shows the relationship between that emergency egress ramp and the park site. you can see, the park site is level with the street; which is on the left side of the image this. emergency egress area is not accessible from the park itself once developed, nor from the street. it would not be publicly accessible from the street. the intent of this emergency egress is again to provide access from the building in cases of emergency from the building on to the street. this emergency egress area would be secured with retaining walls, holding up the level park side, fencing and landscaping. and would be secured at the street with a gate. here is the perspective again showing the relationship between the easement area, which is on the right side of that image. and the park proper is on the

left side. as you can see, there is a division between the two spaces, again with retaining wall and landscaping and fencing and a gate at the street. the entire park property including the easement area would be maintained by the parks and recreation department with the exception of the phelps and gate along guy street, because that is an art enrichment element and as such would be maintained by the arts commission. the adjacent property however is responsible for any damage done to the easement area. and that concludes my presentation. i'm available for questions. >> is there any public comment on this item? being none, public comment is closed >> commissioner low. >> marvin, can you clarify

that last comment. the easement area is the maintenance responsibility falls on the city? >> that is correct. according to the easement agreement, the recreation and park department is responsible for -- reserves the right to maintain, it operate and so forth the easement area. >> including the gate? >> the gate, because it's an art enrichment area will be maintained by the arts commission. >> okay. commissioner bonilla. >> yes. two questions. will we be using recycled water for the water features, and i wonder about the wisdom of using -- i mean of installing water features in any of our new projects in light of the

citywide water conservation plan? those are my two questions. and i know that we, the recreation and park department has closed down some of our projects or venues that have water features. so i just want a little bit more information on this. >> okay. there are four water features within this park design and each one of the water features would be self-contained where it would use recycled water, but each one of the features, the water features are designed such where if the water would be turned off they with remain attractive cultural items of the park design. >> so it's recycled water. >> recirculated water. >> recirculated water that doesn't conflict with our water conservation plan?

>> no. >> the department? >> no. >> commissioner levitan. >> it might be just the sight of me that always asks the question relative to playgrounds and children in terms of sight lines and security and maybe i'm being overly concerned about something that wouldn't apply here. but the design -- and i'm delighted there is unanimous support. so this is just me. the design seems like it lends itself to maybe not being able to see from the street, if people are in the park and there are things going on in the park that are not safe or appropriate, especially after hours. so my question is has the security issue from the standpoint of design been considered? and also, you say that the gate is a design element. and it looks from the drawing that the gate opens and closes. it is going to be maintained, locked? what are those issues? >> okay. first of all, the gate would

lock -- the park would be locked at night, which is the purpose of the gates. it was heavily considered in the development of this concept design and, in fact by raising the park sight we have better sensibilities to the park. the vegetation would be low. so that sight lines would not be impeded and vertical column should not have sight line impediment to the park. >> commissioner low. >> the matter is before us is to approve a conceptual design, which is fine. but i think as we drill-down into the details, i think we should get better clarification on the use of this easement. it should n't not be the city's responsibility, but the private property owner who benefits from the secondry regress. i understand the gate is an art element to the park.

but again, that should be the responsibility of the private property owner if there is damage to the gate and shouldn't be the city's responsibility, since the city is granting the easement. but i think we should drilldown in that detail as we further develop plans. would i would like to more to have this matter approved. >> is there a second? >> second. >> all those in favor? >> aye. >> so moved. >> thank you, marvin. >> we now on item 9, coit tower food kiosk. >> good morning commissioners. mr. general manager. casanda costello with the department in the property management division. i'm here today to present an item on a coit tower

refreshment kiosk looking for an endorsement to proceed forward with approvals on an eastside location or a west side location at coit tower. before we go into the nitty gritty details i wanted to give you a little bit of background. in october of 2011 we asked a request for proposals and in that request for proposals interest is an opportunity for special event, fad and beverage service, et cetera. jr. of 2014 this commission recommended approval of the lease agreement with coit tower, llc. to the board of supervisors and just this last may, after the incredible renovation and installation. murals coit tower re-open to the public. coit tower has historically offered food and beverage through the previous vendor. many monuments around the globe offer tasteful food and beverage service and the

department sees tastefully and professionally offered food and beverage as a desired amenity to the hundreds of thousands of visitors to coit tower annually. there is a demand for food and beverage and the current lessee receives many, many inquiries daily about a beverage or snack for folks visiting coit tower. the proposed kiosk is not designed to be a destination, but it's meant to serve the guests at coit tower by offering a light refreshment. this has been a long process. we have been working with the community or a number of years. and food and beverage service has been contemplated in every step of the approval process. starting with the rfp, the selection process the lease negotiation and the lease approval process. and, in fact in 2008 we work closely with the telegraph hill dwellingers and pioneer park project on concession goals and

principles for coit tower and did opine on guidelines for food and beverage services that were incorporated into the proposal. meetings were held for the agreement and also for the food and beverage proposed options. at some of the meetings, community members expressed some concern over the previous location for food and beverage services on the south lawn. and the commission listened to that feedback last year before you approved the lease agreement and asked staff to go back to the community and go back to the vendor and come up with some alternative location proposals. so we have done that over the last, i would say 16-18 months and we worked with the vendor and really scoured coit tower and analyzed a number of locations keeping in mind ada access, parking and

historic preservation. this graph here, i indicated with stars the number of locations that were seriously considered. all of these are situated around coit tower, the perimeter of the parking lot and in the parking lot. the staff and lessee also analyzed mobile options such as food trucks and mobile carts which are also not being considered due to logistically challenge s around ada, operating noise from a generator or fumes from a generator and concerns stated by lessee about the high operating costs of mobile carts. some of that is due to

requirements. so that brings us to two community proposed locations. one is on the eastside of the parking lot and one is on west side of the parking lot. the eastside of the parking lot was proposed by the pioneer park project, probably about 16 months ago. they started to come to us with this idea. when we presented the option to the public last year, they said hey, can you think about a location farther west? so we have come up with a location and work with the vendor closely on a west side kiosk location. we at first proposed the design on left and due to feedback from the telegraph hill dwellingers and pioneer project, as well as members of the public we went back to the drawing board to come up with designs that we felt were more compatible with coit tower. i want to say these are artists

renderings of the kiosk and will probably change as we go through the ceqa process and work with the planning department. the designs are interchangeable for the west side or eastside of the parking lot. we're also looking into the possibility of a green wall, this is something proposed by members of the public. sort of a living wall concept. so working with department of public health, we're looking into some of those options as well. all of the designs are designed to deter vandalism, deter people from climbing on them, compliment coit tower and pioneer park, be small in size, either 9x12. offer only light refreshments. so no cooking onsite. be ada accessible. sell tickets to the tours and to the elevator, which is important to have some of that queuing outside of the tower. retain views of coit tower and the surrounding bay. be as discrete as possible, be able to run without a generator. retain all current levels of

parking. be removable. and have little permanent impact on the park and be visible, but not obtrusive. this slideshows the existing conditions of the eastside location. so this is a location along the inverse bleachers that surround the parking lot at coit tower. so i have kind of indicate where had the views are from. the views farthest to the right, i have stood where the story pulls are -- i know some of you got a chance to check out the story pulls and those are looking directly down to the nearest homes. we put -- as feedback from the last community meeting we heard from members of the public they wanted us to put up story poles to get a better impact of what a removable kiosk would be. so we did that and what you have on the top layer of the screen are the

story poles and i realize it's a little difficult to see. so we went ahead and shaded in what the impact would be by connecting the story poles. and here is a rendering, again this design or west side design are interchangeable. so i'm sure you have a lot of the emails in your packets and i will also put together some comments in your packet as well. but i wanted to make sure to put up this slide, so you understand there has been a tremendous amount of correspondence, a lot of comments on both the east and west side. these are comments directly from the public and these do not reflect staff's view. these are existing locations for the west side location. i do want to point out the

slide on the lower left-hand sideshows the existing decaus and existing structures. again a rendering of the story poles. here is the artist's rendering at two different angles. same comments for the eastside -- these are different comments, but these are proposed by the community. i did my best to summarize some of the comments we received from emails, which again you have in your packets.

we put together the slide so you see eastside option is a little over 100' away from the closest home and we did verify that with a laser and didn't rely on google earth. 150' away from the proposed west side option. so as you know, staff and the vendor believe that either location would serve the needs of the public, serve the needs of the department and also serve the needs of the vendor. so what we have done is sort of put together an analysis of some of the issues that we heard time and time again from the public. so preserve existing parking. as you know parking is very precious everywhere in the city, but definitely up at coit tower. a lot of local residents depend on it and both locations preserve existing parking. both locations are easy to

remove. both locations support the visitor experience. the west location is a little bit less visible from homes. eastside station further from the decaus toilets. the eastside location will be less expensive to install, but a note on that, the reason is because eastside location is a more simple design and build because of it's rectangular shape and preexisting foundation. the west side location requires a higher level of engineering due to a more complicated topography, need to install footings for a foundation and need to follow a frontal radius and build around angles. the removal of the rock wall along the stairs, but i want to know either location will require ceqa review and through the process design may change and additional costs may incur

with either location. the department has kept the community very abreast of the situation and any situation at coit tower and reached out to the local official supervisors, as well as anybody who has expressed interest in coit tower and food at coit tower has been appraised of these commission meetings, as well as community meetings held previously. we received quite a bit of feedback from members of the public. i would say the majority of the feedback has been from the neighbors in close proximity and neighbors who live in and around telegraph hill. i also want to note there are some people who would prefer no food and beverage service at all at coit tower and we received correspondence of that nature. quite a process moving forward.

hopefully today you will be able to give me some guidance on which location to pursue environmental approvals on. we're also most likely need to vacate a portion of the greenwich paper street in order to build a refreshment kiosk. we'll also go through the building and planning department for review of plans and then we would come back to you with a lease amendment, which would have the food and beverage kiosk. you would be recommending, hopefully, the amendment to the board of supervisors to amend their lease to allow for food and beverage service. that concludes my presentation. happy to address any comments that you have. thank you so much. >> commissioner low. >> just one question, before we go to public comment. casanda, can you comment on the two locations. >> we have heard concerns because of the sidewalk that

goes from one side of the street to the coit tower that there may be some additional congestion through pedestrian using the crosswalk, whereas the west side has a connecting sidewalk. so there are no streetss to cross. >> public comment. >> i'm going to read names off and come up in any order. richard rothman. gordon francis. i'm not sure if it's mariam or marvin hinkle. >> good morning commissioners my name is richard rothman and i don't live up there, but i give tours up there about once a month. i think it's time to bite the bullet, and to me, either location is fine.

my main concern is that protection of the murals. i think having a kiosk outside where we could -- where the vendor could sell tickets and people would wait outside and have some kind of -- like in the restaurant, a call-system, so people know when their time is to go up. because in the summertimes the lines get very long and that is cause for potential damage to the murals. so if we can avoid lines inside the building by having a kiosk. the other thing when cassanda told me that even if you make a decision today, it is still going to take a year to get up and running. so i would just encourage the commission to use their wise judgment and make a decision today. thank you. >> thank you.

>> next speaker, please. >> yes, my name is gordon francis, i'm an eastside dwelling on montgomery side. you will hear from a number of eastside dwellers. it was an excellent presentation by miss costello and does clarify some of the issue. the question do we actually need it is a valid one and to have refreshments at every historic site, i think is debatable. given by the sounds of it very light refreshments, why is a kiosk needed at all besides doing this inside? i hear the issues about the murals and certainly the renovations are lovely there, but does one need an outside kiosk because regardless of what it looks like, it's still another external distraction and there will be trash no matter what

one does. how many facilitis are nearby? there are many facilities as individuals go up the stairs or down the stairs on either side of the hill, that they can get the light refreshments that they might need. the second issue i would like to talk about is really eastside dweller issue. i'm on montgomery, so a little further down than some of the main players you will hear from. the diagram presented by miss costello was informative, but if you look at the residents overall, and many of them are nearer the eastside than the west side and there is on the west side, there is park -- between the kiosk and the homes, there is also a roadway and there is further green space. so there is actually greater separation. i think when you are thinking about the positioning here, is that all other things being equal, the advantage to the

site would be a west side one rather than an eastside one, because it would be less disruptive -- it would be the eastside site is going to be more disruptive to residents than the west side location. all other things being equal. i think what will you hear from some of the other presenters, things are probably not equal, because some of the safety issues, including the traffic one will be allude to, but non-resident hillside dwellers is more likely to occur. unless there is a compelling reason to gone on the eastside -- the eastside should be excluded as a site for a kiosk is win is needed at all. thank you. >> next speaker if i have called please come up.

[ reading speakers' names ] >> good morning. thank you all for all the work you do, and i ahave been in front of the commission. i think it's really important to think through these real dilemmas. it's a very, very congested area. terry has done a fabulous job attracting people. it's a very, very clean operation. the murals are, of course the big magnet and the lines, cassandra is not in any way distracting from the fact there are a lot of people. how this can be managed, just like the tower of pisa, sent

just about a kiosk in a parking lot. it's really a management problem. there is no question in my mind if there is to be a kiosk, the disruption it will cause on eastside is very impact. we see people -- those of white us who park up there, you see such confusion now. there is no signage to help people know where to park, where to be and where to work and i know public works is going to address it, but i implore you to take the time to really think this through, and this is not a negative influence at all on cassandra

or the department. i think there should be traffic studies and i could go on, but you all know and apply your wisdom, because this is unique. in my mind it's unprecedented. there has never, ever been something like this and i think the ticket lines will be substantial. i think the population that lives there is always impacted. we know that. but to add to it in this way really, really takes consideration. so if there is to be a kiosk, i implore you to look completely at the west side. because it just deserves that look. thank you. >> thank you. >> so names again. either maryanne hinkle, john barber, rob hammond and we have lewis -- and i think john ritz

-- i don't know, go ahead. >> good morning. >> thank you. >> i support my neighbors and the community and that -- >> could i get you to speak into the mic. >> the west side in my opinion and the opinion of my neighbors and others is much safer. there is a tremendous amount of traffic that occurs as everyone has said. and there is a bottleneck at top, where the eastside was proposed anyway, so i think that would be enhanced or added in terms of the traffic flow would be slowed down. so there would be additional safety issues as was mentioned. as well as litter. that is going to be an issue on either side, but i do believe due to the open area of the proposed west side, you will just have a more natural, i guess, disposal, because of the

existing trash facilities and so forth. largely, again, i'm looking at safety. i'm looking at additional litter. i'm looking at the the congestion around the steps on the eastside so to that end, if it does have to go in, i support my neighbors in that it should be on the west side. that is all i have. my esteemed neighbors have additional comments. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi my name is rod hamid the owner of the probably the closest building we're approximately 100 feet away from the proposed location. my issue -- i'm sort of neutral on having a kiosk at

all, but i'm particularly strongly against having it on the eastside. primarily two reasons as people mentioned the safety reason and cassandra explained crossing it, but it's a large parking lot and traffic is horrible. you have people waiting 20, 30, 40 minutes, waiting to park in coit tower. and road-rage right now is an issue and as people are crossing the parking lot in weird positions, there is going to be a confrontation or accident at some point. also, i have a window that looks directly at where the proposed kiosk is, 100 feet. there are some bushs in the way, but i would be look at that every day. it's a very seclude area and we had a problem with transients in past because it's quiet over there and setting up camp. i think at night, there is going to be issue -- there is