Minutes:
The Committee considered the undernoted report:
“1 Relevant Background Information
Members will be aware that as part of the approach to cemetery and crematorium development we have been engaged in a process to identify a site for development as a new cemetery and that discussions have been ongoing around a potential site at Dundrod.
The site at Dundrod came to the Council through an expression of interest exercise which the Council initiated. This site was put forward by an agent acting on behalf of a business man who holds an option on the site. Officers from the Parks and Leisure Department, Legal Services and the Estates Management Unit have held a number of meetings with the party who holds an option on the site along with their agent. The Council is aware of who the landowners are but at this point have had no direct dealings with them.
A company, Carston Undertakings Ltd, has now been established and has taken over the option on the site. Carston Undertakings has commissioned a number of pieces of work around the development of the site and a delegation led by Strategic Planning made a presentation, on their behalf, to the Committee in June, outlining their proposals for the development of a cemetery on the site.
2 Key Issues
Members will be aware that in selecting a site for development as a potential cemetery there are several issues which need to be considered. The report brought to the Committee in August outlined the work that has been undertaken to date in relation to the site and informed Members that URS, who have undertaken previous assessments for the Council in relation to our search for a new cemetery site have been commissioned to undertake an analysis of all the findings of the previous four studies around the viability of the site and to provide a concise view on the issues and constraints to developing the site to allow Members to make a decision on the options available.
1 Access
As previously outlined to Members the proposed site is on the circuit of the Ulster Grand Prix which would result in the main access, onto the Quarterland Road, being closed for the duration of this event and therefore a secondary access would be required. A potential secondary access has been investigated onto the Carnaghliss Road. Two issues that have arisen relating to this secondary access are that additional land would be required from adjoining landowners and that due to the undulating topography of the road significant re-grading would be necessary.
The expert opinion is that secondary access from the Carnaghliss Road is not viable due to vertical alignment and that even if the access was viable the proposed site does not make adequate allowance for the 215m sightlines required.
2 Environmental
The expert opinion assessed the works that had previously been undertaken in relation to the environmental issues associated with the site. The site has a major watercourse (Coopers River) running through it and several minor watercourses. There are NIEA guidelines on the buffer zones required around watercourses and based on this the expert opinion has indicated that it can be assumed that approximately 29 acres of land would be unavailable for use as burial plots. Some of this land may be available for other cemetery related infrastructure. There may be potential to divert the minor watercourses to reduce the amount of land that is lost to burial, however there would be a cost associated with such works and it is not known at this point if the various statutory agencies would agree to this as it may contravene their own objectives.
Within the northern portion of the site there is a Scheduled Rath and there are three other unscheduled Raths in close proximity but outside the site boundary. There is also a scheduled complex of Raths 500m to the east of the site, all of which would likely indicate that the area in which the cemetery is located would have high archaeological potential and there remains a certain amount of potential for as yet unknown archaeology to survive below the current ground surface. The work undertaken to date on the site has not included a consultation with NIEA- Built Heritage but URS have indicated that it is unlikely that they will permit development of the Scheduled Rath site and they are likely to recommend a walkover survey takes place followed by a Programme of Archaeological Work. The expert opinion has estimated that if we are required to undertake an archaeological investigation and interpretative analysis of the Scheduled Rath site, this is likely to cost in the region of £250,000. Depending on what else is found on the site the Council could spend another £250,000 on archaeological work for the rest of the site. Archaeological investigations would require the approval of the landowner as it would include intrusive site works.
3 Geoservices
The Council has had some initial ground condition tests undertaken on the site. However the expert opinion has concluded that there are significant gaps present that restrict the ability to fully assess the suitability of the site as a cemetery and recommends a series of further tests. The original trial pits were dug to a depth of 3m which is sufficient for a 2 burials grave. However the Council’s practice is to have 4 burials per grave and therefore deeper excavations are required across the site. At the time of the original site investigations the Council was not considering purchasing the far northern/north western area of the site and no trial pits or boreholes were dug in this area. However a trial hole in the area below this portion of land has shown bedrock at a high level.
The expert opinion is that a complete Tier 1 hydrogeological risk assessment would be required for the site. This would be submitted to NIEA who would make a determination on whether Tier 2 or Tier 3 tests would be required but given the site is considered as a high burial rate site it is likely that Tier 3 tests would be required. It is estimated that the cost of doing the essential works required to allow the Council to complete a Tier 1 is £8,000. Teir 2 or Tier 3 investigations would result in a period of testing and remodelling which would require in excess of 12 months additional work and have additional cost implications.
4. Planning
The expert opinion in relation to planning is that the site has the benefit of a pre-application in principle ‘yes’ to a proposed cemetery use from the Planning Authority. However this is qualified on the basis that a significant amount of supporting technical study and detail is required. Their opinion is that the risks of not achieving planning are currently high when issues of access, archaeological impact and possible contamination are so uncertain.
A map outlining the site and potential restrictions on burial has been circulated. The map shows the watercourses that are present within the site and the potential buffer zones. It also shows the position of the Scheduled Rath and those areas that we have not carried out ground investigations in. There is a possibility that archaeological investigations and the additional ground investigations required may indicate that further areas of the site would be unsuitable for burials. In the absence of these investigations it is difficult to determine how much of the site is suitable for burials.
5 Conclusion
The expert opinion concludes that there is high risk of not achieving planning approval on the basis of a second vehicular access but also with regard to archaeological impact and possible contamination uncertainties. Further studies to bridge the gaps in archaeological and contamination/ground investigation information will be required to fully assess the suitability of the site as a cemetery but may not remove the uncertainty over planning approval.
6 Costs
As indicated throughout this report the expert opinion has identified a number of significant potential constraints on this site and a comprehensive body of work would need to be completed if the Council is to continue considering this site as a potential cemetery. The work required and the costs are outlined in the appendix 2 and in summary essential works (which includes the potential archaeological works) are estimated at £508,000. Other future works including a likely Tier 3 assessment are estimated at £51,000. The completion of this work could not guarantee that the site would be suitable for use as a cemetery given the initial issues and constraints that have already been identified.
Members are reminded that the Council has not entered into any contractual arrangements with the option holder regarding this site and nor has the Council made any commitment in terms of agreeing any acquisition terms for the site, including the purchase price. If after the necessary further investigations were carried out, it was deemed that the site, or part of it, was viable for development as a cemetery, and Members agreed, the Council would have to enter into negotiations to ascertain whether the land we required could be acquired at a level of value which could be recommended for Council approval. In addition to the purchase price we would also have to pay legal fees and land registry fees which would be determined by the title to the lands (i.e. if it is registered / unregistered land) and the value of the lands. The Council would not be in a position to agree to acquire the land until planning permission was in place.
7 Recommendation
Based on the constraints that have been identified with this site, in particular the issues around secondary access and archaeology, and the costs of the additional works required, which are likely to confirm the evidence to date, it is proposed that Members do not pursue any further interest in this site as it would not provide good value for money.
8 Review of burial policy
The last review of the Council’s burial policy was undertaken in 2010 and it identified at that time that the Council required a site of 72 acres, in addition to what was available in other cemeteries to provide it with sufficient burial capacity for a 50 year period. As has been demonstrated over the last number of years there are real difficulties in identifying a suitable site of this size, which meets the strict guidelines required for a cemetery, within a reasonable distance of Belfast. Should the Committee decide not to proceed further with the Dundrod site it is recommended therefore that the burial policy is revisited to look at what options are available and whether or not we should revise the size of site we are seeking, for example that we develop a number of smaller sites. To allow the Council to do this, it is recommended that suitable expertise be commissioned to undertake this review, which will include an update of the statistics and burials etc.
If this is agreed in principle a report would be prepared for consideration by the Shadow Strategic Policy and Resources Committee.
3 Resource Implications
Financial
The development of a new cemetery is currently a Stage I emerging project in the Council’s capital programme.
We anticipate that the cost of the work around the reviewing of the Council’s burial policy will fall within the Council’s quotation limits and can be met from existing revenue budgets.
Human Resources
There are no human resource implications at this stage.
Asset and Other Implications
None at this stage although the final phases of the project will inevitably increase the Council’s land ownership and associated liabilities.
4 Equality and Good Relations Implications
There are currently no equality or good relation implications however this will continue to be reviewed as the project is developed.
5 Recommendations
Members are asked to agree:
i. That given the constraints and issues that have been identified with the site at Dundrod, and the costs required to carry out the further investigations, that it is agreed that this site would not provide good value for money and therefore is no longer considered viable for development as a potential cemetery; and
ii. To recommend that a review of the current burial policy be undertaken and to refer this to the Shadow Strategic Policy and Resources Committee for consideration.
6 Decision Tracking
Director of Parks and Leisure to implement the Committee’s decision”
After discussion, the Committee agreed that:
(i) negotiations continue with the site owner or agent to ascertain whether or not a smaller portion of the site at Dundrod could be utilised for burial lands;
(ii) a workshop be held early in the new year, at which all the information previously submitted to the Committee in relation to burial sites be presented to enable the Members to review the current burial policy and the provision of crematoria; and
(iii) an updated report be submitted to the Shadow Strategic Policy and Resources Committee.