Considerations for all new building number suffixes

  • Suffixes should be used where there is no gap in existing numbering sequence for an infill development.

    For example, 4 new properties are proposed for a gap on an existing street between the existing numbers 25 and 31 but there are insufficient odd numbers to allocate to the new properties.

    Where possible, avoid applying a suffix to an existing building number, for example 25A, as this may cause confusion to the existing building numbered 25. This is because it infers that a spilt of the existing number 25 has occurred and an additional external entrance has been added to this building. Consideration should also be given that the existing number 25 may already be subdivided and 25A may already exist.
    Sequence 23, 25, 25A, 27, 27A, 29, 31, 35... Not correct

    The new building numbering sequence should begin with the next whole number, for example, 27, 27A, 29, 29A.
    Sequence 23, 25, 27, 27A, 29, 29A, 31, 35... Correct
  • Where a large number of new buildings require suffixes, consideration should be given to not using the following letters: I, J, O, Q and Z.
    Sequence 25, 27A, 27B, 27C, 27D, 27E, 27F, 27G, 27H, 27I, 27J, 29... Not advisable

    In this instance consideration may be given to adding a named terrace to the development to avoid the use of an excessive number of suffixes.
    25, then 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 The Terrace, Main Street, then resuming 27 - appropriate sequence

    London Building Acts (Amendment) Act 1939 empowers Local Authorities to use fractions as suffixes.