Park Place

raveydavey · Post by **raveydavey** » Tue 17 Mar, 2009 9:09 pm

Cheers for that - it answers another of lifes little mysteries!

wiggy · Post by **wiggy** » Thu 19 Mar, 2009 4:27 pm

cnosni wrote: ads wrote: Park Place is numbered as it is because it was originally a one sided street with a park, or at least a pleasant garden area to the south of it. Whilst the general conventions on numbering are as stated, it does not always follow, and varies locally. For example, Leeds is built up of a lot of former urban councils who dealt with their own addressing, and they were the centre of their own universe with numbers radiating from their centre. There are some issues where for example Leeds streets become Morley streets, Victoria Road has numbers from both the Morley end and the Leeds end so numbers are duplicated. Bloddy Hell ads you do this every timeI hope youre coming to Jonesy's little do well done ads..i would of thought that to be common knowledge but it seems its just you and i.you see,there only easy when you know the answers.

Treadstone71 · Post by **Treadstone71** » Wed 25 Mar, 2009 10:21 am

Briggate is also not numbered in the conventional way. Numbering starts at the 'bottom', Call Lane junction and runs consecutivly northwards 'up' the west side until The Headrow junction and then back down the East side.Anyone know the reason for this one.

ads · Post by **ads** » Wed 25 Mar, 2009 11:12 am

The numbering for Briggate didn't happen until the 1920's. The reason for it not following convention was to avoid confusion between Briggate and New Briggate. If it had followed normal convention you would have had two number 1s in very close proximity, with the only difference being the 'New' in the address. The street naming conventions are a best practice, but in some instances can't always be followed and have to be adapted to suit.