Road numbering is a system with clear rules. Unfortunately the people responsible for numbering roads don't always follow them - or even, sometimes, seem to care there's a system at all.
Our year of celebrations to mark the centenary of UK road numbering has run on for slightly more than a year now - but who's counting? We're bringing the season to a close by exploring some incorrect and unhelpful numbering mistakes.
You wouldn't think it could go too badly wrong. Not only does the system come with rules to tell you what sort of number is appropriate in different situations and different parts of the country, there are also literally thousands of examples that demonstrate how it looks when it's done right.
Then again, maybe the fact that it looks easy is why it isn’t taken very seriously.
You might think a badly chosen number doesn't matter, and sometimes it doesn't. The present A42, for example, was applied to a road between Tamworth and Nottingham in the 1980s. It lies entirely within zone 5, so it should have a number beginning with a 5, so it’s technically wrong - but the downsides of calling it A42 are few, and outweighed by the navigational benefits of it forming a continuation of the M42. Choosing a number that breaks the rules, for pragmatic reasons, might be a good choice. The world still turns.
What we're here to discuss is much more interesting: bad numbers that were created for terrible reasons, or even for no reason at all. By looking at them in detail we might learn a little bit about why road numbering actually matters. But first, let's take a moment to remember how numbering is meant to work.
An internal memorandum between civil servants at the Department of the Environment in 1972, discussing potential motorway numbers south east of Birmingham, where you might expect to find a number like M41, explained the problem with this number:
“I should explain that we have problems with the number M.41 because at a very early stage it became attached to the West Cross Route in London. Eventually this will be sorted out and the allotted number, M.14, will be introduced. But this is unlikely to be done quickly because GLC are heavily involved with public enquiries and a change in numbers would be most unwelcome at the present time.”
The phrase "became attached" sounds almost delightfully accidental. It's easy to see what happened: it was meant to be M14, but at some point the digits were accidentally transposed, and since M41 appeared to fit nicely in West London, surrounded by 4-zone numbers, nobody thought anything of it until it was too late.
In 1973 it became clear that the rest of the West Cross Route would never be built, and the jumbled number remained in service until the stump of road lost motorway status about 26 years later.
Saved by roadgeeks
Here’s a very different kind of mistake. In the summer of 2011, Birmingham City Council opened a long-awaited bypass for Selly Oak, diverting the A38 away from the main shopping street. The old road, vacated by through traffic, was downgraded to a B-road. It needed a new number.
Its new number was B38.
Once again, the vigilant members of SABRE swung into righteous action, composing messages to Scotland’s trunk road authority to ask whether this was some terrible mistake. This time, though, the authorities were not to be swayed. Scotland no longer cares about the century-old rules.
“It should be noted that road signage is a devolved matter, and there is nothing to prevent a B-class road being given a two digit classification in Scotland. This matter has been reviewed by both the Ayrshire Roads Alliance and Transport Scotland, and neither organisation has found any issue with the chosen numbering of the B77.”
That is true: road numbering and signage are devolved matters, so Scotland is not beholden to Westminster, or anyone else, when it chooses numbers for its roads. They could have called the old road through Maybole the X5000 if they wanted, or Highway Z, or Route Four Billion, and nobody can tell them not to.
However, this is the first time that Scotland has actually done anything other than follow the rules established for the whole of Great Britain a century ago. (A pedant might also note that, while Scotland has the power to make its own numbering policy, it has never actually done so, and as far as anyone can tell its current policy is unchanged from the one it inherited in the 1990s, which permits only three- and four-digit B-road numbers.)
However, in early 1980, the final section of M876 opened to traffic, bypassing the old A876 through North Broomage and Antonshill. As is common, the old road was renumbered to remove the association with the number 876 and encourage through traffic onto the new motorway. But instead of a demotion, for reasons known only to themselves, Scottish highway engineers gave the bypassed length the unused number A88.
The result is that the old road, trundling through the towns of Stirlingshire, has the important-sounding and catchy number A88, while the high speed trunk road just to the north is lumbered with M876.
Why not just renumber the whole road to A88, which would permit this vital link in Scotland’s motorway system to be called M88?
No logical reason for this decision has ever been found, no official explanation has turned up to explain it, and nor does the open goal of M88 ever seem to have been considered. But then, if you go looking for logic in British road numbering, you’ll quickly find there’s none in sight.
Mistakes happen, of course, and the world muddles on regardless whether Britain has short lengths of road numbered B77 or B38 or M14 or M88. But all too often numbering is treated as an irrelevance or an afterthought, even by the professionals who are tasked with upholding it.
If we’re going to use road numbers at all - and we evidently are - then we ought to credit them with at least a passing appreciation of the value they can bring.
Road numbers have now been part of all of our lives for 101 years: a part of our national furniture without which we’d see the world, and our journeys through it, very differently. Road numbers are clearly worth the trouble. So, perhaps, we ought to go to the trouble of sparing them a moment’s thought when we need to come up with a new one.
Comments
It is worth remembering that the Scottish motorway numbering system is different from E&W (motorways are numbered by the A road they replace or complement, and therefore use the existing zonal system as for other roads). So M87 is effectively reserved for a never-to-built motorway between Invergarry and the north of Skye, via Eileen Donan castle. The suggestion of renaming the whole length of the road as A88 makes the most sense, and would be a good fit for its near neighbour, the A89.
Yes but Scotland *is* its own country and it *does* have its own rules, when it comes to highways. I don't see how we can expect them to follow the rules someone in Westminster created years ago, when they're not even being followed properly by English engineers. That just strikes me as typical English exceptionalism.
Scotland is not a country, merely a region of the United Kingdom.
No, it’s a country. The word “country” doesn’t mean “sovereign nation state”. Wikipedia has a good definition as a starting point:
“A country is a distinct part of the world, such as a state, nation, or other political entity. When referring to a specific polity, the term "country" may refer to a sovereign state, states with limited recognition, constituent country, or a dependent territory.”
No, Scotland is a country inside the United Kingdom. Similar on how Uzbekistan was before inside the Soviet Union.
I am Scottish born and bred, Scotland most definitely is 'part' the UK but if you ask most Scots you find that we are Scottish NOT British.
Oh and Scotland is a nation.
"I also wonder what the rules are for road numbers in Northern Ireland."
Rules? I see no rhyme nor reason. For A roads the A1 runs from Belfast to the border, meeting the Irish N1, the A2 runs along the coastline. The M1 starts parallel to the A1, and similarly the M2 starts parallel to the A2. There was a grand motorway scheme which means there are numbered stretches of what are effectively spurs, and stretches that were built in isolation such as the A8(M) and M2 Ballymena bypass.
As for B roads, there are no rules on length of digits etc. I live near the B6 and it is an awful stretch especially between the market town of Saintfield and its terminus near J6 of the M1. J2 of the M12 you'll even see signage for the B2, a road with no particular importance.
Occasionally you'll see a bit of logic, the A12 which "links" the M1 and M2, the A101 which is a relatively modern retail park diversion for the M1/A1 Sprucefield junction.
This is a bit random, but I remember being intrigued by a "B50" I saw in the Philip's Street Atlas of Edinburgh. Unfortunately it was a misprint for the entirely unremarkable B1350.
Where is the line where geekery crosses into becoming a killjoy?
Britain has famously always been a nation of eccentrics - quirks, oddities and one-offs are all part of our charm. Getting all hot under the collar because there are a few harmless idiosyncrasies, feeling outraged (however slight and knowing!) that B38 should be the B38x or the B438 or whatever to slavishly comply with The Official Rule Book just means there are less fun oddities to look out for to relieve the tedium of a car journey. Boo!
All power to the A77/B77 - the next time I'm down that way I will be sure to toast it with a glass of non-alcoholic something. Vive la différence!
I agree. I'd add that a system is only useful when the vast majority of users can understand and benefit from it. The road number system (as distinct from the road numbers themselves (and i will reference this caveat when you keyboard warriors launch into one)) are not understood or used by most. The only real requirements for road numbers these days is to be unique and on google maps(other map apps are available).
Perhaps the solution lies in the example of the renumbering of the bypassed sections A74 to B70xx in various places, potentially incorporating the original number in the new number?
Actually, traffic signing is rather more important than Rob suggests. Anyone trained in road accident prevention will have learned of the dire consequences of carelessness over signing. Unfortunately, recent personal experience has shown that it is not taken seriously by the likes of Transport Scotland or its contractors, and road users will pay the price. (Maybole isn't the only disaster.)
So we have the M77, A77 and B77... is that unique on the UK mainland?
It’s definitely unique for a two-digit number, but there are - for example - an M876, A876 and B876. There will probably be others matching the numbers of three-digit motorways.
If you count M6 Toll as its administrative number of M600, A600 and B600 also exist
The former A601(M) comes to mind instantly when it comes to random and inconsistent road numbering!
Perhaps, when it was downgraded, they should have called it the M601(A)...?
That's actually quite a good idea! Another example could be the M6144(A) (obviously referring to the former A6144(M)) So if we could do that, there would be:
- 2 motorway classifications (Mx and Ax(M));
- 2 A-road classifications (Ax and Mx(A));
- and the Bx classification.
101 years since introduction it's surely time for a wholesale review in light of advances in navigation and the arrival of motorways.
The current system is no longer fit for purpose, it just isn't.
There is another post on the subject of road numbering on this site. I raised on it the case of the M62 (it should of course start with a 5) and also the A66. And with regards to Scotland the saga of the M6. Most of you will remember that during the upgrade of the A74 signs stated that it was to be called the M6, but its never happened and will never happen.
And about 30 years ago the saga of road numbering was raised in the Daily Telegraph motoring section one Saturday. Some from the the DOT said that road numbering "was being looked at". In the civil service if something is being looked at that means theyve lost the file!
I would suggest that the country has considerably higher priorities to spend a gazillion pounds on than this, what with consultants fees, patching tens of thousands of signs and a lengthy public information campaign because the government will be beside itself with worry that Outraged of FacegramtokX might be confused by changing it.
Auntie Google Maps says look for A999, Joe Bloggs looks for sign with A999 on it. Sorted. The fact that the geeks and experts say that, in an ideal world, it *should* be the Q6793 is irrelevant.
As for spending money, Blair said that it would cost at least 700 million quid to change the roads signs to metric so they werent going to be changed while he was Prime Minister.
So, how long before the Scottish government take back control of the A1 and renumber that road (and other A1* roads) north of the border.
I have suggested this on another post. To me it seems odd the the M6 stops before the border but the A1 keeps merrily rolling along to Edinburgh.
I was told that was because the original zones were based on an A road running from major centre to major centre, so the A1 was London to Edinburgh, A2 London to Dover, A3 London to Portsmouth, A4 London to Bath, A5 London to Holyhead, A6 London to Carlisle, A7 Edinburgh to Carlisle, A8 Edinburgh to Glasgow, and A9 Edinburgh to Inverness. As I understand, it was decided that the M6 couldn't, therefore, run to Glasgow because Glasgow is the '8 zone' and the space between it and Carlisle is the '7 zone'.
Thats a very good point about the M6, but why do the Scottish government not come out and say that its because of that the A and M 74 havent been renumbered? Dont forget that the plan 30 years ago was for the M6 to run all the way to Glasgow.
Except that the A-road zones are irrelevant to motorway numbering. In England and Wales they have their own zones, which are independent of A-road zones, and in Scotland motorways simply take the number of the A road they are intended to replace.
Regardless, in both cases they are just an overall system and, by accident or design, exceptions exist (indeed, that's the entire point of this article!) so if they wanted M6 to run to Glasgow there's nothing stopping them. Personally, I suspect its more likely a case of not wanting an "English" motorway number in Scotland.
And certainly, DO NOT come to the USA looking for any rhyme or reason to the roadway numbering system. The interstate highways USED to have a set of guidelines, but those seem to have devolved, also. When you have all the fingers of federal, state, county, municipalities (cities, towns, villages, etc) sticking their possessive fingers in the pie, the pie will be a mess.
There still is a certain amount of rhyme and reason to the number grids of the US for Interstates and US Highways. Most do follow the numbering conventions of the grids, though while one could argue that the duplicates shouldn't exist, I don't think the average driver's gonna care that there are technically two I-42s, I-74s, or I-87s. In fact, I doubt most would care too much about it, given that each state is allowed to use all nine 3dis for each 2di they have, regardless of whether or not any particular 3di is already in use in another state.
And one could very well argue that the grid was broken as soon as it was created back in 1926. US 11 runs a diagonal route from the Canadian border in far NE New York down southwest to New Orleans, LA, crossing US Routes 21, 31, and 41, with only US Route 51 being separated from it by the city of New Orleans itself. What wound-up becoming the famous (US) Route 66 was originally intended to be US Route 60 prior to some of the eastern states complaining about the lack of a major US Route. Due to getting a new alignment, the resulting US 66 wound-up being entirely north of US 60, and thus entirely out of grid.
And of course Canada changes road numbers at the boundary of each Province. For example route 401 in Ontario becomes autoroute something else in Quebec. I think the only road in Canada to keep its number is the Trans Canada Highway.
Here Because Tom Scott recommended it!! ?
I thought Tom had stopped producing his factual videos now?
Focusing on one-offs and TechDif stuff?
And then there are the hidden (in the UK) E-road numbers (which are not comprehensive for all Motorways or major A roads, and not always congruent with UK road numbers even when assigned, as far as I can see from a quick skim of available maps)
E-road numbers have their own rules and logic (I quickly went looking to see if there was an article on this this to reference here...but didn't find one Sabre and wikipedia both have articles.
I was so delighted to see one of the Selly Oak signs immortalised here. I had noticed, when taking a photo last year of a preemptive—but consequently confusing—roundabout infoboard showing 3 exits when the first one hadn't yet been built, that sunlight was grazing a little panel of green vinyl on an exit flag pentagon in such a way that the spurious characters "B38" bulged gently from underneath. I smiled inwardly. Or was it outwardly? Oops.
Great article. Legible road numbers are probably becoming less important (except to us road geeks) now most people rely on sat-nav rather than printed maps, and just follow a blue line instead of actively choosing a route. I guess in the A77/B77 example there's less incentive now for a longer B road number as the sat-nav would direct you through the quickest route and no decision on the motorist's part is needed. If driverless / automated vehicles become commonplace, the general public will likely take even less notice of road numbers - they'll eventually become something akin to a computer IP address which the tech uses to identify a route / destination and which only the engineers working on the tech need to know about!
Round the corner from Trafford Retail park there is a sign saying "M63 motorway" that should be "M60 motorway"
The M63? Blimey thats an old sign, but why was the number changed?
Presumably that sign hasn't been replaced in the last 25 years.
The Stretford-Eccles bypass used to be M63 (after being M62 for a few years). It was also originally two lanes each way with intermittent hard shoulders from the Eccles Interchange to the A56. The oddities of the Eccles Interchange are due to it not originally being built for the number of lanes that now pass underneath. All that section was completely rebuilt and widened during the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The section of M63 from the A56 to Princess Parkway was built with 3 lanes each way and continuous hard shoulders. That particular scheme ended with the spur to Roscoe's Roundabout (named after a garden centre that had closed long before the motorway was built).
I am surprised that no comment has been made about the numbering of the motorway between Carlisle and Glasgow at the border the M6 becomes the A74(M) but changes to the M74 north of Abington
There’s only so much space in one blog post! There are dozens more anomalies that we could have covered.
In the case of the M6, A74(M) and M74 - none of those numbers are wrong in terms of the rules for selecting road numbers, it’s just highly unusual that all three apply to different sections of what is effectively one road.
Not All of M81-M89 were unused. There once was M85.
Whether you disagree with the independence or not, Scotland is a recognised nation with the UK sovereign state. Those outside England won’t switch between Britain and England when somebody wins or loses something. As for decisions made, I’d say they missed an opportunity with the M88 and A88 at Kincardine Bridge for sure. But as it’s a bad thing, we’ll just list this under Scotland and Scottish
And why does the M62 become the A63?
One could equally ask why does it become the A5080 at the other end? There doesn't have to be, and often isn't, any correlation between motorway numbers and nearby or connecting A-road numbers.
That being said, in this case I suspect its probably because the M62 acts as a bypass / replacement for the old A63 (now B1230) between Howden and Newport, so where the motorway restrictions end it reverts to the 'original' number for the route it replaces.
Because the Motorway numbering system in England is different (although similar) to the other road numbering system, always has been, always will be. Otherwise you could argue the the M1 up to Rugby should be called the M5, and the M5 of today should be the M38.
Surely the A 166 through Stamford Bridge should have been the A 1066?
And as the M1 lies west of the A1 should it really be called M6?
No, because motorways don’t use the same zones as A- and B- roads. We’ve got a whole article about it!
So why dont motorways use the same numbering as A roads? I was under the impression that they do, please enlighten us?
Add new comment
Picture credits
- Archive photograph of West Cross Route under construction is used under licence from London Metropolitan Archives, City of London (Collage record number 248615).
- Photograph of sign showing B38 is courtesy of BigL and used with thanks.
- Photograph of High Street, Maybole is taken from an original by Billy McCrorie and used under this Creative Commons licence.
- Photograph of sign showing A77 and B77 is taken from an original by Mary and Angus Hogg and used under this Creative Commons licence.
- Photograph of M80 and M876 sign is taken from an original by N Chadwick and used under this Creative Commons licence.
- Photograph of A88 sign is taken from an original by Peter Wood and used under this Creative Commons licence.
I do find it absolutely pointless that the A876 was renumbered to an important sounding A88 and do wish that the M876 has the '6' dropped making it a much better sounding M87 as it's easier to patch over, I still don't get why the Scottish government had to muck about with the renumbering up north removing the M85 though, Scotland basically acts as it's own country and will of course not follow the UK rulebook on anything including road numbering, I also wonder what the rules are for road numbers in Northern Ireland. It's also funny that that B38 briefly appeared but most unusual that it was fixed. Awesome article!