Agenda item

To consider aligning the Street Naming and Numbering charging system between Tewkesbury and Cheltenham Borough Councils and to make recommendations to Council to achieve this.  

1.   That it be AGREED that charging for street naming and numbering in the Borough be introduced and that authority be delegated to the Deputy Chief Executive, in consultation with the Lead Member for Built Environment, to take all necessary steps to implement such charges.

2.   That it be RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

a.   that, after giving the requisite notice under Section 180 and Schedule 14 Paragraph 25 of the Local Government Act 1972, the provisions of Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Public Health Act 1925 shall apply throughout the Borough; and

b.   that, once Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Public Health Act 1925 have been adopted, Section 64 of the Towns Improvement Clauses Act 1847 shall cease to have effect so far as it relates to street naming (although it would still apply to matters of house numbering).  

31.1           The report of the Development Services Group Manager, circulated separately at Pages No.1-5, asked Members to consider a proposal for Tewkesbury and Cheltenham Boroughs to align their street naming and numbering charging system so that an income was received which covered the running costs of the service.

31.2           Members were advised that the street naming and numbering service had been operated for Tewkesbury Borough Council by the shared Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Building Control Service since its formation in November 2009. Prior to that the Tewkesbury Building Control Service had operated and maintained the system. Tewkesbury Borough was currently the only District Council in the County which did not make a charge for the discretionary aspects of the service and, therefore, if it began charging it would align more closely with other street naming and numbering services as well as providing a more understandable service for customers. It was felt sensible for a single charging system to be available across the County, however, currently the only practical option was to align Tewkesbury and Cheltenham (as that was a shared service) and to work with Stroud, Gloucester, Cotswold and the Forest of Dean Councils to develop a system which was aligned across all of the Districts, subject to compliance with the legal requirement that charging be based on a cost recovery basis.

31.3           Based on the 2015 figures for Tewkesbury, and using the current Cheltenham Borough Council charging levels, it was estimated that the potential income could reach £32,175 which would mean a surplus of £838.00 to be put back into the service once the costs, including Officer time, had been covered. Members felt that the proposal was a good idea, especially given the fact that the service could be self-financing, they did however express concern that this had not been done before. In response, the Development Services Group Manager explained that, when the original Section 101 Agreement had been put into place to set up the shared service, there had been a lot of legislative issues and this was why the charges had not been introduced immediately. Those issues had now been addressed and it was felt to be a good time to review the matter. Another Member questioned why it was anticipated that there would be problems aligning the charges across the County. In response, she was advised that each District had a different scale of fees and moves to align them previously had not been successful.

31.4           In terms of the implementation of the charges for Tewkesbury, Members were advised that the consultation period would run for approximately six to eight weeks; they could then be implemented. In terms of the requirement that the service be non-profit making, Members were advised that this was set down within the legislation. There were four categories for street naming and numbering which were used in Cheltenham and the same model would be used in Tewkesbury: changes to an existing postal address £35.00; new development not involving new street names £50.00 per plot/unit up to a maximum of £500.00; developments requiring new street name and numbering £100.00 per street plus £50.00 per plot up to a maximum of £500.00; and renaming of existing streets £100.00 per street. Officers were looking at increasing the profile of the service so as to improve its market share; this would of course be helpful for its resilience against competitors in the private sector. In response to a query regarding maintenance costs, Members were advised that this related to IT equipment and, if it was not budgeted for, the upgrades required would not be easily obtained. A Member referred to the maintenance of street furniture in his area but was advised that this would usually be undertaken by County Highways. Another Member indicated that her Ward had fairly recently received some funding for new signs so she thought that there may be a small budget available within the Borough Council for this.

31.5           The Chief Executive advised that the Council was trying to make all of its activities as commercial as possible and building control was no exception. Cheltenham Borough Council was taking the same kind of approach to commercialism so both would be looking to maximise income as best as they could according to the rules. Having considered the report, and information provided, it was