After Birmingham City Council published its decision to enter into a contract with developer Berkeley Group, there was considerable resident backlash to the proposals for the significant regeneration of Ladywood.

Residents felt that plans with such a massive impact on their local area had been sprung on them with little warning or consultation.

In response, Shabana Mahmood laid out the red lines she has told the council that they must not cross in order to secure her support for the regeneration. More here.

Shabana Mahmood conducted a survey of her constituents to understand their views on the proposals and get a clearer picture of their concerns, to amplify their voices in her conversations with the council.

Over the course of six weeks 254 people responded. Overwhelmingly, 65% supported all Shabana Mahmood’s red lines. Over 9 in 10 people supported at least one of Shabana’s red lines.

It was clear that the council has some consultation exercises to conduct as 80% of people felt the council’s engagement had been “bad” or “very bad”.

The majority of respondents that put views into their own words felt negatively about the regeneration plans – with many citing the desire to stay where they are or concerns about losing value on their homes.

However, many acknowledged that the area needed regeneration and improvement in existing housing stock but had a problem with the way the council had conducted its communications and engagement regarding the plans.

Commenting on the survey results, Shabana Mahmood MP said:

“In the words of one of my residents: people in Ladywood matter. I could not agree more and will not stop fighting for residents who have laid down roots and made Ladywood their home.

“I am very concerned to learn that the council still doesn’t have meaningful engagement in place, despite numerous calls from the community to do more.

“Workshops have started this month, but they are not offering enough opportunity for residents to have their say. They tell me that workshops are over-subscribed and some of those who attend are made to stand.

“I want to thank residents for taking part in this important survey, and to reassure them that I will continue to speak up for my community.”

ENDS

SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESULTS

Shabana sent out a survey to people living in the Ladywood regeneration zone and received a total of 254 responses over the course of six weeks.

Breakdown of respondents

• 120 people owned their homes
• 125 (49%) people are council and housing association tenants. 109 were council tenants and 16 were housing association tenants.
• 9 people were privately renting
• 38 people said they had lived there for more than 40 years. 80 said they had lived there for more than 30 years.

Condition of council properties

37 council or housing association tenants describe their property as in a poor condition (29%). 14 (11%) said it was in a terrible condition. 49 people gave details of the issues with their property many of which were disrepair concerns or mould and damp complaints. Shabana’s team will be taking each of these issues forward as casework.

Priorities for Ladywood regeneration

Shabana asked respondents what their main priorities were for any regeneration of Central Ladywood. See below for a breakdown of their responses:

• New parks and community spaces – 151 people (59%)
• Better quality of housing – 166 respondents (65%)
• Improved transport links – 101 respondents (39%)
• Better job opportunities – 101 respondents (39%)
• New public services (e.g., GPs) 134 respondents (52%)

Shabana asked respondents to indicate which of the following statements they agreed with:

• We need a full and transparent consultation process with a specialist appointed to support the community. 215 respondents ticked this.
• Residents who want to stay in Ladywood should be guaranteed to stay in Ladywood – rehoused in one move. 230 respondents ticked this.
• A promise from the council that new, quality community facilities are at the heart of any scheme. 182 respondents ticked this.

Shabana asked respondents to tell her in their views about the proposals. 208 people responded to this question and there were a wide range of views. The majority of people are very unhappy with the proposals. Some identified that there is the need for regeneration but said they were not happy with the way the council had conducted its engagement.

Please see below for a number of quotes which demonstrates the language used and views held:

“I own my home and have spent a lot of money futureproofing it now that I am retired. I do not understand why the council has described Ladywood in such negative terms. I have lived in the St Marks area for 12 years and have never felt uncomfortable. I have lovely neighbours, and everyone is very friendly. I have joined a local litter-picking group, but these recent announcements have dampened my enthusiasm for continuing. It seems a pointless exercise….”

“I am not happy with the proposal, I am happy where I am, I would be very happy if the proposal was to make changes to improve the area, and leave us where we are, I am too old to start all over again, this is the first place I’ve lived since leaving home…”

“I agree Ladywood needs to be regenerated but everyone knows people on average wages or unemployed cannot afford the rents of private developers…”

“The local area definitely needs regeneration; it was poorly designed and now looks very shabby. My concern as a homeowner is that the money offered by the city council will not be enough to purchase a similar property in the area or anywhere within walking distance of the city centre.”

“I don’t feel part of the proposal, we matter, Ladywood people matter.”

“Very good proposals. I hope these are carried out though.”

Council engagement

Shabana asked respondents to rate the council’s engagement with residents so far regarding the regeneration plans.

172 (67%) people rated the council’s engagement as “very bad”. 33 rated it as “bad”. In total, 205 (80%) respondents rated the council’s engagement negatively (either “bad” or “very bad”).

Shabana asked respondents what they would like to see improved when it comes to engagement. Many of the responses referenced the need for transparency and open communication.

Please see below for a number of quotes which demonstrates the language used and views held:

“Full communication either possibility to influence decision-making. Full answers to questions! Meetings just for leaseholders or freeholders as their interests are different.”

“More open and honest communication about plan.”

“Complete transparency and regular updates.”

“I have never heard anything concerning this. I heard this through rumours and not from the council.”