‘Huge mistake’ by council to permit more natural burials

MORE burials at a natural cemetery are a “huge mistake”, claim neighbours.

The controversial proposal for a natural burial ground in Winterley Lane, Walsall, was narrowly passed by the council’s planning committee at a tense meeting.

The site owners will now be allowed to increase the number of burials from the current 50 a year to one a day.

But residents, who objected to the plan over traffic fears and the environmental impact, were left disappointed.

Officers said they were satisfied the increased number of burials a year would not have a negative impact on the area as 50 car parking spaces would be provided and services would be restricted to off-peak hours between 10am and 3pm.

Despite this, a group of residents held a protest outside the council house before the meeting urging members to vote against the plan.

Natural burials attempt to return a body to the earth in as natural a way as possible. This involves a rejection of embalming processes, cremation and caskets or coffins that do not biodegrade with time and often takes place in green spaces, such as wildflower meadows, protected woodland and park land.

Neighbouring landowner Ruth Meeke spoke out against the plan and said the data gathered from other facilities was not comparable as they were situated on bigger A and B roads.

She added that, even in off-peak times, the country lane is used by dog walkers, families taking children to the playing fields as well as people on the school run.

But representatives of the applicants said there had been no objections from the Highways and Environment agencies.

Committee chairman Mike Bird said they had no planning reasons to vote against the officers’ recommendation to approve.

Senior planning and highways officers warned that a refusal would leave them open to a planning inspectorate inquiry which they would likely lose.

Committee deputy chairman Garry Perry, however, said evidence showed natural burials quicken the decomposition process, which increases the risk of ground water contamination. He also said he was not confident a need for additional burials had been proved while the impact on the road and amenities for residents would be too detrimental.

Ruth Meeke told members: “All these people here are representing their local community. What you’ve done today is actually make a huge mistake. When there is an accident down that road, it will be on your heads.”

After the meeting, Councillor Worrall said: “We are all very disappointed at the outcome and what we saw as undue pressure on members to approve.”