Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Naming topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council rejects street-name change request for small Summit Ridge court
Summary
The McAlester City Council voted down an applicant request to rename a short court in the Summit Ridge subdivision (affecting one addressed structure) from its existing name to Grace Court; the planning commission had recommended approval 5–3.
The McAlester City Council voted down a request to change the name of a short court in the Summit Ridge subdivision, rejecting the applicant’s request to rename the court to Grace Court. Council members voted against the change after a public hearing and discussion of address impacts.
Planning staff said the application affected a short cul-de-sac with only one currently addressed structure; the Planning Commission recommended approval by a 5–3 vote. Planner Miss Clifton told council that notice for the request followed the city code’s publication requirement. “Section 94-180 of the McAlester City Code requires publication,” Miss Clifton said during the hearing.
Applicant Daniel Bensky (addressing the council as the property owner) said he was seeking the change because mail and business matters were being affected and because of the modern cultural perception of the existing name. “I get a lot of mail. I'm doing the home office running of the business...my house is the only house that will ever have an address on this court,” Bensky told the council. He also said he had spoken to nearby lot owners but could not confirm whether they had been personally notified.
Council discussion ranged from past name changes to the lack of formal written criteria for renaming streets. Several council members noted the city has processed multiple street-name changes in recent years for a variety of reasons, including commemorations. One council member framed naming as a discretionary, political decision for the council.
A motion to approve the name change failed on roll call. The transcript records yes votes from Councilor Stone and the mayor and no votes from Vice Mayor Beatty, Councilor Woodley, Councilor Roden and Councilor Boatwright; the motion failed. Planning commission and staff records are in the meeting packet; the council did not adopt a policy establishing objective criteria for future name-change requests during the session.
Because the request involved a single addressed structure in a residential area, questions about 911 address assignment and whether future lots would take different addresses were raised. Miss Clifton said 911 addressing practices determine initial addressing based on which way a structure faces. Councilors did not direct staff to draft new renaming criteria at this meeting.
