Full details about proposed boundary changes in County Durham have been revealed. 

The Local Government Boundary Commission says Durham County Council should be represented by 98 councillors serving 51 divisions. The current make-up of the region consists of 126 councillors across 63 divisions. 

The region should also have 51 divisions, 12 fewer than there are now, it says. 

This means there will be nine three-councillor divisions, 29 two-councillor divisions and 13 single-councillor divisions. 

Among the most significant changes are a new layout in the Consett area and a revised pattern of divisions for the Teesdale and West Auckland areas. 

How will the recommendations affect you? 

The recommendations will determine how many councillors will serve on Durham County Council. They will also decide which division you vote in, which other communities are in that division, and, in some cases, which parish council ward you vote in. Your division name may also change.

The commission said the revised boundaries will ensure councillors represent the same number of electors, and will help the council work effectively.

The LGBC added: “We consider that our final recommendations will provide for good electoral equality while reflecting community identities and interests where we received such evidence during consultation.”

The changes are due to become law once Parliament has approved them, and council officers will ensure that the arrangements are in place for the 2025 local elections.

What have the political parties said? 

The final proposals have been welcomed by Labour members in the county. 

Cllr Carl Marshall, Labour leader, said: “Labour represented the voice of the people throughout this process. Labour councillors and members are entrenched in our county’s communities, and it was the views and priorities of residents, organisations and businesses that we took to the commission, always presenting what we believe is the best option for each division.

“While the Tory-led Coalition made this boundary review about politics, Labour made it about the people. Some of the proposals put forward by Tory, LibDem and Independent coalition councillors running Durham County Council made no sense and, in some cases, appeared to be a thinly-veiled attempt at gerrymandering.”

Meanwhile, Council Leader Amanda Hopgood, on behalf of the Joint Administration, said: “The recommendations put forward by the LGBC represent a fair outcome. 

“[The] submissions were very varied, and there were clearly several politically motivated suggestions from individuals and parties, some of which were driven by self-interest. For our part, the Joint Administration encouraged members to carefully consider the proposals and send submissions that would meet the objectives that the commission set out to achieve. 

“We applaud the LGBC for the work that it has done to finalise proposals that are fair, and which will serve both democracy and residents in County Durham.”

What are the proposed boundaries? 

Consett

Benfieldside - 2 councillors 

Incorporate the entirety of the Blackhill area, removal of Medomsley Edge from the current division.

Consett North - 1 councillor 

A single-councillor Consett North division, which will be composed mainly of the town centre. 

Consett South - 1 councillor 

Derwent & Pont Valley - 3 councillors 

A three-councillor Derwent & Pont Valley division, composed of the entirety of the Burnopfield, Dipton & Ebchester division previously proposed, in addition to the villages of Leadgate and Medomsley. 

Delves Lane - 2 councillors 

Lanchester & Burnhope - 1 councillor 

Stanley 

Annfield Plain & Tanfield - 2 councillors 

Craghead & South Moor - 2 councillors 

Stanley - 2 councillors 

Chester-le-Street

Chester-le-Street North - 2 councillors 

Chester-le-Street South - 2 councillors 

The area immediately east of the East Coast Main Line, which includes Chester-le-Street Community Hospital, Relton Terrace, Clifford Terrace and Orchard Gardens, will be included in Chester-le-Street North division.

The area containing the residential roads of Cragside, Gibside, Gainford and Wynyard will be included in the proposed Chester-le-Street South division.

Sacriston & Witton Gilbert - 2 councillors 

Lumley & West Rainton - 2 councillors 

North Lodge - 1 councillor 

Pelton - 3 councillors 

Sacriston & Witton Gilbert - 2 councillors 

Brandon and Esh

Brandon - 2 councillors 

Deerness - 2 councillors 

Langley & Esh - 1 councillor 

Durham City

Belmont - 2 councillors 

Reduced to a two-councillor division

Elvet, Gilesgate & Shincliffe - 2 councillors 

Renamed to include Shincliffe

Framwellgate & Newton Hall - 3 councillors 

Neville’s Cross - 2 councillors 

Murton and Seaham

Dalton & Dawdon - 2 councillors 

Murton - 2 councillors 

Seaham - 2 councillors 

Easington, Pittington, Sherburn and Shotton

Easington & Shotton - 3 councillors 

A new three-councillor division comprising Easington Colliery, Easington Village, Haswell, Shotton and Shadforth parishes.

Pittington & Sherburn - 1 councillor

Horden and Peterlee

Horden & Dene House - 2 councillors 

Peterlee - 2 councillors 

Blackhalls, Thornley, Trimdon and Wingate

Blackhalls & Hesledens - 1 councillor 

“We have decided to adopt this name as part of our final recommendations, as we consider that this name better reflects the communities that will make up this division, which includes Blackhall Colliery, Blackhall Rocks, Crimdon, Hesleden, High Hesleden and Monk Hesleden.”

Castle Eden & Passfield - 1 councillor 

Thornley & Wheatley Hill - 1 councillor 

Trimdon & Wingate - 2 councillors 

Sedgefield

Aycliffe North & Middridge - 2 councillors 

Aycliffe South - 3 councillors 

Chilton - 1 councillor 

Sedgefield - 2 councillors 

Bowburn, Coxhoe, Ferryhill and Spennymoor

Bowburn & Coxhoe - 3 councillors 

Ferryhill - 2 councillors 

Spennymoor - 2 councillors 

Tudhoe - 2 councillors 

Bishop Auckland and Shildon

Bishop Auckland - 3 councillors 

“Bishop Auckland Town Council stated that it would prefer the area to remain represented by four councillors (Bishop Auckland Town and Woodhouse Close), as opposed to the three we have recommended. 

“However, given the reduction in the number of councillors for the authority as a whole, it is an inevitable consequence that we must reduce the allocation of councillors per division and redraw division boundaries across the county to achieve an effective balance of our statutory criteria.”

Shildon & Dene Valley - 3 councillors 

Crook and Willington

Crook - 3 councillors 

Willington & Hunwick - 2 councillors 

Teesdale and Weardale

Barnard Castle -  1 councillor 

We have sub-divided our three-councillor Barnard Castle division. We are instead recommending a single-councillor Barnard Castle division, comprised solely of Barnard Castle parish, bounded by a single-councillor Upper Teesdale division to the west and a two-councillor Lower Teesdale division to the east. We consider that these three divisions reflect the evidence provided by residents and parishes who expressed a preference for smaller divisions in the Teesdale area.

Evenwood - 1 councillor 

“We are recommending a single-councillor Evenwood division that is similar to the current two-councillor Evenwood division, except for Cockfield parish and the part of Etherley parish that includes High Etherley and Toft Hill. As a result of these changes, Etherley has been parish warded in our final recommendations.

Lower Teesdale - 2 councillors 

Upper Teesdale - 1 councillor 

West Auckland - 2 councillors 

“We have decided to adopt the Labour Group’s proposal for a two-councillor West Auckland division that incorporates the Escomb and Witton Park areas, along with the part of Etherley parish that includes High Etherley and Toft Hill.”

Weardale - 2 councillors 

Full details of the proposals can be found at: www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/county-durham 

Recommended reading: 

​Grab our digital subscription for just £3 for 3 months and stay connected with local news