|Distance:||9.4 miles (15.1 km)|
|Met:||A9, A86, A9|
|Now part of:||B9152|
|Route outline (key)|
The use of the B9151 number for part of the former A9 south of Aviemore is currently speculation. However, despite no mapping evidence being found so far, there is substantial evidence that it may, however briefly, have been used.
From Newtonmore north to Inverness there are a number of sections of the old A9 which have remained classified, albeit as B roads. They are the B9150 at Newtonmore, the B9152 at Aviemore, the B9153 at Carrbridge and the B9154 at Moy. The obvious gap is the B9151. However, as the Aviemore Bypass was opened in advance of the section south to Kingussie, it seems possible that the two sections may have initially been allocated separate numbers. Indeed, with the A951 to Coylumbridge meeting the A9 in Aviemore, what is now the B9152 would have formed two separate parts once the new A9 was completed if the A951 had survived.
Further evidence that the B9151 may once have existed is found on signage in the area, signage which must have been erected following the completion of the Aviemore-Kingussie section of the A9, and yet which carries patches to update the numbers shown. The most pertinent sign is located at the junction of the B9152 and A9 south of Aviemore. Not only does this show a patch over the entire number for the road heading north to Aviemore, the road to the south is signed 'Kincraig B915(2)' with the 2 being on a patch. What else could lurk underneath, other than a '1'?
Much more recently, the B9151 number at Aviemore has been used by Scottish Water as the address for a planning application, and a press report used the number for an incident at Kincraig. Of course, both instances may have been typos...
So why is the road not still the B9151 (if indeed it ever truly was)? There are a number of reasons why the road is now the B9152. Firstly, the A951 up to Coylumbridge seems to have been downgraded, returning to be part of the B970 around the time that the A9 was upgraded. Precise chronology is not yet known, but it seems that the decision was made after the signage for the new junctions was signed off. This would have led to a change in road number at a random point, which is a little daft, so common sense seems to have prevailed to ensure that the route held a single number.
Finally, of course, the whole thing may have just been a mistake somewhere, or an oversight, with the B9151 number never truly being allocated to any road near Aviemore, but bearing in mind the other evidence this seems somewhat unlikely.