Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Naming topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. James council splits over street name for donated parcel, approves '6th Avenue Court S' on first reading
Summary
The St. James City Council voted 3–2 on Nov. 6 to approve the first reading of Ordinance 025 to name a donated parcel '6th Avenue Court S' after heated debate over consistency with past street-naming practices and relations with the land donor.
The St. James City Council voted 3–2 on Nov. 6 to approve the first reading of Ordinance 025, adopting the name 6th Avenue Court S for a parcel donated to the city for a fourplex development.
Council discussion centered on whether to follow the Economic Development Authority’s recommendation to name the parcel Cunningham Lane or to keep naming conventions consistent across the city. One council member urged rejecting the EDA recommendation to maintain consistency and to preserve a relationship with a potential donor, saying the donation made the development possible: "this was donated years ago and we are now able to put a fourplex on it to address housing needs in our community," the member said. The same speaker moved to reject the EDA recommendation and return to the Cunningham name; that motion was seconded.
Other council members defended the EDA and Planning & Zoning process. Planning staff noted the EDA had recommended the Cunningham name and that the item had gone through the Planning Commission on Oct. 29 with a recommendation to proceed. At one point a council member said, "Brianna was bullied to put it in on the agenda," criticizing how the item reached the council, and another council member pushed for adherence to prior street-naming patterns so residents can find locations more easily.
Following debate, councilors first voted to reject the EDA recommendation and then voted 3–2 to adopt the ordinance naming the parcel 6th Avenue Court S on its first reading. Council recorded a 3–2 tally on the naming; the meeting transcript records the final first-reading approval but does not list individual vote names.
Why it matters: The decision determines the street name for a site that will host a fourplex intended to address local housing needs and has drawn attention because the parcel was donated. Council members framed the debate around procedural consistency, community wayfinding and maintaining relationships with local donors.
Next steps: The council indicated this was the first reading of the ordinance; a future meeting will include the second reading and any final adoption steps.
