photo-12It’s not over yet. Despite plans for a Ladbrokes on the corner of Water Street and Castle Street (in the premises vacated by Starbucks, which was odd in itself. Why would Starbucks vacate such a good coffee spot?) being refused by the Council’s planning department, the bookies have appealed again: for a third time.

When Ladbrokes submitted their proposals, the Council responded fairly unequivocally: “The proposed signage would set an undesirable precedent for the proliferation of further such unsuitable signage to listed and historic buildings in this locality, which would further detract from the character and setting of the Castle Street Conservation Area and Liverpool’s Maritime Mercantile City

“The proposal would constitute incongruous, cumbersome and overly prominent features that sit awkwardly with the building fenestration and architecture, thereby detracting from the character and appearance of the Grade II listed application building, and undermining the special character and setting of the surrounding historic area.” Furthermore, the Council says, the proposed alterations would constitute: “unduly harmful and irreversible impacts to the historic building fabric.”

So that’s a no, then?

And yet, this week, following a further, rejected application, Ladbrokes Plc has mounted a further appeal. Make no mistake, they’re desperate to cross the finish line with this one.

Local resident, Clare Gammond is just one of many who are hoping their appeal is, again, rejected.

“I’ve lived in the city centre for a couple of years now and since Starbucks closed back in October 2012 I really hoped an original, interesting business would choose to trade from the building. Instead we are faced with the prospect of two Ladbrokes betting shops, one at each end of Castle Street, with the existing one located just around the corner on Lord Street,” she tells SevenStreets.

“The empty building is in both the Commercial District and the Castle Street conservation area. I’ve objected to the proposals twice and the Council knocked them back twice. The Council also confirmed it is a Listed Building.

“I walk past the building at least twice a day and the number of tourists taking photos never ceases to amaze me. What a crappy impression it would give if all their photos of Castle Street and Water Street include ‘Ladbrokes’ in lights. There’s already a William Hill on Castle Street but customers access the premises away from street level. The empty building is huge and is located on a corner, so I’m expecting Ladbrokes would plaster it with advertising and signage…”

Ladbrokes, if you’re reading: find somewhere else to rinse us dry, thanks.

  • Philip Stratford

    I’ve registered my objection to the first two planning applications as well. Why won’t they get the message? Nice comments from Claire, there – she could have given them in French, too you know!

  • Andrew

    Liverpool should become a bookies-free zone. We could have those signs line we used to have in the 80’s about nuclear free on the East Lancs to advertise the fact…

  • thewilk

    Like I said on Facebook, I’d rather see a bookies in what must be one of Liverpool’s most affluent streets than in a low income area, which are already full of bookies and Cash Converters. Sounds like the council are resisting the controversial architectural plans, so what is the issue here? Nothing but nimbyism.

  • Stephen Cunningham

    why did Starbucks shut down?

  • Clare Gammond

    Cheers Phil. A real shame I feel I have to defend my views here as I’m not anti-gambling as such and I’ve got at least a dozen bookmakers ‘in my back yard’ already…I’m not a nimby! This building is in a focal point second only to the Waterfront. The company is already on Lord Street and that’s why so many have objected. I very much doubt they would close the other one if they succeed…

  • The Salted Slug

    The Starbucks closed because it wasn’t making money, hard as you might find that to believe. A fair number of branches across the country closed actually.
    Makes you wonder just how exorbitant the rent/rates must be. It might go some way to explaining the vast number of empty commercial spaces too.

  • bobbybobob

    If they get this it will be the crowning turd on the decline of our Liverpool streets.