Leicestershire population rises by more than 100,000 in last ten years

[davieG]

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/leicestershire-population-rises-more-100000-7290712

 

Find out how your area is changing and growing according to the latest census data

ByHannah RichardsonLocal Democracy Reporter
05:00, 12 JUL 2022

The populations of Leicester and Leicestershire have swollen by more than 100,000 over the last ten years, the most recent census data shows. The figures show most of the local authority areas around the county are have seen above average levels of growth compared to England as a whole.

Data collected on census day in 2021 shows that the population of England has grown by almost 3.5 million people in the last ten years. This is an increase of 6.6 percent between March 2011 and March 2021.

However, the rise in local population numbers is higher, with Harborough experiencing the highest percentage increase of 14.3%, which is more than twice the national average. Only two Leicestershire districts – Oadby and Wigston and Melton – have seen growth below England’s rate.

 

The number of people living in the city has risen from around 329,800 to 368,600. In the county, the population levels have increased from around 650,500 residents to 712,300.

The national census is taken every 10 years. The results are used to help authorities make decisions and plans for delivering and funding local services.

The local population also seems to be getting older with a bigger increase in those aged 65 and over compared to the national average. England as a whole has seen a 20.1 per cent increase in people of this age.

Only one area has more men living in it than women. In Charnwood, there were 91,900 women compared to 92,000 men.

Find out below how the population levels have changed in your local area:

 

Leicester
Leicester has seen an 11.8 per cent growth in its population between 2011 and 2021, taking it from 329,800 residents to 368,600. Of these, 186,500 are women and 182,100 are men.

The rise, which is above the national average means Leicester is now the 19th biggest city in England, up from 21 st in 2011. There has been a 16.9 per cent increase in the number of over 65s living in the city, despite a small drop in the number of 80-89-year-olds.

There has also been an 11 per cent increase in the number of 15-64-year-olds around and an 11.4 per cent increase in the number of under 15s. However, both the 0-4 age ground and the 25-29 age groups have dropped by eight per cent.

 

Blaby
Blaby district's population increased by 9.6 per cent from around 93,900 people in 2011 to 102,900 people in 2021. There are 52,500 women in the district and 50,400 men.

The area has seen its over 65 population increase the most (up 25 per cent) compared to the 15-64 ages group (up five per cent) and the under 15s (up 10 per cent).

 

Charnwood
Charnwood has the biggest population of all the districts and boroughs, although it is around half of that of the city. It grew by 10.7 per cent in the ten years between 2011 and 2021, from 166,100 to 183,900.

There were 91,900 women in the district, compared to 92,000 men. Again, the over 65 population grew the most in the area (up 26.9 per cent), while the 15-64 group increased by seven per cent and the under 15s by 10.2 per cent.

 

Harborough
Harborough has seen the highest overall level of population growth of any district i Leicestershire, up over twice the national rate at 14.3 per cent. This takes the number of residents in the district to 97,600 from 85,400.

Of these, around 49,300 are women and 48,400 are men. Harborough also had the highest increase in the over 65 population at 38.5 per cent.

They also had an increase of 10.1 per cent in the 15-64 age group and an increase of 5.2 per cent for the under 15s.

 

Hinckley and Bosworth
This borough had a population increase of 8.1 per cent, taking it from 105,100 residents to 113,600 – 57,600 women to 56,000 men. Again, a big jump was seen in the over 65 category which grew by 31.4 per cent.

Conversely, the 15-64 age group only grew by 1.7 per cent, with a drop in the number of 15-24-year-olds living there. The number under 15s increased by 7.4 per cent.

 

Melton
Melton Borough was one of the two local authority areas which saw growth below the national average at 2.8 per cent. It also has the smallest population size of all the local areas with 51,800 residents (up from 50,400).

This is split into around 26,500 women and 25,300 men. While Melton saw a reasonably big increase in the older age group (up 29.6 per cent), the borough now has fewer younger people than in 2011.

The 15-64 age group saw a four per cent drop with fewer 15-24-year-olds and 35-49-year-olds than before. The under 15s group also saw a similar decrease at 3.6%, including a 14 per cent drop in 0-4-year-olds in the area.

 

North West Leicestershire
North West Leicestershire had the second highest population growth of all the local areas at 12 per cent. There were 104,700 people living there in 2021 compared to 93,500 in 2011.

There were 53,100 women and 51,600 men in the area when the data was collected. There was a 30 per cent rise in the number of over 65s in the district, with the highest increase in the 70-74 category at 61 per cent.

There was a 9.1 per cent increase in 15-64-year-olds. The under 15s groups so a 5.2 per cent increase.

 

Oadby and Wigston
This area has seen the smallest increase in population size since 2011 at 2.7 per cent. There are now around 57,700 people living there, up from 56,200 in 2011 – 29,800 women and 28,000 men.

There was a moderate increase in the number of over 65s in the area at 13 per cent, while the number of 15-64-year-olds has dropped by 1.7 per cent. This includes a decrease in the number of 15-24-year-olds and of 40-49-year-olds. There has been a 9.3 per cent increase in under-15s, however.

[davieG]

Build it an they will come!

 

 

[The boy Linacre]

1 hour ago, davieG said:

Build it an they will come!

 

 

Well if there is an extra 40k in the city itself, sounds like they will.

[Lako42]

Despite what the above says I'm quite sure they are all in Shepshed judging by the incredible amount of new housing estates that are popping up there each week. 

[davieG]

5 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

Despite what the above says I'm quite sure they are all in Shepshed judging by the incredible amount of new housing estates that are popping up there each week. 

That's happening everywhere, Beware of buying a house overlooking green fields as they'll likely be new housing estates before you can say 'wow what a view'

[CosbehFox]

Not a surprise considering Rutland is Leicestershire 

[MPH]

So that’s a total of more than 1,000,000 in the whole county including the City?

[Voll Blau]

Harborough District Council's tactic of throwing up retirement flats everywhere and making it impossible for any natives to afford to live there is clearly working then. Gerrymandering at its finest.

[MPH]

1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Not a surprise considering Rutland is Leicestershire 

 

have they changed back over again then?

[davieG]

1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Not a surprise considering Rutland is Leicestershire 

Are you sure, I believe it's Unitary Authority although I think we share the same Police Commissioner 

 

Just checked wiki.

 

Rutland (/ˈrʌtlənd/) is a ceremonial county and unitary authority in the East Midlands, England. The county is bounded to the west and north by Leicestershire, to the northeast by Lincolnshire and the southeast by Northamptonshire.

[Free Falling Foxes]

Some will say we are a growing, thriving city.

We're growing certainly and this can only accelerate as more people have more children.

 

Hopefully the infrastructure can keep up as we'll need more schools,  GP's, hospitals and other services.

On top of the housing needs, these services will take yet more land - including greenfield.

 

It cannot continue. As others are mentioning; new estates are cropping up everywhere.

 

Regarding new developments, it should be restricted to brownfield sites only and no more student flats for a few years. Furthermore, prioritise housing for the offspring of those folk who already live here.

 

Developments on fields and existing open land should be an absolute last resort and only after meaninful and sincere consultation with locals.

 

 

[Stadt]

We've had a chronic undersupply of housing for years, we need to be removing barriers to building more housing rather than add to them. Besides, Leicester doesn't have any designated greenbelt land.

[kenny]

20 minutes ago, Stadt said:

We've had a chronic undersupply of housing for years, we need to be removing barriers to building more housing rather than add to them. Besides, Leicester doesn't have any designated greenbelt land.

There is plenty of brownfield sites in the city. SPS has done some good work to get these developments moving.

 

The work at the Waterside and the following works at Corah are both large inner city developments that add over 1500 homes to Leicester.

[Free Falling Foxes]

1 hour ago, Stadt said:

We've had a chronic undersupply of housing for years, we need to be removing barriers to building more housing rather than add to them. Besides, Leicester doesn't have any designated greenbelt land.

If true,  then that is something to be ashamed of and certainly not boasted about nor used as an excuse.

We had used to boast we were the UK's first environmental city, what happened to that?

Edited 12 July 2022 by Free Falling Foxes

[Lako42]

1 hour ago, Stadt said:

We've had a chronic undersupply of housing for years, we need to be removing barriers to building more housing rather than add to them. Besides, Leicester doesn't have any designated greenbelt land.

Leicestershire's wild spaces are being shat on from every direction. 

 

The county split by two motorways for it's entire length and then genuine greenfield land being used to build the worlds largest industrial estates on top of new housing developments everywhere. 

 

Depends which bit of the county you live in but NW Leic has some of the most under pressure countryside going. It's environment is quite different to the rest of the county and it's being lost on a massive scale. 

[Stadt]

2 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

Leicestershire's wild spaces are being shat on from every direction. 

They're fields rather than wild spaces.

 

House price to earnings ratios are out of control because we've paid no attention to stagnant wages and a chronic undersupply of housing. It's regrettable that some fields get tarmac'd over but I'd like to one day afford a house tbh.

[Lako42]

1 minute ago, Stadt said:

I'd like to one day afford a house tbh.

We thought the same, until we lowered our expectations. 

 

These new housing developments aren't creating affordable houses mate. 

[Stadt]

Just now, Lako42 said:

We thought the same, until we lowered our expectations. 

 

These new housing developments aren't creating affordable houses mate. 

Housing is housing, we don't have enough housing stock regardless of what it costs. Because the supply is far outstripped by demand most houses are de facto unaffordable - we need some slack in the housing market.

 

 

[davieG]

Here's some detail on what's meant to be built

 

 

Leicester cannot meet its housing targets - so thousands more will be built in Leicestershire instead
18,700 have been taken off the city's housing target and spread around the districts - here's how each area is affected

ByHannah RichardsonLocal Democracy Reporter
05:00, 18 MAY 2022

Aerial photo of the city centre of Leicester in the UK showing houses and apartment building on a sunny summers day
There is not enough room in Leicester to meet housing targets

Thousands of homes which were due to be built in Leicester have now been moved to districts across Leicestershire because the city simply doesn't have the space to fit them all in. Demand for new homes is now so high that the Government has imposed swingeing housing targets on every local authority in the country.

Leicester City Council was asked to build 39,400 new homes between 2020 and 2036 after the the Government announced that the 20 largest cities in England would need to increase their new housing supply targets by 35%.But less than two years in, the city says it cannot fit them all in - and so 18,700 have been taken off its targets and shared out among the Leicestershire districts instead.

Blaby District Council is taking the biggest share of the city's shortfall at 5,536 more homes which will need to be built between now and 2036. This more than doubles the number of new homes it needs to build in the 16 year period to 10,992.

READ MORE: Developer seeks residents' views on plans for 220 homes and new school in their village

North West Leicestershire District Council is down to take the second highest increase at 5,024. This means the district's target has almost doubled to 10,948.

Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council has taken 2,992 off the city's target, meaning 10,544 need to be built by 2036. Harborough District Council will now be required to build 1,968 more homes taking its total to 10,512.

Charnwood Borough Council had the highest original housing target of all the districts in Leicestershire at 17,776, this will increase by 1,248 to 19,024 homes before 2036. But it will also be asked to meet the need for 23 hectares of new employment space due to an over-supply of employment land and the availability of employment sites and land which is close to the city.

Melton District Council needs to find room for 1,104 extra homes taking its to target to 4,800 homes. Oadby and Wigston will have the smallest share of the re-distributed housing at 1,008 giving it a 2036 target to build 3,840 new homes.

The redistribution, leaves Leicester with a target of 20,700 new homes by 2036. However, as the time period started in 2020, a number of the eight councils will have already built a number of new homes.

All the councils across Leicester and Leicestershire are legally obliged to work together to meet housings targets under the current planning law set by the Government. City mayor, Peter Soulsby said: “We are making enormous efforts to accommodate as much housing and employment land in the city as we can, for example with the ongoing development of Leicester’s Waterside and at Ashton Green.

“However, we simply cannot meet predicted need for all the housing and employment land the Government sets out. That’s why we are immensely grateful to all our neighbouring councils for their constructive attitude to this Statement of Common Ground.

“By working together, we can ensure that agreements about where development takes place stay in the hands of local decision-makers who are accountable to local people.”

In a joint statement, the district, borough, city and county council have said they are looking at plans for how those homes which cannot be accommodated in the city might be distributed. Councillors still need for formally approve the new changes in a vote.

Each area’s share of the unmet need was worked out by considering factors such as the relationship of each district with the city – for example is there are high levels of commuting between the two – the balance of jobs and homes in each district, and whether the homes are deliverable.

Terry Richardson, chair of the Members Advisory Group, said: “This is a significant challenge for Leicester and Leicestershire, but all councils are working together to ensure we do what is best for our local communities. It is important we deliver the housing and employment we need to ensure people have homes to live in and jobs.

“It is equally important that we plan that growth so it is controlled and limits the impact on our environment.” The district and borough council are currently considering the proposals individually, but have been recommended to approve them by the planning steering group overseeing the process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leicestershire towns and villages might not have to accommodate the city’s housing overspill following a U-turn in Parliament last week. However, the announcement was made by a minister who was about to be sacked on behalf of a Government on the verge of implosion.

Now, Leicester City Council and other authorities across the wider county, await for the outcome of the search for a new Prime Minister and the appointment of a new cabinet before they can be sure the changes will be made. Leicester had been asked to build 39,400 new homes between 2020 and 2036 after the Government announced that the 20 largest cities in England would need to increase their new housing targets by 35 per cent.

However, the council said it did not have room for all the homes within its borders. That meant an 18,700 home shortfall would then have been picked up by the districts and boroughs. As neighbouring authorities, they had a legal obligation to work with the city to find space for the developments.

 

For some councils, this meant space would need to be found for around twice as many homes than their own housing targets had set out. In Blaby district, which was apportioned the largest share of the unmet needs, an additional 5,536 more homes were allocated, bringing its target for the 16 year period to 10,992.

However, it now seems the Conservatives - at least those who governed the country until last week's events - are minded to remove this obligation on neighbouring authorities. Michael Gove, the recently deposed Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, said: “We will also end the so-called duty to co-operate, which has often led some urban authorities to offload their responsibility for development on to other areas in a way that has meant that we have had not urban regeneration but suburban sprawl.”

Dr Luke Evans, MP for Bosworth, welcomed the decision, labelling the previous legal duty to co-operate an ‘onerous obligation’. He said: “I was very pleased to hear the Secretary of State confirm that, under the new Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill, this onerous obligation will be removed.

Dr Evans was one of five local MPs who raised concerns with the Government about the overspill of homes which will be forced onto their constituencies as Leicester have been unable to meet their planning numbers. Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council had also criticised the decision to pass the unmet need to the county.

Lead member for housing, Councillor David Bill, said the borough would not be able to cope with its allocation of 2,992 extra homes – the third highest of all the districts. He said: “There are no further brownfield sites available [in the district], they’ve long since been taken up.

“So any additional housing is bound to go out into the countryside. It’ll mean even greater loss of countryside and even more congestion on the roads. We simply don’t have sufficient capacity in the schools, surgeries or the hospital.”

It is not yet known what this change would mean for Leicester City Council or whether any of the districts and boroughs would opt to take on the extra homes without the obligation to do so. LeicestershireLive has approached the city council for more information.

[Footballwipe]

24 minutes ago, Stadt said:

They're fields rather than wild spaces.

 

House price to earnings ratios are out of control because we've paid no attention to stagnant wages and a chronic undersupply of housing. It's regrettable that some fields get tarmac'd over but I'd like to one day afford a house tbh.

It is, but why is it being treated by some more outrageous now than in the 1930s? I was bought up in Braunstone Town, which until just before WWII was a massive field. No-one bemoans the loss of that green space, but as soon as we want to build on green space now, everyone is up in arms.

 

LFE opposed Thorpe Astley, Thorpe Astley opposed New Lubbesthorpe. Chances are most people are living in a house that used to be a lovely, lush green field. Want more housing? Sorry, it's going to have to go where it's allocated unless you elect yourself PM and scrap the policy of building on green spaces altogether. Very much a case of pulling up the drawbridge, though isn't it?

 

At least with large scale developments the infrastructure can be included. Tagging onto villages is just rubbish. Places where schools, doctors, parks and proper amenities can be installed are absolutely vital.

[jonthefox]

It’s the roads that bother me. In twenty years time we could potentially have another 100k cars on the road. And what do we get?. More cycle lanes.

[Free Falling Foxes]

1 hour ago, jonthefox said:

It’s the roads that bother me. In twenty years time we could potentially have another 100k cars on the road. And what do we get?. More cycle lanes.

Excellent.

It may be a dream but more people cycling just might bring about a reduction in car use. That 100k figure you quote could be significantly more if not.

I suspect folk would grumble even more about jams, if that were the case.

[Lako42]

2 hours ago, jonthefox said:

It’s the roads that bother me. In twenty years time we could potentially have another 100k cars on the road. And what do we get?. More cycle lanes.

Ironically it's the short sightedness of this post that amuses me. 

[jonthefox]

9 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

Ironically it's the short sightedness of this post that amuses me. 

How.?

[Sir Shep]

21 hours ago, Lako42 said:

Despite what the above says I'm quite sure they are all in Shepshed judging by the incredible amount of new housing estates that are popping up there each week.