Denham Hindu temple’s plan for new crematorium rejected

A HINDU temple with designs for a new crematorium to accommodate ‘funeral capacity currently lacking in its community’ has been refused planning permission on grounds it is “harmful” to the Green Belt, writes Rory Butler.

Plans to build a new crematorium and dining hall on the existing grounds of the Anoopam Mission, Swaminarayan Temple, in

Denham, will not be going ahead, having been rejected by the South Buckinghamshire Area Planning Committee, last Tuesday (1).

Committee members went back and forth for almost two hours on the “very difficult application”. But they determined the temple’s plans would constitute an “inappropriate development” resulting in “loss of openness and encroachment into the

Green Belt” – and that the “very special circumstances” presented by the applicant did not outweigh potential harms to the surrounding area.

The temple, which lies within the Green Belt, is on the northern side of Western Avenue within Colne Valley Park, and the River Misbourne runs alongside it.

Among the very special circumstances, the temple claimed,

“Hindu cultural and faith sensitivities” are “not being catered for within existing crematoria”.

It also claimed the location is within a one-hour drive of more than half the UK Hindu population. “The size of the proposed crematorium is necessary to accommodate the larger number of funeral attendees a Hindu funeral may otherwise attract,” it said.

But Cllr Barbara Gibbs disputed the capacity claims and Cllr Santokh Chhokar demanded sufficient evidence alternative sites had been investigated in neighbouring local authorities. The committee determined it had not.

Cllr Trevor Egleton said he believed the very special circumstances had been “created”, that “we are in a new world” after coronavirus, and the search for sites criteria had been made before businesses downsized. “But what do we know will be available tomorrow?” he added.

Objections to the proposal were largely from Denham Parish Council, relating to “serious encroachment” on Green Belt land and contraventions of “transport policies…taking no account of nearby proposals in the emerging Local Plan”. (Local Democracy Reporting Service)