Time to rethink history projects at Cuesta Annex | April 1, 2011 | Mountain View Voice | Mountain View Online |

Mountain View Voice

Opinion - April 1, 2011

Time to rethink history projects at Cuesta Annex

by Andi Sandstrom

What many residents involved in Cuesta Annex workshops thought would be retained as natural open space has become the City Council's dumping ground of things not natural.

This story contains 761 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Subscribe

Comments

Like this comment
Posted by basin still on?
a resident of St. Francis Acres
on Apr 1, 2011 at 8:18 am

"If the large water retention basin takes up the entire front portion.."

Mountain View Voice should really do a follow-up on the status of the Permanente Creek flood protection project. At this point it seems unlikely there will ever be a flood basin at Cuesta. The Cuesta Annex basin was meant as an overflow from the upstream basin at Blach Middle School which was nixed by the Los Altos School District.


Like this comment
Posted by USA
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Apr 1, 2011 at 1:53 pm

USA is a registered user.

Thank you, Andi.

That idea of cutting down trees to put them in a tree museum is ridiculous. The idea of paving over the last remaining bits of open land in Mountain View to create a museum to Mountain View's agriculture past is equally ridiculous especially with so many vacant building available.



Like this comment
Posted by Doug Pearson
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Apr 2, 2011 at 11:37 am

As I understand it, the gist of Andi Sandstrom's article is: It's best to leave Cuesta Annex alone and, regardless of whether the flood basin and landscaping are done, the History Museum and its additional parking and the Pearson (no relation) House do not belong in the Cuesta Annex.

I, for one, see the Cuesta Annex as a vacant lot that should be improved as long as the City doesn't have to spend a lot of money doing it.

I would like to see landscaping, and both the flood basin proposal and the idea of planting a small orchard are appealing. Paths, benches and trash cans would be nice.

The History Museum does not belong in Cuesta Annex. It belongs somewhere else. I like downtown in the fake adobe building, the imitation train station, or one of the old buildings. Not Pioneer Park, however; that is a graveyard and we've "improved" it too much already. The History Museum's problem is they have no money for purchase or rental of a building, or even for displaying their artifacts.

The Pearson House does not belong in Cuesta Annex, either. I would like to see it near the Rengstorff House and would not object to siting the History Museum there--though three buildings would probably be too crowded.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.