I see what you're saying, that it's just describing where the house is, but what if instead we ask "On what did the house stand?"
That question asks about the object of the preposition.
One example that may be worth mentioning is "I told the story to him". I have always understood "him" there to be the indirect object of the verb say. I am wondering now if its role changes when we rephrase to "I told him the story", or if it doesn't matter.
Some people would say that "him" in "to him" may be considered the indirect object in "I told the story to him." I reserve the term "indirect object" for the placement of "him" in "I told him the story," which means the same thing as "I told the story to him."
Another name for the structure found in "I told him the story" is the double-object construction. Generally, when I am blogging for people such as you, who are tempted to call "him" an indirect object in "I told the story to him," I use the term "double-object construction" to talk about what I want to talk about.