Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cemetery Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges rule changes to allow more civilian markers, stone-dust footings at Concord cemeteries
Summary
Resident Dick Monahan proposed equalizing the number of civilian grave markers with veterans and replacing 18-inch concrete footings for civilian markers with 4 inches of stone dust, citing space efficiency, lower cost and environmental benefits; committee asked staff for more research and will revisit the proposal.
Resident Dick Monahan presented proposed changes to Concord cemetery marker and footing rules at the April 1 meeting, urging the committee to allow civilians the same number of individual flat markers veterans receive and to permit 4 inches of stone dust as the footing for all flat markers instead of the current 18-inch concrete requirement for civilian markers.
Monahan, a former committee member, said rising cremation rates and family examples motivated the proposal. "My first proposal is that we equalize the number of civilian markers for the number of veterans markers," he told the committee, arguing equal treatment would provide more options for plot owners and make more efficient use of limited cemetery space.
On footings, Monahan said landscapers and monument installers he consulted told him that a properly installed 4-inch stone-dust footing is stable and about half the cost of concrete. "Stone dust is half the cost of concrete," he said, adding that stone dust also would be more environmentally friendly and reduce cost burdens on families.
Committee members and staff pressed Monahan on practical concerns, including root intrusion, slope and old sections of the cemetery where buried roots and irregular soil conditions could cause shifting. One committee member asked, "How do you feel about not using concrete anymore?" and staff noted the town has used concrete because monument companies and families had preferred it for perceived long-term stability.
Staff also described the operational tradeoffs: stone dust can settle and may need periodic resetting in some areas, while concrete increases installation cost and can reduce flexibility for future adjustments. Committee members raised maintenance and aesthetic concerns, including whether allowing more flat markers could crowd areas intended for uprights or change mowing/maintenance patterns.
No vote was taken. The committee asked staff — including the town engineer — to research stability, cost estimates, maintenance impacts and possible grandfathering or zoning of sections before the committee places the proposal on a future agenda for further consideration.
The committee expects staff to return with findings and recommended language for any rule change at a subsequent meeting.
