Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Naming topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council declines proposed rename to Monterra Way; directs staff to pursue alternate name
Summary
Council voted to deny an ordinance that would rename the eastern leg of North Bend Payne Road to Monterra Way and instructed staff to return with a different name (suggested Wheeler Lane) after residents raised objection and historical name concerns.
The Fate City Council on May 5 denied Ordinance O2025-015, a proposal to rename the eastern leg of North Bend Payne Road to Monterra Way, and directed staff to return with an alternative name for council consideration.
Staff explained the request stems from duplication concerns: Monterra Phase 2 will extend North Bend Payne to a current intersection at Monterra Way and county 9‑1‑1 addressing staff recommended renaming to avoid duplicate road names that could confuse emergency response and deliveries. The city sent certified notices to the six affected property owners and planned a roughly 30‑day transition period if a name change proceeds.
During public comment, Stephanie Barker of 1046 North Bend Payne Road said the proposed change would create burdens for residents. "I have many things... tied to our addresses," she told the council, and she asked to keep the existing identity or choose a name reflecting local history. A written statement submitted by Emily and Bracey Woodard asked instead for "East Bend Payne Road" and raised questions whether Monterra residents and developers would extend sidewalks, utilities and amenities to the smaller road if the name were changed.
Councilmember Alan moved to deny the Monterra Way ordinance and asked staff to return with a new name; he recommended Wheeler Lane based on historical ownership. An amendment to direct staff to propose Wheeler Lane or another suitable, county‑approved name was adopted; the amendment and the denial passed 7–0.
Staff said changing the street name will require coordination with Rockwall County 9‑1‑1 addressing and that, if approved, the city would supply a follow‑up letter and a transition period during which both old and new addresses would be recognized to reduce service interruptions.
Council took the action after weighing resident opposition, 9‑1‑1 addressing concerns and the need to prevent future emergency‑response confusion if two roads share a name.
