Agenda item

To receive a presentation regarding procurement of new cemeteries.

The Board received a presentation regarding the procurement of new cemeteries.  The presentation queried whether the Council should provide new cemetery space, provided background to current service provision and obligations, outlined current Borough capacity, addressed delivery of a new cemetery and raised discussion points.

Following a service review in 2013/14, the Executive agreed to endorse the acquisition and establishment of new burial ground within the Borough in close proximity to the town centre to ensure accessible provision for different faiths, cultures and practices, while continuing to examine other options and the suitability of land.

In terms of current service provision and obligations, the provision of burial grounds was not a statutory duty for local authorities, the increasingly diverse society had a variety of requirements, and local authorities were legally required to dispose of the deceased in cases where there were no family or estate and to do this in accordance with their religious beliefs.  The Council operated two open burial grounds in central Guildford, namely, Stoke and The Mount, and was responsible for eight closed churchyards.

Current Borough capacity was 5 to 10 years and there was very limited capacity for catholic lawn graves, non-conformist with no marked provision for members of the travelling community or followers of the Muslim faith and there were sections of the community that the Council was not able to cater for.  Capacity was available in local parish churchyards, Brookwood Cemetery, Clandon Wood Natural Burial Reserve, Nightingale Cemetery and Eashing Cemetery.

A site had been allocated for cemetery use in the draft Local Plan and delivery would cost in the region of £5-7 million.  A business case had been developed utilising the estimated capital cost and assumptions for ongoing costs and income.  To break even the site would need to undertake around 80 full new burials per annum, including the associated memorial income.  At this rate the pay back period would be 170 years.

Questions for discussion included in the presentation were whether the Council should provide a cemetery or leave provision to the private sector; whether a Borough provision should be subsidised, break even or net income generating; and where these decisions sat when judged against other priorities for the Service such as the delivery of the crematorium.

The following discussion points arose:

·             Although there were estimates relating to the costs associated with a subsidised, break even or income generating service, there were many variables.  The existing service was subsidised by the Council.

·             The delivery cost of £5-7 million covered land acquisition, Environment Agency ground water measures and the development of the site

·             The number of funerals arranged and financed by the Council under Section 46 of the Public Health (Control of Diseases) Act 1984 was increasing and work was being undertaken with Environmental Health to plan for this.

·             There was minimal private sector interest in delivering cemeteries as crematoria were more economically viable than cemeteries.

·             The only remaining places at The Mount Cemetery were reserved.

·             Home burials were permitted with the permission of the land owner if they were not deemed to be a public nuisance.

·             The parish churchyards were operated under ecclesiastical law and the majority were Church of England serving parishioners.

·             The cost of burials at Brookwood Cemetery and Clandon Wood Natural Burial Reserve were significantly higher than Stoke Cemetery.

·             The cemeteries were well looked after and people enjoyed visiting them.

·             In response to the three discussion questions contained in the presentation, the Board indicated its support for the Council providing a new cemetery, as agreed following the service review in 2014, on a break even financial basis.  In terms of spending priority, it was suggested that the new cemetery should be planned for over the next three years, and delivered after this date and that a site be identified in the meantime.