Minutes of a Meeting of the Cemetery Management Committee Held on Wednesday 17Th June 2009 at 7

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CEMETERY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE HELD ON WEDNESDAY 17TH JUNE 2009 AT 7.00PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, SIMPSON CENTRE

Committee Members present:Mrs J Hyde (Chairman)

B CollierMrs M Cooper

L StoterD Savill

Mrs L Wilding

Also present:Mr Justin Smith – Cemetery Development Services, and the Clerk

3040.APOLOGIES

Apologies were received on behalf of Councillor Cooper.

3041.DISCLOSURE OF MEMBERS INTERESTS

There were no disclosures of Members interests.

3042.TO RECEIVE A PRESENTATION ON EXTENSIONS TO CEMETERIES FROM JUSTIN SMITH – CEMETERY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

The Chairman welcomed Mr Smith to the meeting and explained the current set up with the Cemetery – parking, vehicular access, the current buildings, toilets, water supply, etc. He had previously been advised that we are looking to extend the Cemetery, hopefully to one side of the current Cemetery which would save putting in completely new services and road access.

Members were reminded that this is a fact-finding exercise and no decisions regarding the setting up of a new extension will be taken at this meeting, to allow Members time to digest the information before the next meeting.

Environment Agency – Environmental Audit

Mr Smith explained that the first matter to be dealt with when constructing a Cemetery extension is to obtain the Environment Agency’s consent for the piece of land we are considering. This requirement has been in force since 2006 and ensures pollution levels are controlled. Depending on where the proposed site is, gaining approval can take a number of years. A contractor, such as himself, would carry out a soil survey and the Environment Agency would advise if the area is a pollution risk. If it were found to be a higher level of risk, bore hole testing would be done, which would be costly.

They look at the soil type in the area concerned and whether there are nearby abstraction zones, which are covered by Source Protection Zones (SPZ’s). SPZ1is a red area and means no burials permitted, SPZ2 extends for some distance and depends on how long potential pollution would take to go through the soil. SPZ3 means you can usually bury in this area. In our case, we are right above an aquifer (layer of permeable rock, sand or gravel through which ground water flows, containing enough water to supply wells and springs). The risks for pollution are scored, and the higher the score the greater the risk. If we can manage the risks the more likely the Environment Agency will grant approval. The proposal could then go to planning.

The application for Environment Agency approval should take between six to eight weeks, but if they find an issue it could take up to two years. Mr Smith estimated that if all went well, we could have a new Cemetery extension up and running in two years.

With regard to water in the soil, there are two types of problems – bottom water where the water is rising up through the soil, and top water where ground surface water sits and ponds in one area. In this chalky soil area there is a risk that there are strata spring layers and water can then come out at any point along the strata. Top water can be dealt with by French drains, but if it is a spring line it can become costly to deal with.

Design and layout (including water levels)

With regard to the design of a new Cemetery or an extension, the most expensive part of the design is the first hectare as it usually includes providing a water supply and road access and cost be in the region of £100,000 to £180,000. But as we would already have those services in the neighbouring current Cemetery we would be able to make some big savings. Savings could also be made if the roadways in the extension were a single lane 3.1m wide with passing bays rather than having a wider two lane road.

Once the basic infrastructure is in place you can then add what is on your wish list. In terms of layout, plot sizes used to be 4ft, and most recent ones are 4ft6, but they are now increasing to 5ft centres as we are becoming bigger, but this would depend on the stability of the soil. He advised that legally we should be using shoring when digging all graves at the Cemetery.

If we were looking at a 4ft6 plot size we would accommodate 700 plots per acre (new burials not re-openers), which would also allow for a narrow roadway. 30% of people who die are buried, 70% are cremated. He calculated that 1% of a population of 12,000 people would die per year, being 120 deaths. Of those deaths between 35 to 45 burials would take place per year, and over 50 years we would need a minimum of 2 acres.

Mr Smith explained that cremations are increasingly being seen as a less sensitive option and very like a production line, and feels that cremations will therefore begin to loose favour and burials may well become more popular again.

With regard to the actual construction of the extension, he advises doing a split contract rather than use one contractor to do the whole project as breaking it down is much cheaper and we could potentially save tens of thousands of pounds. The possible down side is that as there are more contractors there would be more liabilities.

With regard to drainage of the current Cemetery and the proposed extension he advised that it is illegal to put land drains in because of pollution of surface water. The best method for dealing with excess water in cemeteries is to put in French drains.

If land drains are above burial depth there isn’t an issue, but if they are at burial depth there may be a problem with pollution. He suggests putting in a soakaway in the extension to put the water back into the soil, but away from burials.

One option that is sometimes considered where the water table is very high is a chamber burial. The initial costs are very high, but you can have more burials in an acre using this method of burial.

Mr Smith advised that 1 acre would usually cost about £30,000 to develop, so the 4 acres we would looking to purchase would cost over £100,000 to develop, but we would bring the costs down if we break the contract into separate bits, and use separate contractors for each part.

Another option available to burial authorities is to sell the Cemetery as a commercial venture. It would then be run as a private business. The sort of companies that would be interested in this sort of venture would only look to cemeteries burying 50 to 100 per year.

Cemetery charges

When discussing costs for the project he referred to charges made by other burial authorities for plot purchase and interment, and was very surprised to hear what we charge, even though we have made a recent increase to the charges. He felt that our charges are extremely low and we could probably think about charging in the region of £1,000 for a plot purchase, not the £105 we currently charge for a double plot. He explained that the burial services as a whole need to re-educate the public about the fact that burials, etc are a choice and a personal decision, and not a given thing. They need to be encouraged to plan and put money aside for their burial costs.

When asked what he thought we should consider changing our charges to he felt that £600 to £1,000 is a reasonable price for a plot purchase, £400 for interment, and to reduce our charges for memorial rights to £30 to £50.

He suggested considering reducing the burial rights to 30 or 50 years rather than the current 100 years. If a double plot is only used as a single plot, and the family don’t want to renew the burial rights, we are able to bury someone else in the second space in that plot.

With regard to the purchase of the new piece of land for the extension, he felt that we should be looking somewhere in the region of £15,000 to £20,000 per acre. Therefore, with the purchase of the land and the work to set it up, we should be looking at spending about £200,000 on the proposed cemetery extension.

He again reiterated the serious need to review our charges as we are running at a massive loss. Looking at the income we receive for the Cemetery and the high expenditure costs, it is currently costing in the region of £1,000 per person buried per year. However our income nowhere near covers this as we charge £150 for a plot purchase. If we don’t want to make a profit, we should look to at least break even, because although residents may baulk at the increase in charges, they are still paying the deficit each year through their Council Tax. Funeral Directors shouldn’t be making money out of our very low charges.

Types of burials

As well as burial of ashes, or scattering, we could consider constructing a columbarium outside or even inside the Chapel of Rest if it were not being used by a tenant funeral director. We could charge about £400 per niche in which ashes would be placed. But we would have to make sure there was a real need for this sort of provision.

The same goes for woodland burials. Private companies have set up their own woodland burial sites and are very profitable. However these are very professionally laid out and he felt that we would be unlikely to sell many plots in a woodland site at our new extension, as we would have to spend a lot of money on proper pathways through the wood, provide a service area, have some existing trees and put in large trees rather than small saplings to make the area more attractive. You would also only fit in a third of burials and if we hadn’t sold very many we would have great losses. Woodland burials have very high maintenance costs. With regard to scattering of ashes within a woodland setting we wouldn’t be able to charge anywhere near enough to cover the maintenance costs. A good woodland burial site would charge in the region of £2,000 to £3,000 to be buried, but these are stunning sites and there is lots of value added service. People will travel vast distances for such good sites and it would be very difficult to compete. These sites usually use existing woodland as it will take a long time for the wooded area to become established and therefore attractive.

Memorial ‘topple testing’

Mr Smith advised that new guidance has just been released from the Ministry of Justice about testing of memorials and headstones. The new advice is that routine use of mechanical test instruments is not recommended, as the results from these instruments are liable to overestimate the actual risk, and there is some thought that they may aggravate any potential movement risk.

He advised that anyone is able to carry out visual and hand tests but we would need to assess the risks, and insurance.

After discussion, Members felt that this matter needed further investigation, and that the previous decision to carry out a five yearly mechanical test by an outside contractor should be looked at again, in the light of this new Government advice.

Resolvedthat theconsideration of whether to employ a company to carry out ‘topple tests’ on a five yearly basis or to carry out visual and hand tests ‘in-house’ be put on the agenda for the next meeting of this Committee.

Mr Smith concluded by confirming the order in which we should now be looking at undertaking a project to extend the Cemetery:

Carry out the required Environment Agency geological surveys,
If all goes well, submit a planning application for change of use of the land,
Purchase the land,
Design the layout of the new extension.

The Chairman thanked Mr Smith for attending the meeting and giving such a detailed and useful presentation.

3043.ITEMS FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY

There were no items for information.

There being no further relevant business the meeting was declared closed at 8.48pm

CHAIRMANDATED

22/06/09