Highest house number within London

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 6173
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Herts

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by trickstat » Wed Jul 14, 2021 07:58

RichardA626 wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 22:14
I remember my Dad mentioning there was a road in Watford that went into 4 figures.
That would be St Albans Road which I think edges over 1000.

Piatkow
Member
Posts: 2070
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 13:59

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by Piatkow » Wed Jul 14, 2021 08:49

c2R wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:33
Glen wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:21
And more "stupid places to change a road name", one I found when looking for addresses there last year.
Now that is a good topic...

Apton Road, Bishops Stortford manages to escape termination at a roundabout and continue in a different direction... it then continues past cemetary road and then becomes Scott Road, half way between Cemetary Road and Fairlands... it simply doesn't make any sense.

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/ind ... 18&layer=0
You need to verify things like that on the ground or with StreetView. Shifting the point where street names change is one of the copyright traps they put on maps.

Looking at an ABC map I was thoroughly confused as I couldn't pick the site of the house were I spent my earliest years. A quick virtual journey on Google checking the street name plates showed that the names changed at a crossroad not at the illogical point that the map showed.

Octaviadriver
Member
Posts: 1481
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 20:20
Location: Powys

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by Octaviadriver » Wed Jul 14, 2021 08:58

c2R wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:33
Glen wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:21
And more "stupid places to change a road name", one I found when looking for addresses there last year.
Now that is a good topic...

Apton Road, Bishops Stortford manages to escape termination at a roundabout and continue in a different direction... it then continues past cemetary road and then becomes Scott Road, half way between Cemetary Road and Fairlands... it simply doesn't make any sense.

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/ind ... 18&layer=0
This one in Brecon often causes confusion. The B4601 westbound from the town starts off as Bridge Street, then becomes Orchard Street before it changes again to Newgate Street, all in the space of ¾ mile.
https://goo.gl/maps/fdSGQvzHqgMuUFrr8

User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 10359
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by c2R » Wed Jul 14, 2021 10:26

Piatkow wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 08:49
c2R wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:33
Glen wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:21
And more "stupid places to change a road name", one I found when looking for addresses there last year.
Now that is a good topic...

Apton Road, Bishops Stortford manages to escape termination at a roundabout and continue in a different direction... it then continues past cemetary road and then becomes Scott Road, half way between Cemetary Road and Fairlands... it simply doesn't make any sense.

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/ind ... 18&layer=0
You need to verify things like that on the ground or with StreetView. Shifting the point where street names change is one of the copyright traps they put on maps.
I certainly did for the Stortford one - I was adding POIs to OSM and spent some time looking at the house numbers before eventually figuring out that the street randomly changed name!
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps

User avatar
M4Simon
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2002 22:35
Location: WGC, Herts
Contact:

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by M4Simon » Wed Jul 14, 2021 17:24

c2R wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 10:26
Piatkow wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 08:49
c2R wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:33


Now that is a good topic...

Apton Road, Bishops Stortford manages to escape termination at a roundabout and continue in a different direction... it then continues past cemetary road and then becomes Scott Road, half way between Cemetary Road and Fairlands... it simply doesn't make any sense.

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/ind ... 18&layer=0
You need to verify things like that on the ground or with StreetView. Shifting the point where street names change is one of the copyright traps they put on maps.
I certainly did for the Stortford one - I was adding POIs to OSM and spent some time looking at the house numbers before eventually figuring out that the street randomly changed name!
I lived at the top of Newtown Road for a while in the early 90s. I had a friend who lived in one of the first houses in Scott Road and I didn't realise that Apton Road carried on beyond the roundabout. However, Streetview shows a sign that proves you are right! Clicking back in time shows it's only been there a couple of years.

Looking at the architecture of 156-160 Apton Road, the houses are of the same style as those elsewhere on the road, and very different from those in Scott Road. In the town where they re-named Council Road to Wayletts Drive, I suspect that the residents didn't want to be associated with the (probably newer) Council houses next door.

Simon
Historic (1922) routes project

Please visit Rural Roads

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!

User avatar
Sabrista
Secretary
Posts: 2987
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 16:16
Location: Long Eaton, Derbyshire
Contact:

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by Sabrista » Wed Jul 14, 2021 17:57

I grew up at 769 Eastern Avenue, Newbury Park (A12). A girl in my class at school lived further down on the other side of the road at 1128.

Serena
"The motorways are full of teachers' pets in their company cars listening to Simply Red..." - Dean Johnson

Big Trip In A Big (Now Little) Car! (new)
Serena's Mr Floppy Collection
My other pet project!

User avatar
jgharston
Member
Posts: 2138
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 18:06
Location: Sheffield/Whitby

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by jgharston » Wed Jul 14, 2021 20:03

I spent my off-time over the last year driving around the Esk Valley tracking down road names (and house names) to proof read the electoral register. There are loads of places where maps, council documents, and reality on the ground don't match up, eg:
Ellerby Lane?
East Barnby Lane?

User avatar
RichardA626
Member
Posts: 6626
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 22:19
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by RichardA626 » Wed Jul 14, 2021 22:10

Glen wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:15
RichardA626 wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 22:14
Stockport Road in Levenshulme - Longsight certainly gets into the thousands.
Stockport rd.PNG
The road name and building numbers there change arbitrarily at the local authority boundary, so there's the illogical situation of buildings opposite each other being numbered as part of different roads.
Thanks what is the source of the map?
Beware of the trickster on the roof

doebag
Member
Posts: 2029
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 11:47
Location: Wisbech, Cambs

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by doebag » Thu Dec 02, 2021 10:53

Our current house does not have a number, it is registered with Royal Mail by it's name. However every other house in the road is numbered. Depending what database is looked at, we are either top of the list before Number 1, or last after number 102.

Where I was born and grew up was numbered 102, but some time later while we still lived there we were renumbered to 157. Not sure why, but it postdated the formation of the GLC in 1965 by a number of years.

User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 12742
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by KeithW » Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:17

Well we have a rather odd situation on our street which was built in the 1950's. When the developer bought the land there was one holdout who owned an orchard and wouldnt sell at any price. a number (32) was set aside but when the owner died and his heirs sold up it was realise that the plot was too large for one bungalow so two were built in the 1970's. Mine is number 32 and my neighbours is 32A which causes no end of confusion.

User avatar
the cheesecake man
Member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
Location: Sheffield

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by the cheesecake man » Thu Dec 02, 2021 13:22

c2R wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 23:33
Apton Road, Bishops Stortford manages to escape termination at a roundabout and continue in a different direction... it then continues past cemetary road and then becomes Scott Road, half way between Cemetary Road and Fairlands... it simply doesn't make any sense.

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/ind ... 18&layer=0
Is it possible that the roundabout was added after the road was named and at the time the name changed at one minor junction rather than another?

There's a few roads in Sheffield where the name continues past an obvious junction with the Inner Ring Road and changes at a minor junction or even an ex-junction nearby.

Eg Ecclesall Road turns into Moore Street not at the roundabout but at the slight left bend where Twinkl is shown and Bahn Thai's address is 1 Ecclesall Road.

User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 4285
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by Vierwielen » Thu Dec 02, 2021 18:26

KeithW wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:17
Well we have a rather odd situation on our street which was built in the 1950's. When the developer bought the land there was one holdout who owned an orchard and wouldnt sell at any price. a number (32) was set aside but when the owner died and his heirs sold up it was realise that the plot was too large for one bungalow so two were built in the 1970's. Mine is number 32 and my neighbours is 32A which causes no end of confusion.
This is a typical British problem - if a property is split into two, one part retains the original number and the other has an "A" appended to it. Fortunately my two kids do not have this problem. My son owns a flat that occupies the top floor floor of a 3-story Victorian house, formerly No 45. The three flats are 45a, 45b and 45c.

In my view, if a property is subdivided, the original number should be "retired" and each property should have the original number with a "A", "B", "C" etc as a suffix. Thus, my previous house was part of large Victorian property that had been converted intio a pair of semis. The original property was No 46, but the two new properties are now No 46 and No 46A which can cause problems is somebody uses shoddy software to hold addresses and the software can only accept numberic data for the house number - post for 46A can easily end up at No 46.

User avatar
Was92now625
Member
Posts: 709
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 00:29
Location: near A625

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by Was92now625 » Thu Dec 02, 2021 19:45

Vierwielen wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 18:26
In my view, if a property is subdivided, the original number should be "retired" and each property should have the original number with a "A", "B", "C" etc as a suffix. Thus, my previous house was part of large Victorian property that had been converted intio a pair of semis. The original property was No 46, but the two new properties are now No 46 and No 46A which can cause problems is somebody uses shoddy software to hold addresses and the software can only accept numberic data for the house number - post for 46A can easily end up at No 46.
I remember seeing a house in Arbroath with number 47 1/2 (forty seven and a half).

https://www.instantstreetview.com/@56.5 ... DRcUQwFPaw I think. I can't quite magnify it enough to check.

doebag
Member
Posts: 2029
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 11:47
Location: Wisbech, Cambs

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by doebag » Thu Dec 02, 2021 20:11

Vierwielen wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 18:26
KeithW wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:17
Well we have a rather odd situation on our street which was built in the 1950's. When the developer bought the land there was one holdout who owned an orchard and wouldnt sell at any price. a number (32) was set aside but when the owner died and his heirs sold up it was realise that the plot was too large for one bungalow so two were built in the 1970's. Mine is number 32 and my neighbours is 32A which causes no end of confusion.
This is a typical British problem - if a property is split into two, one part retains the original number and the other has an "A" appended to it. Fortunately my two kids do not have this problem. My son owns a flat that occupies the top floor floor of a 3-story Victorian house, formerly No 45. The three flats are 45a, 45b and 45c.

In my view, if a property is subdivided, the original number should be "retired" and each property should have the original number with a "A", "B", "C" etc as a suffix. Thus, my previous house was part of large Victorian property that had been converted intio a pair of semis. The original property was No 46, but the two new properties are now No 46 and No 46A which can cause problems is somebody uses shoddy software to hold addresses and the software can only accept numberic data for the house number - post for 46A can easily end up at No 46.
I'd agre totally with that. If a small row of terraced houses are built on a plot where a single house stood, they get numbered 1A/1B/1C etc. It should be the same if the existing house is divided up.

Isleworth1961
Member
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 14:15
Location: South Gloucestershire

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by Isleworth1961 » Thu Dec 02, 2021 20:50

KeithW wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:17
Well we have a rather odd situation on our street which was built in the 1950's. When the developer bought the land there was one holdout who owned an orchard and wouldnt sell at any price. a number (32) was set aside but when the owner died and his heirs sold up it was realise that the plot was too large for one bungalow so two were built in the 1970's. Mine is number 32 and my neighbours is 32A which causes no end of confusion.
In a road near me two neighbouring houses were very widely spaced, one having a very big bit of garden at the side. Owner of the house with this big garden got planning permission for a house on the plot between his house and his neighbour's. When the new house was built between them it was allocated an A suffix to the other neighbour's number. He wasn't happy, but as that was the direction the numbers in the road ran, rules is rules. But I suppose the new house could have been renumbered to the number of the original house (in which garden it was built), and the existing house given the A suffix...if the other owner had pushed hard enough.

User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 12742
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by KeithW » Thu Dec 02, 2021 21:20

Vierwielen wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 18:26

This is a typical British problem - if a property is split into two, one part retains the original number and the other has an "A" appended to it. Fortunately my two kids do not have this problem. My son owns a flat that occupies the top floor floor of a 3-story Victorian house, formerly No 45. The three flats are 45a, 45b and 45c.

In my view, if a property is subdivided, the original number should be "retired" and each property should have the original number with a "A", "B", "C" etc as a suffix. Thus, my previous house was part of large Victorian property that had been converted intio a pair of semis. The original property was No 46, but the two new properties are now No 46 and No 46A which can cause problems is somebody uses shoddy software to hold addresses and the software can only accept numberic data for the house number - post for 46A can easily end up at No 46.
These were both new properties plonked down in a plot that may have been normal size for 1951 but the frontage for each is 14 m wide and the length is 37 m. As built they were identical twins.

User avatar
Was92now625
Member
Posts: 709
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 00:29
Location: near A625

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by Was92now625 » Thu Dec 02, 2021 22:24

doebag wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 20:11
I'd agre totally with that. If a small row of terraced houses are built on a plot where a single house stood, they get numbered 1A/1B/1C etc. It should be the same if the existing house is divided up.
Who decides ? If it is the authorities, there SHOULD be a measure of consistency. If it is the individuals, I'd not expect much consistency.

User avatar
Chris Bertram
Committee Member
Posts: 13734
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by Chris Bertram » Thu Dec 02, 2021 22:29

The house next door to us is No 69 (stop sniggering at the back), but the bottom of of the garden was sold off ages ago, before we moved in to our house. The bungalow that occupies this plot, with a long drive between No 69 and ourselves to access it, is not No 69a, nor No 71a, but No 69b. There is no 69a, and No 69 remains plain old No 69.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!

User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 6173
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Herts

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by trickstat » Thu Dec 02, 2021 22:29

doebag wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 20:11
Vierwielen wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 18:26
KeithW wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:17
Well we have a rather odd situation on our street which was built in the 1950's. When the developer bought the land there was one holdout who owned an orchard and wouldnt sell at any price. a number (32) was set aside but when the owner died and his heirs sold up it was realise that the plot was too large for one bungalow so two were built in the 1970's. Mine is number 32 and my neighbours is 32A which causes no end of confusion.
This is a typical British problem - if a property is split into two, one part retains the original number and the other has an "A" appended to it. Fortunately my two kids do not have this problem. My son owns a flat that occupies the top floor floor of a 3-story Victorian house, formerly No 45. The three flats are 45a, 45b and 45c.

In my view, if a property is subdivided, the original number should be "retired" and each property should have the original number with a "A", "B", "C" etc as a suffix. Thus, my previous house was part of large Victorian property that had been converted intio a pair of semis. The original property was No 46, but the two new properties are now No 46 and No 46A which can cause problems is somebody uses shoddy software to hold addresses and the software can only accept numberic data for the house number - post for 46A can easily end up at No 46.
I'd agre totally with that. If a small row of terraced houses are built on a plot where a single house stood, they get numbered 1A/1B/1C etc. It should be the same if the existing house is divided up.
I think if a new property is built in between existing houses, there is something to be said for keeping the existing property as XX with the infill being XXA, as the occupants of the existing property won't need to change their address with all the attendant admin issues.

User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 6173
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Herts

Re: Highest house number within London

Post by trickstat » Thu Dec 02, 2021 22:38

Was92now625 wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 22:24
doebag wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 20:11
I'd agre totally with that. If a small row of terraced houses are built on a plot where a single house stood, they get numbered 1A/1B/1C etc. It should be the same if the existing house is divided up.
Who decides ? If it is the authorities, there SHOULD be a measure of consistency. If it is the individuals, I'd not expect much consistency.
The local authority ultimately decides, although I think the Royal Mail can advise/veto if they foresee problems. I think most local authorities tend to avoid approving addresses that the Royal Mail might veto because of potential confusion. Different local authorities might have slightly different practices on numbering. For example, some don't let developers skip the number 13, while some do, while another might allow them to use something like 12A instead.

Post Reply