Care to make it? I think it'll be a logistical nightmare (eg. how do you get consent? Do you have to sign a form and send it to tomtom/google? Does filling in your address imply consent? Who can give consent? The property owner? The occupant? If I'm at at a party and want other friends to come over, do I have to explicitly ask the occupant/owner for permission? Google can probably easily get consent from people, but what about mapping startups? What if the previous owners gave consent, can you revoke that consent?), and provide little to zero privacy benefits.

I don't really care to make the argument, no, since I think street numbers are reasonably expected to be in the public domain in the culture I've grown up with.

But I wouldn't rule out that someone else looks at it differently to the degree that I'd pose it as a rhetorical question, as an example that's illuminating in its absurdity. That was really all I was trying to say.

Though whether or not it'd be a logistical nightmare for Google or startups really doesn't play into it; all kinds of privacy (and other) regulations are logistical nightmares for those whose business it is to violate them. E.g. kyc regulations were a logistical nightmare for financial services that didn't bother or didn't want to k their cs.