Chigwell Cemetery Extension Need Assessment March 2016

Chigwell Cemetery Extension

Need Assessment

Peter Mitchell Associates

March 2016

Contents

CONTENTS 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

INTRODUCTION 4

THE AUTHOR 4

DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS AFFECTING DEMAND FOR BURIAL 5 AGE STRUCTURE 5 RELIGION 10 ETHNICITY 11 SUMMARY OF DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS 13

THE CONTEXT OF BURIAL SPACE CAPACITY. 14 IDENTIFIED SHORTAGE OF BURIAL SPACE CAPACITY IN LONDON 15 LPAC REPORTS 15 GLA AUDIT 16 BBC SURVEY 18 NEW CEMETERY LAND 19 BURIAL SPACE CAPACITY WITHIN THE CHIGWELL AREA 23 UNDERSTANDING BURIAL CAPACITY 25 RESERVED GRAVES 26 BURIAL SPACE CAPACITY WITHIN CHIGWELL CEMETERY 27

CONCLUSIONS 31

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 2 of 31 Executive Summary

This report examines the demographic factors influencing demand for burial, the context of burial space capacity and burial space capacity in the Chigwell area.

Whilst it is not possible to calculate precisely how many years’ capacity remains at Chigwell Cemetery, this report provides estimates ranging from 53 to 24 years and suggests 38.5 years as being a reasonable estimate.

In view of these factors, the securing of the land immediately adjacent to the cemetery for the purposes of a future cemetery extension would guarantee the continued provision of burial space in Chigwell Cemetery into the long term.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 3 of 31 Introduction

This report updates a report issued in April 2015 and re-examines the issues affecting the future capacity of Chigwell Parish Council’s cemetery, in Froghall Lane Chigwell.

The Author

I am Peter Mitchell, Fellow and Diploma holder of the Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management.

Commencing in February 1983, I have worked at all levels from operations to management in cemeteries and crematoria in both public and private sectors. Since April 2002, I have been an independent consultant specialising in all matters relating to burial, cremation and exhumation.

I am very familiar with the issues associated with the provision, development and management of cemeteries and crematoria. My work has involved me in assessing the need for new developments, undertaking feasibility studies, ground investigations and advising on design. I have an extensive knowledge of the law relating to burial, cremation and exhumation.

My professional life has brought me into close contact with many bereaved people, Funeral Directors and Officiants, which has given me an understanding of the needs of key stakeholders involved in providing for the deceased and the bereaved.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 4 of 31

Demographic factors affecting demand for burial

Age structure

The chart below illustrates for the whole of England and Wales in 2012 the statistical link between increasing age and likelihood of death:

Death Rates by Age in England & Wales 2012

Males Females

250

200

150

100

0 0 to 5 - 9 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 - 35 - 40 - 45 - 50 - 55 - 60 - 65 - 70 - 75 - 80 - 85 - 90 4 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 and Population the 1,000of per Rates Death over 5 Year Age Band

Figure 1: Mortality by quinary age band. Source ONS Deaths registered in England and Wales Table 1

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 5 of 31 The chart below illustrates the age structure of the population of Epping Forest, Essex and England as a whole:

Figure 2: Age Structure (Census 2011)

Epping Forest has higher proportions of its population than England as a whole in all age groups from 30 years and older.

This age structure suggests a higher than average increase in deaths in the future as this higher proportion of the population ages.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 6 of 31 Mortality rates change significantly over time and have been in general decline in England and Wales since the mid 19th century, as illustrated in the chart below:

England & Wales Deaths & Death Rates 1841-2010

Deaths Death rates

3,500,000 25 3,000,000 20 2,500,000 2,000,000 15

1,500,000 10 1,000,000 5 500,000 Death Rate per 1,000 per Rate Death Period Year 5 per Deaths 0 0 1841-1845 1846-1850 1851-1855 1856-1860 1861-1865 1866-1870 1871-1875 1876-1880 1881-1885 1886-1890 1891-1895 1896-1900 1901-1905 1906-1910 1911-1915 1916-1920 1921-1925 1926-1930 1931-1935 1936-1940 1941-1945 1946-1950 1951-1955 1956-1960 1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010

Figure 3: England & Wales deaths and death rates. Source ONS Deaths registered in England and Wales Table 10

Mortality rates amongst infants and the elderly have seen the greatest change. There are a number of factors leading to this reduction in mortality rates and consequent ageing of the population, including improved healthcare, diet and socio-economic status of the population.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 7 of 31 However, numbers of deaths and mortality rates are expected to rise from 2016 onwards as the post-war generations continue to age:

Figure 4: ONS 2008-based national population projections, series PP2 No 27 25.7.2010

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 8 of 31 The chart below illustrates ONS projected deaths for the Epping Forest District Council area:

Figure 5: ONS projected population at deaths

Between 2015 and 2037, the population is projected to rise by 22%, but the number of deaths by 36%. This projected increase will inevitably lead to increased demand for burial space in Chigwell Cemetery.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 9 of 31 Religion

Religious belief can play a significant role in people’s choice between burial and cremation. Demand for burial and cremation facilities may thus be influenced by the religious beliefs of the residents of a particular area.

Forbid Permit Cremation Cremation Muslims Hindus Jews – Orthodox Buddhists Greek Orthodox Sikhs Russian Orthodox Roman Catholic Zoroastrians Jews – Liberal Parsees Church of Scotland Church of England Church in Wales Church of Ireland Presbyterians Methodists Table 1: Religious Attitudes towards Cremation (Source: Cremation Society of Great Britain)

The vast majority of Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs all choose cremation in preference to burial. In contrast, Muslims and Orthodox Jews choose burial. An area with a high proportion of Muslims is thus going to have lower demand for a crematorium than one with a high proportion of Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs.

The majority of Roman Catholics still seem to prefer burial, in spite of a Papal edict in July 1963 that stated that they are permitted to choose cremation.

The most recent data on religious belief is contained in the Census 2011.

The chart below illustrates the Census 2011 data and compares the minority religious beliefs of the population of Epping Forest, Essex and England as a whole.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 10 of 31

Figure 6: Minority religious belief (Census 2011)

Epping Forest is more diverse than Essex as a whole and has a higher proportion of its population who are Jewish and almost as high a proportion who are Hindu as England as a whole.

The Jewish people are likely to choose burial at one of the exclusively Jewish cemeteries in the area. The relative proportions of Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims will effectively balance out the demand for cremation and burial from these groups.

Ethnicity

Ethnic origin is often associated with religious belief and thus preferences for burial or cremation.

The chart below compares ethnicity in Epping Forest, Essex and England as a whole for the non-white groups:

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 11 of 31

Figure 7: Non-white ethnicity (Census 2011)

The chart below illustrates by ward the proportions of people in non-white ethnic groups:

Figure 8: Non-white ethnicity at ward level (Census 2011)

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 12 of 31 There is considerable variation, with the highest diversity in Grange Hill, Chigwell and Buckhurst Hill, which form the primary catchment area for Chigwell cemetery. Whilst the highest proportion is people of Indian origin, who are likely to prefer cremation, other significant groups prefer burial.

Whilst Epping Forest is generally less diverse than England as a whole, it is more diverse than Essex as a whole. Specifically Epping Forest has more people of Caribbean, Pakistani and Indian origin, the first two groups preferring burial.

Summary of demographic factors

Chigwell Cemetery primarily serves people living within a number of wards of Epping Forest District Council. Epping Forest has a relatively older age structure compared to England as a whole. This helps explain why, in spite of the projected increase in population, deaths are projected to increase more, by 36% by 2037.

The relatively high proportion of Jewish people living in Epping Forest suggests a higher than average demand for burial. However, this demand will almost exclusively be met a specifically Jewish cemeteries, so will not impact upon demand at Chigwell Cemetery. Religious belief does not significantly impact upon demand for burial at Chigwell Cemetery.

The highest proportions of the non-white population in Epping Forest are Indian, who are generally Hindu or Sikh and prefer cremation. However, overall other ethnic groups such as Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Caribbean people represent a slightly higher proportion of the population and these groups generally prefer burial.

These demographic factors indicate a sustained and growing demand for burial at Chigwell Cemetery.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 13 of 31 The context of burial space capacity.

The provision of burial space capacity varies widely across England and Wales. Whilst in the past media attention has focused primarily upon the situation in London, shortage of burial space can and does occur in rural areas, as highlighted in the following media report:

“A national shortage of grave space has become “critical” with some towns now on the brink of having nowhere to bury the dead, MPs have warned. Growing pressure to secure land for development and the needs of farmers and existing owners have left local councils struggling to find space for burial sites, they said.

Dr Sarah Wollaston, the Tory MP, said that in one part of her Devon constituency there are now only 16 empty burial plots, after emergency efforts to create more space have been exhausted. Earlier this year the Church of England put forward plans to offer discounted funerals for those who choose cremation rather than burial because of the shortage of space.

Pressure on graves is expected to intensify within the next few years as deaths rates rise sharply because of Britain’s ageing population.

Although for centuries local churches provided the main community graveyard, many traditional churchyards are already full and have been formally “closed” to burials. Meanwhile councils are finding it more difficult to secure space for new cemeteries. A study last year showed that many local authorities are already resorting to converting car parks and pathways into new burial plots to meet the demand.

The warning came during a Commons committee debate about ecclesiastical law, which includes minor technical changes to the rules on burials.” 1

Chigwell is located within Epping Forest District Council, which covers many rural areas within and outside the M25 orbital motorway. Whilst Chigwell is not within London, it borders London and burial space capacity at Chigwell Cemetery should be considered within the context of the situation in London.

1 ‘Towns running out of space to bury the dead’, Daily Telegraph 13th May 2014.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 14 of 31 Identified shortage of burial space capacity in London

There have been a number of reports published on the issue of the shortage of burial space in London:

• Burial Space Needs in London – London Planning Advisory Committee (LPAC) January 1997 • Planning for Burial Space in London – LPAC August 1977 • An Audit of London Burial Provision – GLA March 2011

LPAC reports

In its conclusions to Burial Space Needs in London 1997, LPAC states:

Although the overall requirement for burial space will continue to decrease, there is likely to be little increase in the use of cremation and insufficient space to meet the needs of burial space for parts of inner London beyond 2006. Local authorities and other cemetery providers in London must make the best use of existing cemeteries to meet future burial needs.2

LPAC highlighted the link between demand for burial space and the demand for cremation:

Burial authorities should be ensuring choice for the bereaved between burial and cremation. Local authorities should make best use of remaining space by seeking to ensure that high quality cremation services are available for their residents.3

In addition to the promotion of cremation, the LPAC report concluded:

The first priority should be to make efficient use of unused space and reclamation. Selective re-use would significantly increase the future supply of burial space, as cemeteries reach capacity, particularly in inner London.4

2 Burial Space Needs in London 1997 LPAC Page 96 3 Ibid Page 97 4 Ibid Page 98

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 15 of 31 In the second report, Planning for Burial Space in London, LPAC states in the section on Burial Space requirements:

The most startling figure is that Inner London Boroughs have, on average, only seven years’ supply of burial space left. In Outer London, the figure is only eighteen years on average, with nine Outer London Boroughs having less than twelve years’ supply…The inevitable conclusion is that much of the new space proposed to meet Outer London Boroughs’ needs will have to be made available for Inner London burials as well, with all the attendant problems of access and cost to Inner Londoners, unless changes are made to the burials regime in London as a whole.5

GLA Audit

An Audit of London Burial Provision, produced for the GLA by the Cemetery Research Group, University of York and published in 2011, updated the survey work undertaken for the previous LPAC reports. The report includes a summary table as Table 2.3, reproduced below:

Operational capacity of private and borough cemeteries, 1995 and 2009

1995 2009 Full 5 11 Accommodating re-opens only 41 38 Reliant on created graves 15 14 Virgin land available 63 52 Missing data 4 13 Total 128 128 Table 2: Operational capacity of private and borough cemeteries, 1995 and 2009. Source: Table 2.3 in the GLA Audit of London Burial Provision 2011.

In drawing conclusions about the supply of future burial space, the report includes reference to potential or planned cemetery extensions:

2.25 For the purposes of this survey, the assumption has been made that it would be possible to

5 Planning for Burial Space in London LPAC 1977 Page 7

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 16 of 31 bring all planned extensions into use. This space would bring an estimated additional minimum of 14.78 ha to the overall supply of private and borough cemetery land, providing an estimated 66,510 grave spaces. This total comprises 21 per cent of the estimated required grave spaces needs for London over the next twenty years.6

The Audit summarises ‘Borough status capacity’ 7 and the table below reproduces the classification used in the Audit, with an additional column showing the percentage of boroughs falling into each category:

% of Score Description of category Boroughs FULL: No burial space available/existing cemeteries deemed to be full or there are fewer than 100 interments a year in the borough in 1 25% cemeteries, mostly re-opens and in created graves. space 2010/11 – 2030/31, and/or an extension is likely to be brought into use. CRITICAL: Reliance on created graves only (i.e. graves only available in parts of the cemetery not originally designed to accommodate interment; in space created through the addition of topsoil or constructed above- 2 ground burial vaults; in existing capacity above common graves; or in 28% reclaimed graves) and/or space is limited and unlikely to meet demand as indicated in the estimated demand for virgin space 2010/11 – 2030/31. Space is likely to be exhausted within the next ten years. PROBLEMATIC: 3 The borough has some virgin space remaining, but insufficient to 16% meet demand for the next twenty years. ADEQUATE: There is sufficient new space is available to meet the estimated 4 28% demand for virgin space 2010/11-2030/31 and/or an extension is likely to be brought into use. SUSTAINABLE: Grave re-use in the borough has extended capacity of an existing 5 3% cemetery infinitely.

Table 3: Classification employed in GLA Audit of London Burial Provision 2011

6 An Audit of London Burial Provision Page 14 7 Audit of London Burial Provision Page 18

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 17 of 31 An Audit of London Burial Provisions states:

Conclusion 2.41 An audit of the demand for and supply of burial space in London, and projected capacity to accommodate further interments rests on a number of assumptions. These assumptions, particularly with regard to the supply of burial space within existing cemeteries, means that estimates of capacity must be treated with caution. It is for this reason that broad timescales have been adopted in this assessment. As comparison between the 1995 and 2009 surveys indicates, cemetery owners in London may be compelled to introduce more or less desperate measures to extend the working capacity of their sites, which distorts the ability to arrive at accurate short‐term capacity projections. 2.42 It is notable that eight boroughs in London contain no significant burial space, and a further fifteen are reliant on created graves or would be unable to meet projected demand for burial provision over the next twenty years. These borough assessments take into account the supply of land reserved for extensions to existing cemeteries. Although denominational burial grounds are not included in these totals, the overall number of interments accommodated by these sites is small.8

BBC Survey

BBC Local Radio undertook a national survey of burial space availability in 2013, which included London. The BBC summarized the survey results as follows:

Almost half of England's cemeteries could run out of space within the next 20 years, a BBC survey suggests. And a quarter of 358 local authorities responding to the BBC said they would have no more room for burials within a decade.9

It can be seen from the results of the 3 surveys discussed above that burial space provision in London has been examined at different times by different people and is widely regarded as being problematic. New grave space availability is patchy across London, in short supply in many boroughs and non-existent in others.

8 An Audit of London Burial Provision Page 21 9 BBC News web site. 27.9.2013 @ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24283426

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 18 of 31 New cemetery land

Clearly, the most obvious way to create new grave space is through the creation of a new cemetery or the formal extension of an existing cemetery into adjacent land not previously used for burial.

The LPAC report ‘Planning for Burial Space in London’ included reference to potential new cemeteries and cemetery extensions within its estimates of burial space provision. This exercise identified a potential 230,000 new grave spaces that might be created.

The GLA Audit also included potential cemetery extensions within its estimates of burial space provision. This exercise identified a potential 14.78ha of land with 66,510 new grave spaces that might be created.

The table below summarises the current situation with regard to these potential new cemeteries and extensions and also includes other developments that were not included within the reports:

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 19 of 31

Borough Location Type Hectares Graves Current status

Chadwell Heath Barking and Dagenham Extension 3.0 7,500 Opened in 2013 Cemetery Barnet Hendon Cemetery Extension 0.5 1,250 Abandoned Consented 2013 for 4.41ha first phase. Barnet Edgwarebury Lane New 8.0 20,000 Sold for use as a Jewish Cemetery. Leased to Nursery Brent Carpenders Park, Extension 2.6 6,400 until 2051 Brent Kingsbury New 23.0 57,500 Abandoned Kemnal Park Bromley New 22.3 55,668 Opened 2013 Cemetery Greenlawn Memorial Planning refused at Croydon Extension 24.0 60,000 Park, Tandridge DC Appeal in 2015 Greenford Park Ealing Extension 2.0 5,000 50% developed Cemetery Enfield Strayfield Road New 4.0 10,000 Developed Hammersmith & Mortlake Cemetery, Extension 0.1 230 In use Fulham Richmond Havering Upminster Cemetery Extension 5.5 13,750 Opened 2013 Planning Permission Havering Maylands Golf Course New 27.0 31,800 refused 2015 Maylands Muslim Planning Permission Havering New 11.5 10,000 Cemetery refused 2015 a) Borough Cemetery Extension 7.2 18,000 a) Subject to funding b) Hatton Cemetery Extension 4.8 12,000 b) Awaiting surveys Hounslow c) Chiswick New Extension 6.0 15,000 c) Subject to funding Cemetery 1,385 spaces in Trent Park Cemetery, initial extension Islington Extension 13.9 34,800 Enfield granted planning permission 2016 Merton & Sutton Joint Merton & Sutton Extension 11.4 28,600 Opened in 2012 Cemetery Redbridge Forest Park New 6.0 15,000 Opened in 2005 Redbridge Gardens of Peace New 7.7 10,000 Opened in 2012 Twickenham Richmond Extension 5.0 12,500 Opened in 2012 Cemetery Camberwell New Southwark Extension 1.2 3,000 Abandoned Cemetery Totals 177.1 374,998

Table 4: Summary of planned cemetery developments in London

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 20 of 31 The table below summarises the expected and the actual new graves delivered since the publication of each of the two reports:

Report Anticipated Actual new graves new graves LPAC 1997 230,000 90,480 GLA 2011 66,510 52,980 Table 5: Summary of expected and delivered grave space numbers

In both cases, the numbers of new graves made available in London since the publication of the reports are significantly lower than expected.

Space in these new cemeteries and cemetery extensions has already reduced as they fulfil their function of accommodating burials.

The GLA Audit states:

2.43 The amount of land held in reserve by London boroughs is sufficient to accommodate an estimated minimum of 21 per cent of demand for burial space over the next twenty years. It should be noted that not all land designated as reserve burial space has secured planning permission.10

Burial space capacity in London may be summarised as follows:

There have been a number of reports published that highlight the issue of the shortage of burial space in London, published in 2007 and 2011, together with a BBC survey in 2013. All have concluded that there is a serious shortage of burial space capacity within London.

The LPAC and GLA reports identified significant numbers of potential new grave spaces that could be created by the development of new cemeteries or cemetery extensions. However, few of these developments have actually come to fruition, some have been abandoned altogether and there remain only a small number that are being actively pursued.

10 An Audit of London Burial Provision Page 21

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 21 of 31

In spite of the cemetery developments that have gained planning consent and actually been delivered since the LPAC and GLA reports, new grave space availability remains patchy across London, in short supply in many boroughs and non-existent in others.

Even when a site is considered feasible and funding is available, new cemetery developments in London are still uncertain, with gaining planning consent presenting significant challenges.

Shortage of burial space in London does not appear to be being addressed by most London Boroughs in spite of predicted increases in the numbers of deaths.

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 22 of 31 Burial space capacity within the Chigwell Area

People generally choose to bury their dead locally, close to where they live, so that they can easily visit the grave. Traditionally this has been achieved through burial in the local parish churchyard and increasingly since the 1850s in local authority cemeteries. Some groups, such as Jews, Muslims and Roman Catholics, prefer burial if possible in cemeteries that cater exclusively for members of their respective faiths.

The table below illustrates the non-denominational cemeteries located within 20 minutes drive time of Chigwell in which people living in Chigwell might choose to bury their dead:

Miles from Provider Cemetery New graves available Chigwell Chigwell PC Chigwell Yes Yes, but unpopular Redbridge Roding Lane North due to wet ground conditions 2.9 Redbridge Barkingside No 3.5 Redbridge Garden of Rest No 3.5 Westerleigh Group Forest Park Yes 3.5 Theydon Bois PC Theydon Bois Yes 3.6 Yes, but unpopular Barking and Dagenham Chadwell Heath due to wet ground conditions 4.8 Epping TC Epping Yes 6.7 GreenAcres Epping Forest Woodland Burials Burial Park Yes, but ‘Woodland Burial’ only 9.0 Table 6: Cemeteries in the Chigwell area

The exact distance to each cemetery depends upon the location of each family concerned.

Factors influencing choice of cemetery include:

• Family connection, i.e. whether other family members are already buried in a particular cemetery • Price • Choice of grave type, e.g. whether choice of memorial is restricted to lawn headstones • Restrictions affecting non-residents

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 23 of 31 The following information relating to burials in Chigwell Cemetery during 2014 illustrates how people exercise choice when arranging burials.

There were 33 coffin burials in Chigwell Cemetery, 33% of which were in new graves. In addition, there were 9 cremated remains burials, 22% of which were in new plots.

Residents of Chigwell purchased 41% of new graves and cremated remains plots sold in Chigwell Cemetery.

24% of new graves and plots were sold to residents of Loughton and Buckhurst Hill, where the local Loughton Town Council cemetery no longer has capacity to offer new graves.

35% of new graves and plots were purchased by people living in other areas, which suggests a lack of local provision in their area.

There were 10 coffin burials of Chigwell residents at Forest Park Cemetery in Redbridge.

The number of Chigwell residents choosing Woodland Burial at the Epping Forest Burial Park is not known.

There is often confusion in the media about demand and capacity for burial and this confusion to some extent also creeps into the reports referred to above.

There are usually different types of burials taking place, namely coffin burials of adults and children and ashes burials of adults and children. These may occur in different types and sizes of graves.

The two key factors affecting capacity in any given cemetery are:

• the number of new graves remaining for adult coffin burial • the annual demand for adult coffin burial in new graves

Adult coffin grave spaces are the largest type of plot sold in a cemetery, normally measuring 9’ x 4’ (3.345m2) each. In contrast, ashes plots normally measure only 2’ x 2’ (0.372 m2) each. Allocating 30% of available space for roads, paths and landscaping it is possible to have 850 adult grave spaces per acre, or 2,100 per hectare.

It is important to note that not every adult coffin burial requires a new grave space, except in the cases of Muslim or Jewish burial. In most cases, people purchase the rights in family graves excavated sufficiently deeply to accommodate more than one coffin burial. Thus an adult coffin burial may occur where an existing grave is reopened to accept a second of third burial of a family member.

This author has repeatedly found across a wide number of cemeteries in the UK that adult coffin burials in reopened graves tend to account for approximately 50% of all adult coffin burials in a cemetery with space remaining for new graves.

As space for new graves in any given cemetery becomes exhausted, the proportion of burials in reopened graves rises accordingly.

The majority of sales of new graves are ‘at-need’, in other words the grave rights are purchased at the time that the first burial takes place in the grave. However, particularly when there is a perceived shortage of space for new graves, a number of other sales are ‘pre-need’, bought in reserve for potential future use.

Both ‘at-need’ and ‘pre-need’ sales of new graves reduce the total number of available new graves remaining in the cemetery. However, when considering potential future demand and capacity it must be recognised that some future deaths will use ‘pre-need’ graves and should not therefore be counted twice in calculations.

The Google aerial image below, taken in July 2013, shows the space remaining at that time for new graves:

Figure 9: Chigwell Cemetery (part) 2013

The Google aerial image below, taken in June 2015, shows the same view:

Figure 10: Chigwell Cemetery (part) 2015

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 27 of 31 The Google aerial image below, taken in July 2013, shows the whole of Chigwell Cemetery and identifies the areas allocated for future burials:

Figure 11: Chigwell Cemetery 2013 When marking out graves for coffins and plots for cremated remains, space must also be allocated for access, new landscaping features, overhanging trees and facilities such as water taps, waste bins and benches. Thus not all of the visible grassed areas can be fully utilised for burial.

The author used these aerial images and actual measurements made on site on 16th February 2016 to estimate the space remaining for new graves for coffin burials. The table below illustrates the areas concerned. It makes an allowance of a 3m border around each visible area for the amenity trees that have been planted and also takes account of the larger grave spaces provided in areas 3 and 4:

Area E-W N-S Area Graves @ Graves @ m m m2 9' x 4' 10' x 5'

1 19 24 456 136

2 24 24 576 172

3 19 19 361 78

4 24 19 456 98

5 24 14 336 100

2,185 409 176 Figure 12: Space remaining in Chigwell Cemetery 2016 (Scenario A)

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 28 of 31 This table indicates a total of 585 unused adult grave spaces remain. However, the Parish Clerk considers that parts of this space cannot be used for burial due to wet ground and the table below shows the effect of such reductions:

Area E-W N-S Area Graves @ Graves @ m m m2 9' x 4' 10' x 5'

1 19 12 228 68

2 24 12 288 86

3 19 19 361 78

4 24 19 456 98

5 24 14 336 100

1,669 255 176 Figure 13: Space remaining in Chigwell Cemetery 2016 (Scenario B)

The total number of new adult grave spaces is 585 in the first scenario and 431 in the second.

These figures are in addition to new plots for ashes burials.

Whilst there is annual variation, in Chigwell Cemetery in 2014 11 new graves were excavated ‘at-need’. Using this level of demand gives the two capacity scenarios below:

Scenario Graves Annual Years’ remaining demand capacity A 585 11 53 B 431 11 39 Figure 14: Chigwell Cemetery Capacity

Including both 11 ‘at-need’ and 4 ‘pre-need’ sales gives the following two scenarios for capacity:

Scenario Graves Annual Years’ remaining demand capacity A 585 15 39 B 431 15 29 Figure 15: Chigwell Cemetery Capacity

Peter Mitchell Associates © March 2016 Page 29 of 31 The 36% ONS projected increase in numbers deaths in Epping Forest District Council over the 22 years between 2015 and 2037 will inevitably lead to increased demand for burial space in Chigwell Cemetery. Applying an 18% increase to grave sales figures to reflect increased demand over the period of availability provides the following revised scenarios:

Scenario Graves Annual Years’ remaining demand capacity A 585 18 33 B 431 18 24 Figure 16: Chigwell Cemetery Capacity

In summary, there are a number of alternative scenarios possible to estimate a future capacity of Chigwell Cemetery.

At current rates of demand for ‘at-need’ adult grave sales and assuming all ground allocated is suitable for the excavation of graves gives a figure of 53 years.

Including both ‘at-need’ and ‘pre-need’ sales, allowing for some areas to be unsuitable for grave excavation and allowing for increases in death numbers gives a figure of 24 years.

The actual period during which new graves will be available in Chigwell Cemetery is likely to be somewhere between these two estimates, with the middle position being 38.5 years.

There are a number of factors affecting the capacity to provide new graves at Chigwell Cemetery. These include the number of current and future deaths in Chigwell and surrounding areas; the choices people make about funerals; the availability and cost of burial space in surrounding areas; size of grave spaces and suitability of ground conditions for excavation of graves.

The planning, gaining planning consent and the development of an extension to the cemetery into the adjacent field is likely to take some time.

There is no doubt that securing the land immediately adjacent to the cemetery for the purposes of a future cemetery extension would guarantee the continued provision of burial space in Chigwell Cemetery into the long term.