Where is this?

[Jogon]

This has lovely external details.Four / five miles from Town Hall.

[BarFly]

I think it's called "Upper Lodge" on Weetwood Lane. I rode past there on Monday whilst getting lost looking for the Meanwood Valley Trail.

[Jogon]

BarflyWhoah - that was quick.Careful where you ride, mind http://www.secretleeds.com/forum/Messag ... ighLight=1    

[BarFly]

Jogon wrote: BarflyWhoah - that was quick.Careful where you ride, mind http://www.secretleeds.com/forum/Messag ... ighLight=1     I remembered it because it is fairly distinctive and the chimneys and roof look so grand for waht is a fairly small lodge house.I may have to go on a hunt for that bench too. I managed to find The Hollies so thankfully my trip wasn't entirely wasted. I'd still like to ride the Meanwood valley Trail from Stairfoot Lane down into town if I can find it. (just started cycling again after many years so I'm eager to explore)

[MWD]

Jogon wrote: Careful where you ride, mind http://www.secretleeds.com/forum/Messag ... ighLight=1     Glad the message is sinking in.Why, only the other day I refused to get out of the way of a cyclist on a public footpath.His face was a picture as he careered, out of control, into the undergrowth.Hope it wasn't you. (there's the smiley).    

[BarFly]

I don't want tot take this off-topic but from what I gather it is not against the law to cycle on a public footpath unless it is specifically prohibited in bylaws and, in that case, it should be signposted or the police would not be able to take action.The "cycling on a footpath" rules usually in place refer only to the paths at the side of roads set aside for pedestrian use -- what we tend to call "pavements" -- and don't mention other footpaths.That said I always slow down when approaching pedestrians, sometimes to a halt, out of courtesy. I would also choose a bridleway over a footpath if it was clear they headed in the same direction.There seem to be more shared use cycle/pedestrian routes nowadays many of which I think may have even specifically prohibited cyclists a decade or so ago.

[Caron]

Does anyone know why these quaint lodges/gatehouses have such huge chimneys? They look so out of proportion to me.

[Tasa]

Caron wrote: Does anyone know why these quaint lodges/gatehouses have such huge chimneys? They look so out of proportion to me. I think it was to ensure that the smoke from the chimneys was well away from the house by the time it left the chimney so that the residents were not enveloped in soot and smoke (I'm sure I read this somewhere, but others can feel free to correct me!).        

[BarFly]

Is Lower Lodge (I think that's the name) from a different date? It seems a lot less ostentatious. Is the main house the one on Foxhill Court? I know nothing of the area, sadly.

[Phill_dvsn]

Caron wrote: Does anyone know why these quaint lodges/gatehouses have such huge chimneys? They look so out of proportion to me. To add to what Tasa has already said, the lodge, or gatehouse were often a small scale version of the big house, similar architectural features, chimneys e.t.c.It was the wealthy owners way of showing off how ornate his house looked, whilst still having the privacy of the main residence away from the lower passing classes.Just to illustrate this you can see how ornate the lodge is to George Harrisons little gaff on street view herehttp://goo.gl/maps/nW6iKIsn't that just an amazing place to live?No wonder Harrison loved his garden, he said he need never go anywhere else to feel happy, that place was his little piece of heaven. I photographed a few of the other Leeds lodges herehttp://www.flickr.com/photos/phill_dvsn/sets/7 ... 14/detail/