Decision made after Blackpool mortuary plan opposed by residents

A meeting of the council's planning committee heard virtually every resident of Cornwall Avenue in North Shore had objected to the application to use a warehouse for embalming dead bodies.

Ward councillor Michele Scott, representing 36 residents who had objected, said the location was set within a row of terraced houses, with children living nearby.

She said: "It is difficult to comprehend how the proposed activities, including the collection of associated waste, would not have a direct impact."

Committee members said they felt the building, a former food bank and part of the Blackpool Deaf Club before it closed down, was unsuitable for the proposed use.

Coun Andrew Stansfield said a mortuary would be better located in an industrial area, while Coun Gary Coleman added: "I know we need facilities like this, but it is totally the wrong place."

Town hall planners had recommended the application was approved because it would cause no more disruption than the current use of the building as a warehouse.

Plans to use the site as a training school for embalmers had been dropped as part of the proposals, so this would mean fewer traffic movements.

A planning report added "the deceased would be delivered to and from thepremises through the front garage door with all loading and unloading undertaken within the building. "

The report said objections had "been received on the basis of the psychological impact the use could have on surrounding residents, including children.

"Such concerns are understandable. However, mortuary services are a vital and integral part of any community, and any mortuary business would be expected to conduct their work with discretion and sensitivity. "

However the committee voted unanimously against the application, with the main planning reason for refusal being the cold room serving the mortuary would be cooled by external wall mounted chiller cabinets.

It was felt these would generate noise, including at night, meaning the proposals would have too much of an adverse impact on residents.