/ NEWS: Savile's House up for Auction

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
UKC News - on 30 May 2013
Allt na Reigh, 3 kbThe Glen Coe cottage formerly owned Jimmy Savile is to be auctioned later today

Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68094
Double Knee Bar - on 30 May 2013
In reply to UKC News: In reply to UKC News: bargain guide price. I think it'll go for a lot more than that.
NottsRich on 30 May 2013
In reply to UKC News: Nothing to do with my opinion of Savile, but tear it down! Anything to keep buildings out of areas like Glen Coe would be welcomed by me. Selfish, I know...
In reply to UKC News:

Nothing much to do with the thread, but always struck me as a bizarre place for Saville to buy - assuming he actually live there.


Chris
Andy Say - on 30 May 2013
In reply to UKC News:
The Glen Coe cottage formerly owned by Hamish MacInnes is to be auctioned later today.

Is that better?
jessyb - on 30 May 2013
In reply to UKC News:
He did live there. He was always jogging up and down that road. I'd buy it in a second, if I had a pot to piss in.
Bob the Pole - on 30 May 2013
My memories are of the cottage being Hamish McInnes's home and looking at it enviously as I hitched lifts back to Edinburgh in the 70's.... I agree with Cameron McNeish's thoughts on the historic importance of this iconic Glen Coe cottage. I'm sure it will go more than 100k and if I had the money I would be pitching in too. Hopefully someone with a sympathetic and creative mind will buy it and keep it as a positive feature of Glen Coe associated with our climbing heritage.
birdie num num - on 30 May 2013
In reply to UKC News:
Will it have a blue plaque?
plyometrics - on 30 May 2013
andyathome - on 30 May 2013
In reply to birdie num num:
Yep. I would suggest.

'In this cottage Hamish Macinnes lived and worked as he supported Mountain Rescue in this area and developed revolutionary climbing equipment*'.

You have an alternative suggestion?

*which tended to knacker your knuckles.
Bulls Crack - on 30 May 2013
In reply to NottsRich:
> (In reply to UKC News) Nothing to do with my opinion of Savile, but tear it down! Anything to keep buildings out of areas like Glen Coe would be welcomed by me. Selfish, I know...

So, following your objection to its logical extreme, you'd like to see the glen wooded and with no people..including visitors?
bluebealach - on 30 May 2013
aln - on 30 May 2013
In reply to Bulls Crack:
> (In reply to NottsRich)
> [...]
>
> So, following your objection to its logical extreme, you'd like to see the glen wooded and with no people..including visitors?

Why do people come on here and say things like that? He didn't say that. Do you like starting arguments?
NottsRich on 31 May 2013
In reply to Bulls Crack: Trees would be great, thanks for asking. As many as possible please. Take the road away as well (although that would be a little unconsiderate now for the rest of the West Coast, so I understand that's rather unlikely).

Assuming the trees were there, and the road not, I would have no objection at all to visitors. As long as they understood and used the LNT principle. In fact, even if people understood LNT now then I would be a lot happier...

Thanks for asking. Have a nice day :-)
NottsRich on 31 May 2013
In reply to Bulls Crack: Oh, and I'm interested in your question about the glen being wooded. It implies you'd like it to not be wooded. It's obviously not going to change in the short term, but why would you rather not see trees there?
Bruce Hooker - on 31 May 2013
In reply to plyometrics:

That's not expensive... although I don't know what state it's in. I think they have mad a good buy.
Bruce Hooker - on 31 May 2013
In reply to NottsRich:

Why would you want woods in the Glen? Why not keep it a place where humans live, as they have for quite a while. Turning the highlands into a forest desert doesn't seem much of an idea to me... the Clearances should be over.
tony on 31 May 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Wooded would have been its natural state. The Caledonian Forest covered a lot of the Highlands. It's perfectly possible to have trees and huge biodiversity, so it wouldn't be a forest desert. There are already trees in the glen in a few wee pockets. There aren't many human settlements in the glen at the moment, so that wouldn't change a lot.
NottsRich on 31 May 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker: Interesting viewpoint.

Anyway, in answer to your question: Because I like trees.
Bruce Hooker - on 31 May 2013
In reply to tony:

But weren't there more people living in Glencoe before the massacre and the general decline in rural population? There seem to be ruins here and there as in the Highlands further North and I think a few people adds to the beauty of an area... this cottage, for example, must be one of the most photographed in the world. One thing I disagreed with the National Trust about was the way they seemed to want to clear the people out of the old farms around Snowdon as if people had no place there.

There's need for wilderness but also for populations of a reasonable density in mountain areas, grass and culture as well as forest or barren hillside.. IMO.
ads.ukclimbing.com
tony on 31 May 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
> (In reply to tony)
>
> But weren't there more people living in Glencoe before the massacre and the general decline in rural population? There seem to be ruins here and there as in the Highlands further North and I think a few people adds to the beauty of an area... this cottage, for example, must be one of the most photographed in the world.

None of which is incompatible with more trees in the glen.
Milesy - on 31 May 2013
How are you going to create more trees without adding more artificial structures like fences and enclosures to prevent the saplings getting eaten by the deer etc? You need to take the environment away from being natural for quite a while in order to make or more natural.

Also UKC, why need to headline it as Saville's cottage when Macinnes is a much more important figure to the climbing community?
ice.solo - on 31 May 2013
In reply to UKC News:

make the bbc buy it at full market price and turn it into something that generates further revenue (thats where my idea finds a limit) and use the cash to help compensate those who should be.
In reply to Milesy: I did ponder that but decided on Savile because everyone knows who he was (not the case with MacInnes among some younger climbers and hillwalkers I'd suggest), and he was the most recent owner (MacInnes was back in the 70s). Basically I reckoned a lot more people would know which house we were talking about if I said Savile's
Erstwhile on 31 May 2013
In reply to tony:
>
> None of which is incompatible with more trees in the glen.

I actually planted some of the trees now growing around the cottage (I lived there for a while). This was no easy task because you had to cage them against the sheep. Hamish had previously planted some Sitka spruce, but I used to go down to the gorge and find seedlings of local trees (pines and birch, mostly) in areas that would inevitably be chomped down by the woolly backs, and lovingly replant them in my wire cages. I was amazed some 35 years later to see that a few had survive
Bruce Hooker - on 31 May 2013
In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:

> (not the case with MacInnes among some younger climbers and hillwalkers I'd suggest),

Wash your mouth out with salt and water immediately! I've still got one of his axes in the garage, I can hear it turning on it's hook at your words as I type :-)
Goucho on 31 May 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker: I had someone up there bidding for me - my max was 150k - and at one point I thought I might be in with a shout, but then it went silly.

212k is too much, as it basically needs completely gutting - unless you're into that '1960's disused Bothy' look.

And unless you can get the planning authorities to allow some kind of change to the access (which will be time consuming and expensive just getting the plans through) then getting onto the A82 when its full of coaches (so that's May - October) will make you feel like an extra in Smokey & The Bandit.

But all the best to the old couple who bought it.
Bruce Hooker - on 31 May 2013
In reply to Goucho:

I was only dreaming but it doesn't seem dear for such a unique place by South East standards. The Jimmy Saville connection is a non-issue, he'll be forgotten in no time. I think the road would be more of a problem at times.
Rock Badger on 31 May 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Forest DESERT,,, it would be natural for their to be a caledonian pine forest right through the glen the wildlife would be amazing. It would look and feel amazing, what it should look like. FOREST DESERT do you even know what your talking about
Rock Badger on 31 May 2013
In reply to Milesy:
Heavy culls on artificially high deer populations like at Mar Lodge,, plant trees,,,
Bruce Hooker - on 31 May 2013
In reply to Rock Badger:

> FOREST DESERT do you even know what your talking about

I know my opinion, you are welcome to yours. I don't find uniform forests that beautiful and there are already plenty of them whereas Glencoe as it is at present I find very beautiful. I don't think man's effect on the environment is by definition a bad or an ugly thing.
Rock Badger on 31 May 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Im talking natural caledonian pine forest,, quite a rare habitat that used to cover a lot of Scotland
Rock Badger on 31 May 2013
In reply to Rock Badger:

"Today, however, only 1% of the original forest survives, covering 180 square kilometres (44,000 acres) in 84 locations.[1] The forests are home to a wide variety of wildlife, much of which is not found elsewhere in the British Isles."
In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:
> (In reply to Milesy) I did ponder that but decided on Savile because everyone knows who he was (not the case with MacInnes among some younger climbers and hillwalkers I'd suggest), and he was the most recent owner (MacInnes was back in the 70s). Basically I reckoned a lot more people would know which house we were talking about if I said Savile's

a difficult decision I guess. Do you go with

Now?
Then?
Now?
Then?
malk - on 31 May 2013
Michael Gordon - on 01 Jun 2013
In reply to malk:

Natural forest cover has been reduced ever since the Mesolithic/Neolithic transition when lifestyles gradually changed from a nomadic hunting-gatherering-fishing one to a more settled crop/livestock farming one. It is not a new phenomenon.
NottsRich on 01 Jun 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
> (In reply to Rock Badger)
>
> [...]
>
> ...and there are already plenty of them...


Really? Wow, where have you been in Scotland lately!?
Bruce Hooker - on 01 Jun 2013
In reply to NottsRich:
> (In reply to Bruce Hooker)
> [...]
>
>
> Really? Wow, where have you been in Scotland lately!?

Glencoe, up to Skye, saw loads of trees. All a bit off the subject of the thread though, isn't it?

handjammer - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker: "All a bit off the subject of the thread though, isn't it?"

Just a bit... But then it is UKC so it shouldn't surprise me I guess!
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to handjammer:
> Just a bit... But then it is UKC so it shouldn't surprise me I guess!

Absolutely nothing to do with UKC. I have been using forums (and usenet long before them) since the 90s and every forum is exactly the same and every forum thinks it is "just" their forum that is the way it is. Topics go off topic and you can't control that any more you can a conversation in real life changing direction.
ads.ukclimbing.com
Cammy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to UKC News:
The biggest problem in the glen, speaking as someone who lives in the area and watches on an almost daily basis, has got very little to do with trees, though i am a big supporter of the reforestation with indigenous species of other areas of Scotland (not sure the glen is a great candidate for this).

Neither does it have anything to do with human habitation of the area. It does have plenty to do with humans, however. Tourists and climbers to be specific (and at this point i do confess to being a climber).

If you want a sensible answer to the problem, i would suggest the removal of all car parking within the glen!!!
I can hear the angry replies already and will reply to none of them.

Remove all car parking, forcing climbers to walk from either end. Return the land to a wild place, reduce the numbers, help with the erosion and improve the climbing experience all at the same time.

This would then, possibly, come a bit closer to complying with Percy Unnas legacy (unnas rules) which the national trust have disregarded since the day he purchased what was previously two separate estates and gave them to the trust.

As regards the cottage, i hope that it is used, once again, as a family home and not as an occasional holiday home or business and should that prove to be the case, despite my insane jealousy, i wish them all the best in their new home.
Bruce Hooker - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:

> Topics go off topic and you can't control that any more you can a conversation in real life changing direction.

I agree in general, and often am guilty myself, I just didn't want to get dragged deeper into the question, it was the house and it's sale that interested me.
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Cammy:
> Remove all car parking, forcing climbers to walk from either end. Return the land to a wild place, reduce the numbers, help with the erosion and improve the climbing experience all at the same time.

And how would you implement this exactly?

The car parking was a measured response to unsightly and uncontrolled parking all over the glen. You remove the car park areas and cars will just start pulling up onto the verges and there is legally nothing wrong with this. You can't remove parking without removing the road itself.

Let's say hypothetically you can somehow ban all cars from the glen, where would you propose they parked at "either end" ? Move the traffic away from the glen into rannoch moor? Or will they build a big car park in the village? Where will you put this car park and how will the locals feel about it? How will the locals feel about the reduction in numbers who come and spend money in the area?
MG - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:

> The car parking was a measured response to unsightly and uncontrolled parking all over the glen. You remove the car park areas and cars will just start pulling up onto the verges and there is legally nothing wrong with this. You can't remove parking without removing the road itself.


Double yellow lines or no stopping signs, as elsewhere?
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to MG:

Forgetting for the point that you couldn't use double yellow lines, under what basis would you put the waiting restrictions in place? Waiting restrictions have a basis in law for reasons pertaining to the carriageway and vehicles. It has and would not have anything to do with wild land it passes through.

For example, these are the waiting restrictions in place on the A82 where it passes through Fort William for "road safety"

http://tinyurl.com/nxyevwr

And where many roads have waiting restrictions in place you can still park off the road as long as you are not blocking the carriageway (including pedestrian paths etc).
Blizzard - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Goucho:

212K for a place in that location, in a country that is awash with cash amongst those people who are 'rich'. Even though its double the asking price, perhaps after re development someone from Londonium will pay half a mil. Nothing these days surprises me, we live in a country divided sadly, 'the Have's and have nots'.
Cuthbert on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Blizzard:

Agreed. This sale in many ways is an example of the problem of housing affecting rural areas
Michael Gordon - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Cammy:

Well that's just stupid. If you're advocating 'returning the land to a wild place' you would have to remove the road, not just the car parks!
MG - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:
> (In reply to MG)
>
> Forgetting for the point that you couldn't use double yellow lines, under what basis would you put the waiting restrictions in place? Waiting restrictions have a basis in law for reasons pertaining to the carriageway and vehicles.

There are plenty of places with parking restrictions - use whatever rules are applied there (eg. Pen-y-pass). There are many reasons the proposal won't happen but the inability to prevent parking isn't one of them.
MG - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:
> (In reply to MG)
>
> Forgetting for the point that you couldn't use double yellow lines,

Why not?
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to MG:
> (In reply to Milesy)
> [...]
>
> There are plenty of places with parking restrictions - use whatever rules are applied there (eg. Pen-y-pass). There are many reasons the proposal won't happen but the inability to prevent parking isn't one of them.

This might be hard to believe but Scotland is not in Wales. We have our own laws up here. Pen-y-pass as far as I can tell is Government owned land so they have been able to apply their own restrictions, and I don't know much about English legislation so I can't tell you anything about it. I am talking about Scottish legislation and procedures.

Glen Coe is privately "owned" land (using the term loosely obviously) and as I said any restrictions on the road would be applied for road based reasons. Please take the time to read the link I provided with to show you the the restrictions on a section of the A82 that could be applied, how it could be done, and for what reasons.
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to MG:
> Why not?

Go read up on the highway code and figure out in what type of area that double yellow lines are used yourself. Don't be lazy.
MG - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy: I did, it's unspecific, which was why I asked.
The New NickB - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:
> (In reply to MG)
> [...]
>
> Go read up on the highway code and figure out in what type of area that double yellow lines are used yourself. Don't be lazy.

It wouldn't be the Highway Code I would be consulting, it would be the relevant Highway Regulations, so tell us why. I would, but you seem to be under the impression the regs in Scotland are different, which they may be.
MG - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:
> (In reply to MG)
Please take the time to read the link I provided with to show you the the restrictions on a section of the A82 that could be applied, how it could be done, and for what reasons.

I'm not a lawyer anymore than I understand you are so, no, I can't give you the precise legal route. However, if you think in practice it is impossible to ban parking on a road, then I think you are wrong. If the parking places were removed, I would think banning stopping on safety ground would be reasonable, if that is the only legal route, which I doubt.
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to The New NickB:
> It wouldn't be the Highway Code I would be consulting, it would be the relevant Highway Regulations, so tell us why. I would, but you seem to be under the impression the regs in Scotland are different, which they may be.

I am not talking about the double yellow lines. That was a seperate point. You would use normally double yellow lines in residential and built up areas, in particular where parked traffic would impede the movement of traffic (corners, junctions etc). When have you ever seen double yellow lines up a country road? You don't. Country roads which have waiting restrictions will normally have a solid white line on the outside edge indicating no stationary vehicles such as when there are lots of blind corners on a twisty road.

Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to MG:
> If the parking places were removed, I would think banning stopping on safety ground would be reasonable, if that is the only legal route, which I doubt.

Garbage. You can park anywhere on the carriageway where there is not waiting restrictions in place and there is no way they would put waiting restrictions in place for Glen Coe because someone wanted to return the glen to its natural state, and as I stated with waiting restrictions in place you can just pull off the road. If you removed the car park cars could just pull off and park on the side like people already do all over the country where there are no car parks already.
The New NickB - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:
> (In reply to The New NickB)
> [...]
>
> I am not talking about the double yellow lines. That was a seperate point. You would use normally double yellow lines in residential and built up areas, in particular where parked traffic would impede the movement of traffic (corners, junctions etc). When have you ever seen double yellow lines up a country road?

Quite a bit.
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
I have never seen them up here in Scotland which sort of highlights my point.
The New NickB - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:
> I have never seen them up here in Scotland which sort of highlights my point.

Your point appears to be that you don't really know, but you are trying to look like you do. My original point remains ( I did not refer to double yellow lines), it is the highways regulations not the highway code you need to look at.
ads.ukclimbing.com
MG - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy: So, to summarize, there is nothing the HWC about where double yellows might be, you can't point to any specific Scottish legislation about them, and, regardless, there are plenty of examples of clearways in Scotland. Fine.

FWIW I think idea of banning parking in Glen Coe is odd, at best.
MG - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to MG: If anyone does actually know (rather than guess) the difference between double yellows, solid white lines and clearway signs, I would in fact be interested to hear.
Bruce Hooker - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to UKC News:

This thread seems to have a mind of it's own :-)
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to MG:
> regardless, there are plenty of examples of clearways in Scotland. Fine.

I am not getting into an argument about yellow lines. That wasn't my point but they are different from clearways.

Here is an appropriate picture of the road in question which demonstrates no waiting. Solid white line on the outside edge. And this is on the A82

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-8yApRsJW1Vc/TbwOtsnXxgI/AAAAAAAAAms/dRxCh3kBGLw/s912/IMAG1097.jpg

This solid white line on the edge of the road is the type of no waiting line you would paint through the A82 at Glen Coe. This is done purely for the benefit of road safety. If you can find a part of road where you can pull to the side of the no waiting which allows the full vehicle to be off the road then you are not breaching the no waiting.

It is worth noting that the no waiting lines tend to be exactly in the places where you cant pull your car off the road and the reason for the no waiting is to stop cars stopping and being a hazard.
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

MG doesn't have a mind. I think he just has a square battery in there.
Kipper - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:
>
> This solid white line on the edge of the road ... This is done purely for the benefit of road safety.

I think that's right, they mark the edge of the road; nothing stops you parking on them.
Milesy - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Kipper:

No you can't park on them. You can park your car off the road as long as you are not blocking a pavement, entrance to another road, driveway etc.
MJ - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:

Here is an appropriate picture of the road in question which demonstrates no waiting. Solid white line on the outside edge. And this is on the A82

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-8yApRsJW1Vc/TbwOtsnXxgI/AAAAAAAAAms/dRxCh3kBGLw/s912/IMAG1097.jpg


That's an 'Edge Line' and is just simply a means of differentiating the carriageway from the verge etc.
Kipper - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Milesy:
> (In reply to Kipper)
>
> No you can't park on them. You can park your car off the road as long as you are not blocking a pavement, entrance to another road, driveway etc.

See the post after yours; showing some evidence of 'you can't park on them' would be useful.


fmck - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to UKC News:

Unless there is a designated parking area or on private land the cops can issue you a parking ticket at their discretion. I know this because I got one once with no lines on the road and made a complaint.
Sir Chasm - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to fmck:
> (In reply to UKC News)
>
> Unless there is a designated parking area or on private land the cops can issue you a parking ticket at their discretion.

Well, they can if you've parked illegally.

fmck - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to Sir Chasm:

Chasms do tend to echo!
Sir Chasm - on 03 Jun 2013
In reply to fmck: Just trying to clarify whether you think you're parked illegally if you're not in a "designated parking area or on private land", i might have to go and move my car.
useful on 04 Jun 2013
In reply to UKC News: A quick google found this:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_07...

Double yellows: no waiting at any time
Single yellows: no waiting during indicated times
Single white: Edge line.

"Waiting restrictions indicated by yellow lines apply to the carriageway, pavement and verge. You may stop to load or unload (unless there are also loading restrictions as described below) or while passengers board or alight. Double yellow lines mean no waiting at any time, unless there are signs that specifically indicate seasonal restrictions"
estivoautumnal - on 06 Jun 2013
In reply to Blizzard:
> (In reply to Goucho)
>
> 212K for a place in that location, in a country that is awash with cash amongst those people who are 'rich'. Even though its double the asking price, perhaps after re development someone from Londonium will pay half a mil. Nothing these days surprises me, we live in a country divided sadly, 'the Have's and have nots'.


Not quite. The 'asking' price or guide price is set by the auction house/estate agent and in this case was set significantly under the value of the house. That house in that location is probably worth what it sold for.

You forgot the middle category that most people fall into. Have some.
NottsRich on 07 Jun 2013
In reply to Cammy:
> (In reply to UKC News)
>
> It does have plenty to do with humans, however. Tourists and climbers to be specific (and at this point i do confess to being a climber).
>
> If you want a sensible answer to the problem, i would suggest the removal of all car parking within the glen!!!
>
> Remove all car parking, forcing climbers to walk from either end. Return the land to a wild place, reduce the numbers, help with the erosion and improve the climbing experience all at the same time.
>


FWIW, you'd get my vote.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.