Croydon (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Croydon’s former planning chief has praised the borough development projects, offering a surprisingly upbeat assessment amid mounting criticism from residents.
After quitting her position that paid over £130,000 earlier this month, Heather Cheesbrough, the former “director of planning and sustainable regeneration” for Croydon Council, seems to have been busy trying to change the course of history.
Cheesbrough’s wish to take a “career break” was cited in an internal council memo as the reason for his resignation.
Since leaving Fisher’s Folly for the last time, 57-year-old Cheesbrough has used social media to try to clean up the mess that is her record of nine terrible years in charge of planning in Croydon. It’s unclear how long the professional break was planned to endure.
The first and most important appointment Jo Negrini made after becoming chief executive and looking for a director-level successor was Cheesbrough, who joined Croydon Council in 2016.
Cheesbrough quickly became a target of public mistrust and ire due to her somewhat haughty attitude toward the borough’s citizens and council members, second only to “Negreedy” herself.
Residents’ dissatisfaction with their council was embodied by Cheesbrough because of her cover-up of an undeclared relationship between a senior member of her planning staff and private developers (typically a sackable offence), her covert promotion of someone who had been working for a developer within her department, and years of highly dubious reports by her staff approving dubious, sometimes even illegal, overdevelopment throughout the borough.
Cheesbrough supported SPD2, an unpopular planning scheme that aided in the continuous overdevelopment of suburban regions by approving block after block of apartments. That planning policy was abandoned by Mayor Jason Perry.
The leader of the recently established Heather Cheesbrough Associates is currently characterizing herself on LinkedIn as follows:
According to Cheesbrough,
“it’s time to step away, take a breather, and consider new opportunities and avenues to explore after over nine eventful years at Croydon.”
“During my time at Croydon, I am proud to have played a part in bringing forward a wealth of new tall buildings and development to transform the town centre, attracting a new urban population and generating vibrancy and creativity to shape Croydon’s next chapter. Key highlights include Greystar’s tallest modular build in Europe, the iconic Box Park.”
It is actually Boxpark, and whatever it might be, it ain’t iconic.
Anyone who has witnessed how the town centre has been ruined by ten years of Westfield’s obstinate non-development might consider Cheesbrough’s claims to be “transforming” Croydon town centre somewhat extravagant, even if they go beyond tearing the glass awning from the front of East Croydon Station and constructing a wind tunnel down George Street that frequently knocks pedestrians off their feet.
Cheesbrough does not dodge the W word, though… “Throughout this time, I worked closely with Westfield, Hammerson and latterly Unibail Rodamco Westfield (URW) to navigate the complexities of shopping centre regeneration to prepare new consents and a masterplan framework to adapt to rapidly changing retail and lifestyle behaviours.”
“Worked closely”, she claims. And with what result?
“… In the wider borough, I worked on estate regeneration and the redevelopment of over 30 large and small sites by Brick by Brick delivering over 50% affordable housing with award-winning new homes.”
Yes, Cheesbrough is boosting the business that caused the borough to go bankrupt. In addition to omitting to highlight that many of the people currently residing in BxB-built properties are discovering an alarming amount of defects and flaws with their homes, Cheesbrough makes a false claim regarding Brick by claiming that Brick delivered “over 50% affordable housing,” when it did not.
“As a football enthusiast, delivering two new stadium consents for Crystal Palace Football Club was an incredible experience. Planning permission was actually granted for a single stand, not for a whole stadium (you would think a planning chief would understand the difference), and for a structure that some people are unsure would ever be constructed.
“While in Purley, newly consented sport facilities underpin regeneration proposals to deliver a replacement leisure centre and swimming pool within an extensive public realm.”
This is a development that her own officer’s planning report said would cause “harm” to the local community.
Her statement that “it has been an absolute pleasure to grapple with… the importance of seeking fair and equitable outcomes for both individuals and wider society” may surprise many who have been harmed by the brutal negligence of Cheesbrough’s planning department in Croydon.
“Integral to my role has also been improving resident’s [sic] life chances,” Cheesbrough says later in her crazed appeal for employment. Perhaps there was only one resident?
She even attempts to take credit for the council’s adult education program receiving an Ofsted “Good” grade.
Other mistakes and exaggerations can be found in Cheesbrough’s dubious resume.
She refers to the highly controversial SPG as “trail-blazing suburban intensification,” but she makes no reference to the policy’s binary designation.
“The transformation of a busy planning service dealing with over 5000 applications a year” is what she then takes credit for.
It may be a bit of a stretch to say that Croydon Council’s planning department has ever processed 5,000 applications in a single year, according to the council’s own official housing approval statistics dating back 20 years.
Disregarding Freedom of Information requests and not properly interacting with elected officials, as well as taking a condescending and contemptuous stance towards citizens and Croydon council members, all of which contribute to public mistrust and ire.
Making inflated or inaccurate statements regarding her accomplishments and professional background, such as inflating the number of planning applications she has processed and characterizing contentious policies as “trail-blazing” in spite of their subsequent abandonment and lack of support.
Cheesbrough’s planning policies are condemned for putting developer interests ahead of the welfare of the community, leading to overdevelopment, undermining public confidence, and creating a dysfunctional planning department with inadequate responsibility and leadership.
A peak of about 3,800 approvals was reached in 2014–2015, prior to Cheesbrough’s arrival in Croydon. By 2023-2024, the most recent full year for which statistics are available, Cheesbrough’s planning department had processed less than 500 approvals.
According to a 2022 study by the Planning Advisory Service, Cheesbrough’s planning department was evaluated as “all but broken.” According to that assessment, the department was “hollowed out” and unable to hire “good people” due to the council’s “toxic reputation.”
If Croydon and its planning department have a bad reputation, Cheesbrough was largely responsible for it.
By asserting that she has revolutionized Croydon’s building control service, Cheesbrough concludes her exercise in self-aggrandizement and sycophancy by saying:
“Over the course of the nine years, none of this would have been possible without my wonderful and professional colleagues, who were a joy to work with and made every day one of learning, enrichment, and development.”
There have undoubtedly been many negative outcomes, but Cheesbrough has undoubtedly benefited personally. In that sense, at least, she was right.
What were the main criticisms of Cheesbrough’s planning policies in Croydon?
Supporting the controversial SPD2 policy, which allowed for unrelenting suburban overdevelopment and sparked strong local opposition until being abandoned by the newly elected mayor Jason Perry.
In charge of a planning department that was deemed “all but broken” in a 2022 report by the Planning Advisory Service, which described it as a “hollowed-out department” that was unable to hire qualified personnel because of the council’s negative image—a reputation Cheesbrough helped to establish.
Participating in or allowing questionable and occasionally illegal overdevelopment permits, which harmed other towns and resulted in expensive legal disputes that squandered public funds.
Promoting employees with developer connections, hiding an unreported relationship between a senior planning staff member and private developers, and hiding records or making false claims—all of which weakened public confidence and governance norms.