The  Head of Law and Governance has submitted a report  seeking Cabinet approval for the updated Street Naming and Numbering Policy for the Council.

Recommendations:That Cabinet resolves to:

1.    Approve the draft Street Naming and Numbering Policy; and

2.    Delegate authority to the Head of Law and Governance to make any amendments to the draft Street Naming and Numbering Policy as a result of the Cabinet’s consideration of it.

The  Head of Law and Governance had submitted a report  seeking Cabinet approval for the updated Street Naming and Numbering Policy for the Council.

Cllr Nigel Chapman, Cabinet Member for Customer Focused Services, introduced the report.  The Council had a legal responsibility for determining street names and house numbering and needed to ensure that it was done in a professional and transparent way which resulted in unique and unambiguous addresses for everyone. The matter of street naming often generated considerable and understandable interest but it was necessary to be clear that the final decision rested with the Council. In the case of new streets which might be named after people, the default position was that a reasonable period of time should have elapsed since their passing  to give time for a considered reflection of its appropriateness.

There was a growing public appetite for the reconsideration of the suitability of some names which, with the passage of time and new perceptions, may now seem tainted.  While this was still a relatively infrequent occurrence, the policy surrounding it needed to be clear, and set out a two stage process.  The Council would need to be assured that there was broad support for such a change in the local community,  particularly from those living in the street in question. The final decision would need to have the active support of a substantial proportion of those residents living in the street at the time of the consultation.

Cabinet resolved to:

1.    Approve the  Street Naming and Numbering Policy; and

2.    Delegate authority to the Head of Law and Governance to make any amendments to the draft Street Naming and Numbering Policy as a result of the Cabinet’s consideration of it.

Cabinet, at its meeting on 11 November, will consider a report on the revised Street Naming and Numbering Policy. The Committee is asked to consider the report and agree any recommendations thereon.

Councillor Nigel Chapman, Cabinet Member for Customer Focused Services and Emma Griffiths, Lawyer, have been invited to attend for this item.

The Committee considered the Cabinet report on Street Naming and Numbering Policy.

Councillor Nigel Chapman, Cabinet Member for Customer Focused Services,  introduced the report. The Council had a legal responsibility to determine the policy for deciding on street names and numbers and there was a requirement for this to be reviewed every three years. The opportunity to review and clarify the policy  was timely and  welcome.

At the heart of the policy was recognition that local people should have a say in decisions balanced against the understanding that final decisions rest with the Council. The policy listed those people who should be consulted as a matter of course but the list was not exclusive and could be expanded if thought desirable. The basic rules behind the choice of names were commonsensical, such as the need to avoid duplication, unambiguous spelling etc. There was a principle that streets should not, normally, be named after someone until a period of 5 years after their passing had elapsed.  This gave time for a considered perspective on their life but this was a guiding principle and not an absolute requirement.

The renaming of streets, although a less frequent occurrence, was something which remained topical in the case of names of historical/public figures whose position in society might be reappraised. Renaming decisions would be firmly based on the views of local residents which have the “active support of a substantial proportion of those residents living in the street at the time of the consultation.”

In the case of subdivided properties the policy required a numerical distinction. This would be the position going forward and could not be applied retrospectively to the many historic examples of alphabetical or other forms of distinction.

It was confirmed that all future communications with consultees about street naming would make it clear that final decisions rest with the Council and, ultimately, the Cabinet.

While developers could propose names for new streets, they did not have an exclusive right and other interested parties could do so too.

The Committee  was pleased to note the report and had no recommendations to make on it to Cabinet.