tmariar

Poor quality drive-by photo of Reign under construction here. The beige castle entrance sort of blends in with the beige townhouses behind it in this view. I don't know for sure, but the bulk of the club appears to be that beige metal warehouse structure extending back to the left. Nothing says swank lounge like a metal warehouse.

This was a very nice event. The organizers did a great job. The Irvin House (1927 - Joseph Finger) has been beautifully maintained. I hadn't been to Morgan's Point in years - or to LaPorte. for that matter. I've got to plan a trip during the day to get a better look at the Sterling Mansion and LaPorte's Main Street. A number of talented people have gotten involved in the West Mansion preservation efforts. The updates were all positive, but Preserved in Time still has a long way to go to raise the money it needs, and needs all the help it can get.

Thanks, Alpha - sorry, didn't realize about your grandmother.

Sorry - don't mean to cut in on the Red Bluff discussion, but I only just saw the posts re Hot Wells. Also, there's a recent Houstorian post about Highland Park, an amusement park located on the property that is now Woodland Park in the Heights. If either of y'all have any information I could add to the Houstorian post, please let me know. Even just informal memories from you (LeeinMT) or your grandmother (Alpha), would be fun to add.

My thinking precisely. Oh good! I noticed the other day that, of the three article links that had the all-time highest numbers of clicks, two were to articles written by HAIF members. (And if Alison Cook is a HAIF member, then all three.) Well, if anyone does think of anything I should add, just let me know. Doesn't have to be a restaurant, bar, historic house, park, or whatever. Could be a big chicken, a Lombard Lamp (a gift from the city of Hamburg, as it turns out), a community vegetable garden, or something like that...

Thanks to both of y'all. Some of the photos are ok, some not so great. I've been following the any-picture-is-better-than-no-picture philosophy.

Thanks! I've been wondering about Flores' - whether it changed into Lone Star Culinary Spice Market. Maybe they're not connected, though, and there are just two spice shops very close to each other.

A few weeks ago, I made public a Heights-themed blog that I'd been keeping privately for a while for myself and a few friends in the area. It started out mostly as a list of Heights-area bars and restaurants (because I can never remember the places I want to try when it comes time to choose), and then I started adding on to it for friends who were new to the Heights and wanted to know about things to see/do close to them. I didn't really do any write-ups for the places listed, which would be too time-consuming for me - I just linked to others' write-ups, yelp, b4-u-eat, etc. In fact, on an ongoing basis, about all I've been doing is updating posts with new links I see (the most recently updated posts are on the front page). When I have more time, I've been adding new posts or photos. That's all I really have time to do. Anyhow, it's become an ongoing project and I figured it might be useful to others. The posts are categorized in three different ways: (1) by generic categories such as "restaurants" or "bars" or "shops" or whatever; (2) by some random tags like "BYOB", "art", "delivery", "patios", "trees", "steak night", "1880's", or whatever; and (3) "walk/ride" categories like "Norhill" or "Houston Heights SE" or "Studewood" or "Shady Acres" or "Durham" - geographic areas where you might take a walk or ride a bike. It's by no means comprehensive - it gets especially spotty in certain parts of what I've deemed to be the "Heights area" (which I defined pretty broadly) with which I'm not very familiar - like the Ella and T.C. Jester areas. That said, if you have time to check out the blog sometime and let me know if I've missed anything really great on your street or in your neck of the woods, if one of my tag lists is incomplete, or if I missed something good to use as a link (I try to link to HAIF threads when I can - but it's often hard to do because most HAIF topics cover a lot of places) - anything like that would be helpful. Constructive criticism is great, too, though I can already think of a dozen things that would make the blog better that I don't know when I'll have time to do... like add map links to all the addresses.

P - Please don't trouble yourself if it's too much bother, but I'd love to see just a list of the spots they covered. I've got my own list of Heights-area restaurants and am always looking for ways to check its completeness.

Sounds right to me. I was just wondering if there was something specific motivating the gas station advice - if they are especially dangerous at night compared to the grocery store, or neighborhood bars, restaurants, clubs, etc. Could be.

Thanks for passing on some of the information/advice from the meeting. I wonder if the not filling up your gas tank late at night advice is aimed at decreasing crime at gas stations or at home. I'm assuming the former - if it's the latter, I don't see why the advice would be gas station specific.

Yeah, I saw that FAQ language first, and then saw the maps when looking for clarification on whether Washington east of Studemont was considered a "bike line" or something different. It's pretty clearly been designated on maps to be a "bike lane" (as opposed to, e.g., a "bike route"). Having spent some time reading through what's available, the only support I found for an argument that cars can't park on the bikeway on Washington was the poorly-designed "bike safety" map that, in its (yellow) description of (blue) "Bike Lanes" said: "No cars should park here." The more detailed description of "Bike Lanes" on the other map, and in the faq, suggested that the general no-parking rule can be altered with signage. And I think there are signs all along that stretch of Washington - I know of a few businesses along there that are very protective of their street parking because of their limited off-street parking. So, I get that parking is allowed on "bike lanes" via signage. But if parking is allowed on an entire stretch of bikeway, why call it a "bike lane" (parking is generally not allowed on bike lanes unless signs say otherwise) instead of a "bike route" (parking is allowed on bike routes)? It's not a big issue, just another way in which I found the bike maps misleading. As for Broken Spoke - I bet the irony just never occurred to them. I'd still like to try one of their burgers sometime. Oh, and trying to get back on the Heights Trail topic - I think all the questions above regarding how intersections of the bike trail and streets will be handled are good ones. I wonder if the city has made these decisions yet, or is still considering what to do.

Good. I hope the signage clearly prohibits parking even where streets and driveways intersect with the trail. Yesterday, we checked out the concrete poured south of White Oak and the dirt flattened north of White Oak - good to see progress. I'm still wondering if they'll be able to preserve the White Oak Bayou MKT trellis/bridge. And what kind of signage they'll put up where the bike trail crosses a street.

I saw that sign at the Broken Spoke, encouraging people to park on the bikeway - pretty funny. Something else funny? Check out this "Houston Bike Safety Booklet" map - It has Houston bikeways marked in green, blue, pink, and yellow - representing (according to the key): Green - "Multi-Use Trail" Blue - "Bike Lane" Pink - "Signed Route/Shared Lane" Yellow - "Shared Lane" There are also big four big colored boxes - green, blue, pink, and yellow - noting safety regulations for (respectively) "bike routes", "shared lanes", "bike trails", and "bike lanes". These boxes (unlike the key) are in both English and Spanish, and are far more prominent than the map key. But they also conflict with the key. The blue box talks about "shared lanes", which are actually pink and yellow on the map. The yellow box talks about bike lanes, which are marked in blue on the map. The green box talks about bike routes, which I think are marked in pink on the map - maybe yellow, too. And the pink box talks about bike trails, which are marked in green on the map. So, not the best "safety booklet", especially for those relying on the Spanish. Anyhow, Washington east of Yale is marked with a blue line. Which the key says means Bike Lane. Which the yellow box describes as: "A bicycle-only lane on the right - striped, signed and marked. No cars should park here." Washington east of Yale is also marked blue on this Bikeways Network Map, which the map's key says means it's a Bike Lane. The map describes a Bike Lane as: "A designated, striped bicycle lane with special pavement markings and signs along the road. They are generally found to the right of a traffic lane and can be used only by bicycles. There is no parking on this lane unless otherwise indicated." (Compare "Bike Routes", also to the right of traffic lanes, but which allow parking on them.) I think there is signage allowing street parking on most or all of Washington between Studemont and Houston. You'd think they'd just mark it on the map as a "Bike Route", but I guess the city prefers to claim it as a Bike Lane. Parking cars on the Heights Bike Trail The Heights Bike Trail is marked as a "proposed Multi-Use Trail" on both maps. Multi-Use Trails are not defined, but the description of "Bike Trails" on the second map suggests that Multi-Use Trails are likely governed by the same rules as Bike Trails. Both maps say that Bike Trails are usually shared with runners and walkers. Neither makes parking restrictions clear. I looked quickly at the traffic ordinances, but didn't see any that specifically related to parking cars on Multi-Use Trails or Bike Trails. Which isn't to say they aren't there - I just didn't see them. But I think you could argue with regard to the portion of the trail on Nicholson that the trail there fits within the definition of "street" - i.e., "the entire width between the boundary lines of every way publicly maintained when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular traffic." (Bikes count as vehicles.) I think you could then argue that section 26-84 applies: "No person shall park any vehicle upon a street or alley in such a manner or under such conditions as to leave available less than ten feet of the width of the roadway for free movement of vehicular traffic." ("Roadway" means any given individual roadway on a street, not all of them taken collectively.) You might also be able to argue that the bike trail is covered by section 26-91: "It shall be unlawful for any person to park, or leave unattended, or drive a vehicle into or upon any property owned and controlled by the city and restricted to use by authorized persons and vehicles only, without first obtaining permission in writing to do so from the proper city officer, agent or employee, authorized by the city council to give such permission." But that section requires conspicuous signage at all vehicular entrances. Maybe others can come up with something better? Or maybe there's standard block-by-block signage that will go up for the bike trail once it's complete?

20th - Have you had any of the poboys at Jazzie Cafe on 19th? I can't recommend them b/c I haven't tried them, but I've heard some good things. Some history notes regarding the dry portion of the Heights.

I think House in the Heights just moved to a different house. I remember seeing a building permit associated with turning the former location back into a residence - and that's about how it was described on the permit.

Amy - I promise there are a lot more Houstonians than just those who have posted here who have found the Bailey photos online and very much enjoyed them. In my opiniong, one of the best things that can be done to help preserve public access to historic photos is to get them into the hands of an institution like U.T. I'm betting that most of those who posted above, like me, do very much appreciate the photos being available and indexed online; are grateful that they were purchased by a Texas university (that the photos were not purchased by a Houston institution is more of a criticism of local institutions than U.T., to the extent it's a criticism at all, and not just a regret); and understand that purchasing the photos and making them available for viewing online cost the university money. Had they been writing to the university rather than on this message board, most likely would have mentioned some or all of that - and I hope that you and any others who were/are involved in the digitization project who may be reading didn't take the above comments as ingratitude. The group of people who post on the Historic Houston section of this board are, I'm sure, among those most grateful for having some degree of online access to the photographs. And thanks for the contact information for labeling comments - I also have seen a number of what I believe to be errors in labeling, and wish now I'd kept track of them. I may go back and try to find some of them. ---------- Others - At least these photos are available in some form online - unlike the Chron and Post historic archives. And the vast majority of other historic photos of Houston. Still, I think there are some fair questions to be asked about why the original-size Bailey images aren't available online, and I don't think Houstonians should not ask them just out of politeness - U.T. is a public institution, as someone else pointed out. Seeing the Life Magazine archive of historic Houston photos that Google recently made available made me that much more curious about U.T.'s decision. U.T. is not Google, obviously - but the Bailey photos aren't the Life Magazine archives, either. Plus, some of the differences between U.T. and Google would seem to make it more likely that U.T. would make original-size photos available online. I know the copyright issues can be complicated, but I'm more curious about the apparent decision to maintain any copyright protection, and whether it's permanent or just until certain costs are recouped. I don't want to divert attention in this thread from the Bailey photographs by getting too deep into more esoteric topics, but I believe that, just as Houstonians have an interest in historic Houston structures that should not necessarily be trumped by the rights of the current owners of those structures, we have an interest in historic news coverage and photographs concerning our town that should not necessarily be trumped by current ownership interests. As much as many Texans hate hearing any suggestion that property rights should be anything other than absolute, it's a view that many cities and states (in the case of historic structures) and many newspapers and libraries (in the case of historic news and photographs and similar information) support to some extent - the hard part is striking the right balance among the interests, and I get that. But it would be nice if we got to at least hear some kind of explanation from the Chronicles and U.T.'s of the world - even if it just comes down to money. In fact, I bet there are those who would donate money to U.T. to help increase online access to historical materials - heck, I'd donate to the Chronicle if I could earmark the money for helping make their historic archives available/searchable online.

That smell when you walk into Penzey's is great. I'm hoping to try the Lone Star Culinary Spice Market near the Airline Farmer's Market soon. I've heard it's pretty good. I think it used to be Yerberia something - but maybe I have it confused with another spice place in the area.

I know the sign said "get fresh... go local" or something similar - but I honestly never picked up on the local foods emphasis. Could have just been me being oblivious, but I don't remember signs around the store touting the local source of various foods or anything like that. I think I might have made a special trip more frequently, if I'd realized.

Oh, that's a shame... But I'm not that surprised, either - it didn't seem to be getting a lot of business. There were a number of things I liked about the place - and everyone I dealt with connected with the store was always very friendly and seemed eager to please. But it was difficult to do shopping for an entire meal there, and I didn't notice anything worth a special trip. I heard they made good sandwiches, and had a good meat and fish selection - but never remembered to check for myself.

I noticed "John Klotz" mentioned on a couple of recent records for the property - on one together with Jack Gregory, who I think is (was?) the owner of Daily Grind. Don't know if that has any significance unless it's the John Klotz who started the Local Charm location on lower Washington with Rory Miggins, and stayed on as co-owner of the Rhythm Room when Miggins left. I don't see a current liquor permit for 4115 Washington, though. There is one for the property next door - 4105, where Reign Lounge is supposed to be opening. HCAD lists the owner of 4115 Washington as Robert Mize, who owns several properties in the lower Washington/6th Ward area, including the Catalina Coffee building.

Interesting... I'd never heard of this place before. Saw a few people had posted on various sites some video of Elvis playing there, August 7, 1955. In the old newspapers: In the 1890's and decade following, there seemed to be a lot of Magnolia Gardens lots changing hands. In 1929, rescue workers searched for a mother and son feared drowned in the SJ river "below Magnolia Gardens just above the Crosby road bridge." In 1932, a 20-year-old woman celebrating her birthday at Magnolia Gardens intentionally drowned herself "after quarreling with a young man at the party. In 1935, a 40-year-old man drowned in the SJ river "near Magnolia Gardens, about 18 miles from Houston." In 1957, a tornado hit "the Magnolia Gardens Clubhouse near Lake Houston." In 1964, a 22-year-old woman drowned in the river "at Magnolia Gardens." So - not much, and somewhat depressing. On the map, it looks like Magnolia Gardens is an entire area on the San Jacinto River north of Hwy 90 and south of Lake Houston. The newspaper articles seemed to be more about the area than the dancehall, unfortunately, except for this sort of random mention in a San Antonio newspaper article: "Celebrated Houston Attorney Percy Foreman in town last week, and recalling the day back around 1952 when an unknown youngster singing at Magnolia Gardens in the Bayou City ambled into Foreman's office seeking a loan of $750 to make it to Hollywood and a crack at the big time...."

Yeah, me too. I just heard from someone here what they heard about it, inc. the guy's alleged company and position. It would be irresponsible to repeat in detail in these circumstances but, based on what I heard, it was not on the Smith side of the garage, it was in the afternoon, and was not someone who worked for a company in 1100 Louisiana. How sad.

I was parking at the 1100 garage around 10:30 a.m. yesterday, and saw a number of emergency vehicles (inc. an ambulance) with sirens lit stopped in front of 1100 Louisiana (on the Smith side - and right across Smith from the BBQ place, not down toward the Starbuck's entrance). I thought it might have something to do with the fire drill that 1100 Louisiana had at 11:00 a.m., but it could have been related to what the original poster mentioned if the timing is the same.

Wow! I would really hate to see them go. I'm sure the Dom Polanski building could be used for other purposes, but I think it's especially great as a club. The Polish Lodges used the second floor as the dance hall because in the pre-air-conditioning days (it was built in 1918) because it had so many windows. It's cool to me that people are still hanging out there enjoying music 90 years later.