Where is this?

Caron · Post by **Caron** » Thu 20 Sep, 2012 11:02 pm

Tasa, Phill, thank you both for my lesson in chimneys.Phill, I often spend ages flicking through your flickrs

MWD · Post by **MWD** » Fri 21 Sep, 2012 8:21 am

BarFly wrote: 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. That's pretty much chapter and verse on the issue Barfly, with the exception that you have omitted the 'comitting trespass against the land owners' bit.LCC employ nice men on cctv equipped motorbikes to ensure that laws and bylaws are adhered to on their property.They do act accordingly, I have first hand experience of that fact.So, Jogon, if you wish to continue with your indignant rants, whilst ignoring the both the facts, and the advice of someone with local knowledge and experienceof the issue, please feel free. Barfly, if you want a guided tour of the local bridleways, taking in the MVT on 2 wheels just let me know.Back on topic, this link may be of humourous interest. http://users.breathe.com/yorick/potspot/index.htm

LS1 · Post by **LS1** » Fri 21 Sep, 2012 9:18 am

BarFly wrote: 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. Sorry- being a bit thick- so is it OK to cycle on a pavement then or just a public footpath?

Jogon · Post by **Jogon** » Fri 21 Sep, 2012 9:25 am

MWD POST Posted on: 21-Sep-2012 07:21:34./ MODERATORTHIS IS RUDE AND OFFENSIVEYou said a road/path on mvt is "terribly uneven, with large mossy gaps between the stones, and if it is even slightly damp, it can be perilous to merely walk upon "

Si · Post by Si » Fri 21 Sep, 2012 10:37 am

Secret Leeds is not the place to air personal grievances, or, for that matter, the nuances of footpath bye-laws, so please - let's not post offensive or bad-tempered posts.Thankyou.

MWD · Post by **MWD** » Fri 21 Sep, 2012 10:47 am

To that end, I am man enough to apologise for submitting a post that may have caused offence in reaction to a post that caused equal offence to me. I won't hold my breath waiting for a reciprocal post.

Si · Post by Si » Fri 21 Sep, 2012 10:53 am

Thankyou. Let's leave it at that.

BarFly · Post by **BarFly** » Fri 21 Sep, 2012 12:49 pm

LS1 wrote: Sorry- being a bit thick- so is it OK to cycle on a pavement then or just a public footpath? It's OK I wasn't clear as I was responding to previous posts on another thread.It is illegal to ride on the pavement next to the road -- there's a specific law being broken. However, on a public footpath not next to a road then there are no laws prohibiting cycling unless there is a bylaw in place.

Derculees · Post by **Derculees** » Wed 03 Oct, 2012 10:13 pm

Phill_dvsn wrote: 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/ I read somewhere in the threads about the smallest lodge house.Don't know if it's still there or not, at Eccup reservoir, near the water, was a lodge where you could open both front and back, inward opening doors and be able to touch both at once.Also, if I can do it, a couple more lodges, Westroyd Park Stanningley, modernised, and Half mile Lane, Stanningley/Bramley. Nope sorry, can't

Jogon · Post by **Jogon** » Fri 05 Oct, 2012 4:59 pm

They're nice. The more so for having been surrounded by postwar suburbia. Couple of cutesy ones on Burley Rd?Kirkstall Hil. Think there's some flickr groups of them.