 6,905 2.28 2.44 R Ormesby 2,655 2,680 0.9% 5,940 2.22 2.38 R St. Germain's 2,820 2,865 1.6% 6,090 2.13 2.27 R Saltburn 2,575 2,870 11.5% 5,720 1.99 2.20 R Skelton 2,615 3,200 22.4% 7,465 2.33 2.44 R South Bank 3,315 2,760 -16.7% 6,440 2.33 2.40 R Teesville 2,875 2,955 2.8% 6,595 2.23 2.37 R West Dyke 2,915 3,085 5.8% 7,470 2.42 2.54 R Westworth 1,805 1,930 6.9% 4,595 2.38 2.58 R Zetland 2,010 2,020 0.5% 4,560 2.26 2.36 R Redcar & Cleveland Total 57,460 59,615 3.8% 133,915 2.25 2.40 TV Tees Valley Total 268,820 283,070 5.3% 653,455 2.31 2.39 E&W England & Wales 21,660,500 23,366,000 7.9% 55,071,113 2.36 2.36

Page 18 of 29

APPENDIX 3 – Stockton-on-Tees Wards - Occupied Households and Average Household Size Change Mid 2001 to Mid 2011

Mid 2001 Total Mid 2011 Total Mid 2011 - Mid 2001 Mid 2011 Mid 2011 Mid 2001 Dist Ward_Name Occupied Households Occupied Households % Diff Occupied Households Household Population Average Household Size Average Household Size S Billingham Central 3,090 3,145 1.8% 7,300 2.32 2.28 S Billingham East 2,985 2,995 0.3% 7,265 2.43 2.41 S Billingham North 3,495 3,720 6.4% 9,115 2.45 2.65 S Billingham South 2,695 2,745 1.9% 6,675 2.43 2.51 S Billingham West 2,535 2,485 -2.0% 5,605 2.26 2.47 S Bishopsgarth and Elm Tree 2,635 2,845 8.0% 6,535 2.30 2.46 S Eaglescliffe 4,015 4,370 8.8% 10,425 2.39 2.53 S Fairfield 2,530 2,520 -0.4% 5,760 2.29 2.49 S Grangefield 2,475 2,645 6.9% 6,665 2.52 2.64 S Hardwick 3,160 2,980 -5.7% 7,115 2.39 2.30 S Hartburn 2,770 2,765 -0.2% 6,550 2.37 2.55 S Ingleby Barwick East 2,615 3,830 46.5% 10,240 2.67 2.80 S Ingleby Barwick West 2,840 3,705 30.5% 10,820 2.92 2.83 S Mandale and Victoria 4,365 4,635 6.2% 10,555 2.28 2.26 S Newtown 3,085 2,990 -3.1% 7,400 2.47 2.35 S Northern Parishes 905 1,285 42.0% 3,365 2.62 2.61 S Norton North 2,965 3,075 3.7% 6,850 2.23 2.27 S Norton South 2,930 2,965 1.2% 6,575 2.22 2.31 S Norton West 2,635 2,810 6.6% 6,295 2.24 2.41 S Parkfield and Oxbridge 2,845 3,245 14.1% 7,365 2.27 2.31 S Roseworth 2,935 2,945 0.3% 7,250 2.46 2.53 S Stainsby Hill 2,775 2,730 -1.6% 6,470 2.37 2.48 S Stockton Town Centre 2,970 3,130 5.4% 6,325 2.02 1.99 S Village 2,715 3,070 13.1% 6,910 2.25 2.32 S Western Parishes 1,190 1,360 14.3% 3,300 2.43 2.55 S Yarm 4,030 4,145 2.9% 9,440 2.28 2.49 S Stockton-on-Tees Total 74,185 79,135 6.7% 188,170 2.38 2.44 TV Tees Valley Total 268,820 283,070 5.3% 653,455 2.31 2.39 E&W England & Wales 21,660,500 23,366,000 7.9% 55,071,113 2.36 2.36

Page 19 of 29

Appendix 4 – Darlington : Map showing the Vacancy Rate by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 20 of 29

Appendix 4 – Hartlepool : Map showing the Vacancy Rate by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 21 of 29

Appendix 4 – Middlesbrough : Map showing the Vacancy Rate by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 22 of 29

Appendix 4 – Redcar & Cleveland : Map showing the Vacancy Rate by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 23 of 29

Appendix 4 – Stockton-on-Tees : Map showing the Vacancy Rate by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 24 of 29

Appendix 5 – Darlington : Map showing the Average Household Size by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 25 of 29

Appendix 5 – Hartlepool : Map showing the Average Household Size by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 26 of 29

Appendix 5 – Middlesbrough : Map showing the Average Household Size by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 27 of 29

Appendix 5 – Redcar & Cleveland : Map showing the Average Household Size by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 28 of 29

Appendix 5 – Stockton-on-Tees : Map showing the Average Household Size by Ward for Mid 2011

Page 29 of 29