HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2014-10-07 #4CITY OF
Community Development Department — Planning Division
Meeting Date: October 7, 2014
Case Numbers: ED14-048 & UP14-013
Project Planner: Steve Stafford — (415) 458-5048
Agenda Item:
REPORT TO DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SUBJECT: 1600 Mission Avenue (Marin Academy) — Environmental and Design Review Permit and
Use Permit Amendment to allow the construction of a new, 17,940 square foot, "Science and
Innovation Center" building and associated parking, circulation, drainage and landscaping
modifications and to allow an increase in maximum enrollment, from 400 to 450 students. The
new science building is proposed to be located north of Thatcher Hall (current science
building), south of the 'old' gymnasium, west of the athletic fields, and east of Foster Hall
(classrooms); APNS: 011-161-13, 011-154-01, 011-193-04, 011-195-06 & 011-202-05;
Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP), Duplex Residential (DR) & Fifth/Mission Residential/Office (5/M
R/O) District Zones; Ted Lieser for Equity Community Builders, LLC, Applicant; Mike Joyce for
Marin Academy, Owner; Fairhills Neighborhood.
PROPERTY FACTS
Location
General Plan Designation
Project Site:
PQP, MDR
North:
LDR
South:
PQP, HDR, 5/MR/O
East:
LDR, MDR, HDR
West:
MDR
Floor Area Ratio
Allowed: 1.0 (432,500 sf)
Proposed: 0.30 (127,516 sf)
Height
Allowed: 36'
Proposed: 33.5'
Parking
Required: 157 spaces'
Proposed: 157 spaces
Tree Removal
Proposed: 29 (8 'Significant')
Replacement: 55
Zoning Designation Existing Land -Use
P/QP, DR Private high school
R5 Residential
P/QP, HR1.5, 5/MR/O MA, residential, commercial
R5, DR, HR1 Residential
DR Residential
Landscaping
Required: 10% (43,250 sq. ft.)
Proposed: 50,000 + sf (Approx.)
Residential Density (Max.)
Allowed: 1 unit/ 1,800 sf
Proposed: NA
Grading
Cut: 5,466 CY (5,096 CY export)
Fill: 370 CY
Setbacks
Required
Existing
Proposed
Front: 15'
15'+
15'+
Side(s): 10'
10'+
10'+
Rear: 10'
10'+
10'+
* Building height is measured from finished grade pursuant to the "UBC" (1997) method.
' Master Use Permit Amendment (UP02-027); Planning Commission Resolution No. 03-29, 'Marin Academy
Updated Parking and Traffic Plan', Dated April 30, 2003.
SUMMARY
The project is being referred to the Design Review Board (Board) for review and recommendations) of
new building and site improvements on the Marin Academy (MA) campus. The project proposes a new,
17,940 square foot, "Science and Innovation Center" building and associated parking, circulation,
drainage and landscaping modifications. The new science building is proposed to be located north of
Thatcher Hall (current science building), south of the `old'. gymnasium, west of the athletic fields, and
east of Foster Hall. The project requires an Environmental and Design Review Permit (Planning
Commission -level) and Use Permit Amendment (operational changes/ enrollment increase) approvals.
As required for all Planning Commission -level permits, the Board provided conceptual design review
recommendations on the proposed project. At its August 5, 2014, meeting, the Board expressed
unanimous support for the proposed contemporary, energy-efficient, building design and pedestrian -
oriented site improvements. The Board, however, provided the following comments on the conceptual
design:
• The proposed vine `green screens' along the east building elevation is an important design feature
though the Board had concerns as to its workability and longevity. The Board recommended that
these vine plantings should be protected by a physical barrier such as a raised planter. The Board
also recommended the project include deciduous columnar trees planted along with vine plantings.
• The design of the new staircases proposed along the south and east building elevations should
include more landings to eliminate any 20 -step runs without a landing. The design of the new
staircase along the south building elevation (an important element of the proposed creation of an
east -west pedestrian spine) should be wider, `more active' or pedestrian -oriented.
• Details on the proposed use for, and improvements within, the `basement' area or "Floor 0" should
be presented.
• A Lighting Plan with lighting level details, particularly for the converted parking lot/north-south
pedestrian spine should be presented.
The 8/5/14 Board meeting can be reviewed online at: http://www.citvofsanrafael.orq/meetings/.
Planning staff has concluded that the level of details provided in the formal application design submittal
meets the applicable design -related General Plan policies and Zoning Ordinance regulations and
standards. Staff further concludes that the formal application submittal generally meets the Board's
recommendations provided during conceptual design review. Staff requests that the Board provide its
recommendations on the project's compliance with all pertinent design criteria, including the discussion
contained in this report, and specifically consider the following:
Parking
+ Whether a `Parking Modification' to allow the use of the City's reduced 'Downtown' parking space
dimensions is appropriate and, therefore, should be granted for the project.
o Whether a `Parking Modification' to allow the continued use of the existing 20' -wide service
driveway rather than require a minimum 26' -wide driveway is appropriate and, therefore, should be
granted for the project.
• Whether a `Parking Modification' to allow the existing campus parking to meet the parking demand
for the project rather than provide the required 13 additional on-site parking spaces is appropriate
and, therefore, should be granted for the project.
Project Design
+ Whether the project adequately responds to the Board's conceptual review comments; i.e., that 1)
the vine plantings be protected by a physical barrier; 2) columnar trees be planted in conjunction
with the vine plantings; 3) the staircases proposed along the south and east building elevation
2
incorporate landings to eliminate 20 -step runs; 4) the staircase proposed along the south building
elevation should be wider or flared at the athletic field; 5) details on the use and improvements on
the "basement" area should be presented; and 6) a Lighting Plan with lighting level details, for the
converted east surface parking lot, shall be presented..
BACKGROUND
Site Description & Setting:
The subject site is located northwest of the Downtown area. It is comprised of five (5) parcels
containing approximately 432,500 square feet (9.9 acres) of combined lot area. It is developed with,
and operates as, a private high school (MA) campus with a current enrollment capacity of 400 students.
The project site is located on the largest portion of the MA campus: north of Mission Avenue, west of
Forbes Avenue, east and south of Bryn Mawr Drive/EI Cerrito Avenue. It is currently developed with
classroom buildings, gymnasiums (`old' and 'new'), athletic field, swimming pool, maintenance building
and approximately 90 on-site parking spaces. The project site includes an historic resource, Foster
Hall, protected as `significant' under CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act).
The project site retains a park -like setting with an open, landscaped frontage and large redwood and
Canary Island Palm trees. It slopes gradually (approximately 11 % average cross -slope) from north to
south and is surrounded by a combination of residential uses (single-family homes, duplexes and
apartments) to the north, east and west, and office uses and the First Presbyterian Church of San
Rafael to the south. Vehicular access into the project site is through a circular driveway located in front
of Foster Hall and exiting counterclockwise through a service driveway, located 135' west of the circular
drive.
History:
Marin Academy (MA) has operated as a private, college preparatory, high school (grades 9-12) since
1971. The site has operated as a school in various forms since 1890, first as the "Mount Tamalpais
Military School" and later as the "San Rafael Military Academy" and more recently the "San Rafael
Academy". Buildings and facilities on-site remaining from these earlier school uses include Foster Hall,
the `old' gymnasium and the pool (see Campus Map, Exhibit 2).
Since 1988, numerous redevelopment permits for the MA campus have been conditionally approved by
the City, a summary of which is attached as Exhibit 3. On February 24, 2014, Planning staff completed
Pre -Application (PA14-001) review of the project proposal, providing MA with a `blueprint' of the
required permits, meetings and reviews, identifying additional details required at formal application
submittal, and a general discussion on the consistency of the project the City's adopted plans,
ordinances and regulations. On August 5, 2014, the Board subsequently provided Conceptual Design
Review (CDR14-002) comments on the proposed project. At that time, the Board expressed unanimous
support for the proposed contemporary, energy-efficient, building design and pedestrian -oriented site
improvements. The Board, however, provided the following specific comments on the conceptual
design:
The proposed vine 'green screens' along the east and west building elevations were important
design features though the Board had concerns as to their workability and longevity. The Board
recommended that these vine plantings should be protected by a physical barrier such as a raised
planter. The Board also recommended the project include deciduous columnar trees planted along
the east and west building elevations.
The design of the new staircases proposed along the south and east building elevations should
include more landings to eliminate any 20 -step runs without a landing. The design of the new
staircase along the south building elevation (an important element of the proposed creation of an
east -west pedestrian spine) should be wider, `more active' or pedestrian -oriented.
Details on the proposed use for, and improvements within, the `basement' area or "Floor 0" should
be presented.
A Lighting Plan with lighting level details, particularly for the converted parking lot/north-south
pedestrian spine should be presented.
As noted in the summary above, the 8/5/14 Board meeting can be reviewed online at:
http://www.cityofsanrafael.or,q/meetin.gs/.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Use:
The project proposes to construct a new, 17,940 sq. ft. "Science and Innovation Center", located north
of Thatcher Hall (current science building), south of the 'old' gymnasium, west of the athletic fields, and
east of Foster Hall (classrooms). In addition, the project proposes to increase the maximum enrollment
capacity from 400 to 450 students (see Project Description and Design Review. Narrative/Statement of
Intent including Visual Simulations; Exhibits 5 and 6, respectively).
Site Plan:
In addition to the new building, the project proposes to relocate 16 existing parking spaces, located
between Foster Hall and the project area, to the existing faculty/staff parking lot, located north of the
`new' gymnasium ("Athletic Center") and along the existing service driveway. This prior parking area is
proposed to be converted to a 'pedestrian terrace or spine' that includes concrete walkways,
landscaping, and outdoor seating and drainage enhancements. This `pedestrian terrrace' is proposed to
provide a pedestrian connection between the project area and the gymnasiums (both `old' and the
"Athletic Center"), located north of the project area.
Vehicular access to/from the project site is proposed to be reversed. Currently, vehicular traffic enters
the circular driveway and exits in a counterclockwise direction using the service driveway located west
of the circular drive. The project proposes re-routing vehicular traffic to enter the service driveway and
exit clockwise use the circular drive. The direction of parking stall striping along the service driveway is
also proposed to be reconfigured. Portions of the service driveway are proposed to be widened to add
some of the relocated parking spaces which will require new retaining walls less than 3' in height and
the removal of nominal landscaping (turf).
Architecture:
The project proposes an energy-efficient, contemporary design for the new "Science and Innovation
Center", characterized by glass "curtain walls" with aluminum sun control louvers, a combination of
stucco plaster and concrete panels and a clerestory window parapet. Due to grade differences at the
project area, the height of the building is proposed to be two -stories (max. 24') along the west elevation,
facing Foster Hall, and three -stories (max. 43.5'), along the east elevation, facing the athletic fields. The
building is proposed to provide six (6) science lab classrooms and one (1) independent study lab on the
two upper floors above a "shell" basement level with mezzanine for mechanical equipment. The primary
entrance to the building is proposed along the `upper' elevation, along the new pedestrian terrace or
`spine' across from Foster Hall. Exterior colors are proposed to be in earth tone shades. (A Materials
and Color Board will be provided during the Board's meeting.)
At the recommendation of Planning staff, a Historic Resource Evaluation (Page & Turnbull, dated
January 2, 2014; Exhibit 4) was conducted on Foster Hall for the project. This study determined that
Foster Hall, while not currently `listed' as historic, is eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical resources and should be considered a historic structure under CEQA. This study further
determined that the project is "sensitively sited and designed in a way that does not present any
project -specific or potential cumulative negative impacts to Foster Hall." This study determined the
proposed project is in compliance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.
4
Landscaping:
The new science building is proposed to be site to preserve existing redwood and oak groves which will
also help screen views of the building from neighboring residential properties located to the north and
east.
Overall, the project proposes to remove 29 existing trees, eight (8) of which are deemed 'significant'
(i.e., any Oak tree more than 6" in diameter or any tree more than 12" in diameter, as measured 4.5'
above the root crown, and in good health and form) under City policy and must be replaced a 3:1 ratio.
These `significant' trees proposed for removal are existing Oak trees. While several (6) of these trees
are located in the North Parking Lot, a vast majority of the trees proposed for removal are located within
and around the new building area.
The project proposes to plant 55 new trees, all 24"-48" box sizes, distributed evenly between the North
Parking Lot, the new building area and along the service driveway (within the existing grass turf area
east of Foster Hall and the circular drive). The new trees in the North Parking Lot are proposed to be
located primarily around the perimeter.
The project also proposes to incorporate `green wall' plantings along the east building elevation, with
vines (Trumpet vines or Disticus buccinatoria) in 3' -tall powder -coated metal raised planters, trained on
vertical cable assemblies on portions of the southern staircase and east building facade.
Grading/Drainage:
Site excavation proposed by the project includes 5,466 CY of 'cut', 370 CY of 'fill' with 5,096 CY of
`export' off-site. While minor grading is proposed in the North Parking Lot, a vast majority of the
excavation is proposed to occur trees within and around the new building area.
The Hydrology/Drainage Report (Sherwood Design Engineers, dated October 1, 2014) indicate that the
project will utilize a combination of new bio -retention ('raingardens') facilities and permeable pavement
to treat and mitigate storm water runoff, reducing the peak flow rate of drainage leaving the site to
below pre -project levels. Roof runoff from the new building and sidewalks is proposed to be directed to
new bio -retention planters located east and west of the new building. Runoff from the redeveloped
North Parking Lot is proposed to directed new bio -retention planters located south of the parking lot.
Runoff from the expanded west parking area, along the reconfigured service driveway, is proposed to
be directed to new bio -retention planters located east of the one-way driveway and mitigated directly by
the use of permeable pavement.
ANALYSIS
General Plan 2020 Consistency:
The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP). The P/QP
designation allows government or quasi -public buildings or facilities, such as MA, utility facilities and
similar facilities owned or operated by public/non-profit agencies, and residential uses. The project's
proposed use, providing enlarged or more science lab space to complement Thatcher Hall, the current
science building on the MA campus, is consistent with Land Use Policy LU -23 (Land Use Map and
Categories). Also, the proposed new, "Science and Innovation Center' is in accordance with Land Use
Policy LU -12 (Building Height) and the maximum 36' building height, based on the City's current
measurement for building height (Building height is measured from finished grade pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code 1997 method). Staff requests the Board's guidance in evaluating the project for
consistency with the following design -related General Plan Policies:
• Community Design Policy CD -2 (Neighborhood Identity) seeks to recognize and promote the
unique character and integrity of the City's residential neighborhoods and the Downtown and
strengthen the "hometown" image of San Rafael by preserving and enhancing the scale and
landscaped character of the City's residential neighborhoods.
• CD -3 (Neighborhoods) seeks to recognize, preserve and enhance the positive qualities that give
neighborhoods their unique identities, while also allowing flexibility for innovative design. New
development should respect the context and scale of existing neighborhoods.
• CD -4 (Historic Resources) seeks to protect San Rafael's positive and distinctive image by
recognizing, preserving and enhancing the City's historic resources.
• CD -5 (Views) seeks to respect and enhance to the greatest extent possible, views of the Bay and
its islands, Bay wetlands, St. Raphael's church bell tower, Canalfront, marinas, Mt. Tamalpais,
Marin Civic Center and hills and ridgelines from public streets, parks and publicly accessible
pathways.
• CD -10 (Nonresidential Design Guidelines) recognizes preserves and enhances the design
elements that contribute to the economic vitality of commercial areas. New nonresidential and
mixed-use development should fit with and improve the immediate neighborhood and the
community as a whole.
• CD -18 (Landscaping) recognizes landscaping as a significant component of all site design.
• CD -19 (Lighting) requires project lighting at adequate levels for safety purposes while controlling
light spillover and off-site glare.
• CD -21 (Parking Lot Landscaping) requires parking lot landscaping to control heat build-up from
pavement, reduce air pollution, provide shade cover for vehicles and soften the appearance of the
parking lot.
• Circulation Policy C-29 (Better Use of Parking Resources) seeks to improve the use of existing
parking and create new parking opportunities through innovative programs, public/private
partnerships and cooperation, and land use policies.
• Sustainability Policy SU -6 (New and Existing Trees) strives to plant new trees and retain existing
trees to maximize energy conservation and carbon sequestration benefits.
• Culture and Arts Policy CA -13 (Historic Building and Areas) requires new development and
redevelopment to respect architecturally and historically significant buildings and areas.
• Safety Policy S-32 (Safety Review of Development Projects) requires crime prevention and fire
prevention techniques in new development, including adequate access for emergency vehicles
• Conservation Policy CON -22 (Resource Efficiency in Site Development) encourages site planning
and development practices that reduce energy demand, support transportation alternatives and
incorporate resource- and energy-efficient infrastructure.
Planning staff believes the proposed project generally.meets the applicable design -related General
Plan Policies. An Historic Resource Evaluation was conducted on Foster Hall, located immediately west
of the project area, and determined: 1) Foster Hall should be considered a historic structure under
CEQA; and 2) the project is sensitively sited and designed in a way that does not present any project -
specific or potential cumulative negative impacts to Foster Hall and; therefore, is in compliance with the
Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.
M
Zoning Ordinance Consistency:
Chapter 9 — Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP) District
The site is located within the Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP) zoning district. The proposed project is
consistent with the applicable property development standards for the P/QP District, including a
maximum 36' building height and 10% minimum landscape requirement. Those property development
standards applicable to the project are identified in the Property Facts summary matrix located on the
front of this report.
Chapter 16 — Site and Use Requlations
Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Under both the City's General Plan (Land Use Policy LU -9; Intensity of Nonresidential Development)
and Section 14.16.150 (C) of the Zoning Ordinance (Floor Area Ratios and Densities Applicable to
Nonresidential and Mixed -Use Development, Public and Quasi -Public Use FAR), the maximum
allowable intensity of nonresidential development on the project site is 1.0 FAR, which may be
exceeded for health and safety purposes subject to Use Permit approval. The MA campus is comprised
of five parcels; the `Upper Campus' is located along the north side of Mission Avenue and is comprised
of two (2) of the large adjacent parcels, including the project area, while the 'Lower Campus' is located
south of Mission Avenue and is comprise of two (2) smaller parcels separated by Cottage Avenue (The
fifth parcel is located within the Fifth/Mission Residential/Office or 5/MR/O District at 1513 Fifth Avenue
and is developed with a 34 -stall surface parking lot). All four (4) parcels, located in the P/QP District,
contain a combined 432,000 sq. ft. of lot area and allow a maximum of 432,000 sq. ft. of non-residential
development. The project proposes to increase the FAR on campus to 127,516 sq. ft. or 0.30 FAR.
Chapter 18 — Parking Standards
Pursuant to Section 14.18.040 (Parking Requirements) of the Zoning Ordinance, the project is required
to provide 13 new, on-site parking spaces, in addition to replacing the 16 existing parking spaces
removed by the conversion of a surface parking lot, located between Foster Hall and the project area,
into a `pedestrian terrace'. The parking requirement for the project is based on the standard of 1 space
for every 4 students based on the maximum school capacity or as specified by Use Permit. The project
includes a proposal to increase the maximum allowable enrollment capacity from 400 to 450 students.
The City's parking regulations require 12.5 new parking spaces to meet the proposed 50 student
increase in capacity. Pursuant to Section 14.18.030, one (1) parking space is required for fractions of
one-half ('/2) or more parking spaces.
In 1997, the Planning Commission conditionally approved a Master Use Permit (UP97-004) which
included: 1) an enrollment capacity of 385 students; and 2) required the implementation of a parking
program in order to mitigate the impacts of student parking on the surrounding neighborhood streets.
This Master Use Permit was amended in both 2003 (UP02-027) and 2004 (UP04-035), which also
updated the.MA Parking and Traffic Plan. This updated parking plan requires MA to maintain 157 on-
site and off-street parking spaces to meet faculty, staff and student parking demands. The total on-site
parking controlled by MA is currently 161 parking spaces.
The project proposes to relocate the 16 existing parking spaces from the converted surface parking lot
to either the North Parking Lot or the service driveway. Twelve (12) of these existing parking spaces
are proposed to be relocated to the North Parking Lot, which will be reconfigured to meet minimum
parking space dimensions, backup/aisle width and dead-end fire turnaround requirements and the
existing perimeter landscape planter areas will be reduced slightly. The remaining four (4) existing
parking spaces are proposed to be relocated to the service driveway, which will be reconfigured from a
counter -clockwise directional pattern to a clockwise pattern and a portion of the existing grass turf
landscape area west of Foster Hall will be removed and low (less than 3') retaining wall constructed.
7
Parking Modification - Downtown Parking Space Dimensions
The project additionally proposes reconfigure all parking spaces in the North Parking Lot and the
service driveway to meet reduced "Downtown" parking space dimensions (8.5' x 18') rather than the
'standard' parking space dimensions (9' x 19'), as required. Pursuant to Section 14.18.040 (B), the
City's parking standards may be "...modified so as to provide adequate parking which is fair, equitable,
logical and consistent with the intent..." of providing on-site parking to meet the parking demand. A
'Parking Modification' requires Use Permit approval (Planning Commission), subject to the review and
recommendation of the Community Development Director, the City's Traffic Engineer and the Board.
Staff's Comments. Staff recommends that the `Parking Modification' is appropriate, given that; it will
allow the MA to configure their entire campus using a single uniform parking space dimension. Three of
the five parcels (the 'lower campus' and the surface parking lot at 1513 Fifth Avenue) that comprise the
MA campus are located within the City's 'Downtown' neighborhood in which the existing on-site parking
currently meet the allowable reduced (8.5'x 18') parking space dimensions. The City's Engineer has
reviewed the project and supports the proposed 'Parking Modification' to reconfigure all parking spaces
in the North Parking Lot and the service driveway to meet reduced "Downtown" parking space
dimensions (8.5' x 18') rather than the `standard' parking space dimensions (9' x 19'), as required. The
project proposes to reconfigure the parking spaces in the North Parking Lot and the service driveway to
meet all other applicable parking standards including:
• Minimum aisle width or minimum parking space backup area (26');
• End of drive aisle parking stall access extension (2');
• One (1), off-street loading and unloading space with minimum dimensions of 10' in width, 35' in
length and 14' in height clearance, which may be incorporated into a drive aisle if adequate backup
distance is provide as determined by the City's Traffic Engineer;
• Adequate short-term (1) and secure, long-term (1) bicycle parking;
• Adequate clean air vehicle parking spaces (3);
• Minimum parking lot landscaping (1 canopy tree for every 4 parking spaces);
• Parking area and exterior building lighting designed to provide adequate minimum illumination
levels of:
a) One (1) foot candle at ground level overlap shall be provided in all exterior doorways and in all
vehicle parking areas; and
b) Minimum one-half (1/2) foot candle at ground level overlap shall be provided along all outdoor
pedestrian walkways.
Staff requests the Board's comments on the following:
• Whether the proposed `Parking Modification' to allow the use of the City's reduced
`Downtown' parking space dimensions is appropriate and, therefore, should be granted
for the project.
Parking Modification — Minimum Driveway Access Width
The project proposes to maintain the existing 20' driveway access width along the service driveway to
the North Parking Lot while adding the 13 relocated parking spaces. The number of on-site parking
spaces located along the service driveway is proposed to increase from 18 to 22 parking stalls. The
number of on-site parking spaces located within the North Parking Lot is proposed to increase from 45
to 57 parking stalls. The City's parking standards require a minimum 20' -wide driveway access (2 -way)
for non-residential uses serving 6-24 parking spaces and a minimum 26' -wide driveway (2 -way) for
non-residential uses serving 25 or more parking spaces. Pursuant to Section 14.18.040 (B), the project
requests a second `Parking Modification' to allow the continued use of the 20' -wide service driveway
rather than a minimum 26' -wide driveway as required. City's parking standards may be "...modified so
as to provide adequate parking which is fair, equitable, logical and consistent with the intent..." of
providing appropriate driveway width to meet safe egress/ingress. A 'Parking Modification' requires
Use Permit approval (Planning Commission), subject to the review and recommendation of the
Community Development Director, the City's Traffic Engineer and the Board.
Staff's Comments. Staff recommends that the 'Parking Modification' is appropriate, given that; the
portion of the service driveway requiring a minimum of 26' -wide (the 2 -way portion of the service
driveway) is limited to an area which is currently restricted by existing campus buildings, including the
Foster Hall and the 'new' and 'old' gymnasiums. The project proposes to redirect the on-site traffic flow.
Currently, vehicular traffic currently enters the circular driveway and exits the service driveway. The
project proposes to reverse this by routing primary vehicular traffic to the 1 -way service driveway.
Vehicular traffic will continue to exit along the circular driveway. The City's Fire Prevention Bureau has
reviewed and approved fire protection access improvements (`Equivalent Accommodations') proposed
by the project, including a new hammerhead turnaround ('K -Turn') in the redesign of the North Parking
Lot and providing a new aerial apparatus fire lane from Mission Avenue, along to the filed level to the
base of the new science building. The City's Engineer has also reviewed the project and supports the
proposed 'Parking Modification' to allow the continued use of the 20' -wide service driveway rather than
a minimum 26' -wide driveway as required.
Staff requests the Board's comments on the following:
• Whether the proposed `Parking Modification' to allow the continued use of the existing
20' -wide service driveway rather than require a minimum 26' -wide driveway is
appropriate and, therefore, should be granted for the project.
Parking Modification — New Science Building Parking
The parking requirement for the project is not based on square footage of new construction but, rather,
based on the standard of 1 space for every 4 students based on the maximum school capacity or as
specified by Use Permit. The project includes a proposal to increase the maximum allowable enrollment
capacity from 400 to 450 students. The City's parking regulations require 13 new parking spaces to
meet the proposed 50 student increase in capacity (12.5 new parking spaces; one (1) parking space
required for fractions of one-half (1/2) or more parking spaces). The project proposes to meet the
parking demand for the new science building through the existing on-site parking. The Master Use
Permit requires MA to maintain 157 on-site parking spaces to meet faculty, staff and student parking
demands. The total on-site parking controlled by MA is currently 161 parking spaces. The proposed
construction of the new science center will result in no net loss of on-site parking on the MA campus.
Pursuant to Section 14.18.040 (B), the project requests a third `Parking Modification' to allow the
existing campus parking to meet the parking demand for the project rather than provide 13 additional
on-site, parking spaces as required. City's parking standards may be "...modified so as to provide
adequate parking which is fair, equitable, logical and consistent with the intent..." of providing on-site
parking to meet the parking demand. A 'Parking Modification' requires Use Permit approval (Planning
Commission), subject to the review and recommendation of the Community Development Director, the
City's Traffic Engineer and the Board.
Staff's Comments. Staff recommends that the 'Parking Modification' is appropriate, given that; the
project application submittals included a proposed Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP)
identifying strategies and implementation measures designed to ensure that there are no additional
vehicle -trips generated and no additional on-site parking spaces required during a.m. (7-9 a.m.) and
p.m. (4-6 p.m.) peak hours. The City's Engineer has reviewed the project and conditionally supports the
proposed 'Parking Modification' to allow the existing campus parking to meet the parking demand for
the project rather than provide 13 additional on-site parking spaces as required. The City Engineer
accepts the TDMP in concept, subject to the condition requiring MA submit a Traffic and Parking Study
for further review by the City Engineer, monitoring the effectiveness of the TDMP for six (6) months.
This 6 -month evaluation monitoring report is required to begin when the City issues the Certificate of
Occupancy for the new science building and MA agrees to either modify the TDMP with subsequent
measures to reduce traffic and parking demand on campus, reduce enrollment or provide additional
9
available parking. (See the Parking and Traffic Study and the Transportation Demand Management
Plan; Exhibits 7 and 8, respectively.)
Staff requests the Board's comments on the following:
• Whether the proposed `Parking Modification' to allow the existing campus parking to
meet the parking demand for the project rather than provide the required 13 additional
on-site parking spaces is appropriate and, therefore, should be granted for the project.
Chapter 22 — Use Permits
As discussed earlier in staff's report, the project proposes to increase the maximum enrollment capacity
at MA from 400 to 450 students, which requires amendment of the Master Use Permit (operational
changes/ enrollment increase).
Chapter 25 — Environmental and Design Review Permit
The proposed project requires Environmental and Design Review Permit approval by the Planning
Commission given that it proposes to construct a new "public, quasi -public, religious, social or similar
community structure" on the MA campus (Major Physical Improvement per Section 14.25.040(A)(1) of
the Zoning Ordinance). The project is subject to the review criteria for Environmental and Design
Review Permits, pursuant to Section 14.25.050 (Review Criteria; Environmental and Design Review
Permits), as follows:
• Site Design. Proposed structures and site development should relate to the existing development in
the vicinity. The development should have good vehicular and pedestrian circulation and access.
Safe and convenient parking areas should be designed to provide easy access to building
entrances. The traffic capacity of adjoining streets must be considered.
Architecture. The project architecture should be harmoniously integrated in relation to the
architecture in the vicinity in terms of colors and materials, scale and building design. The design
should be sensitive to and compatible with historic and architecturally significant buildings in the
vicinity. Design elements and approaches which are encouraged include: a) creation of interest in
the building elevation; b) pedestrian -oriented design in appropriate locations; c) energy-efficient
design; d) provision of a sense of entry; e) variation in building placement and height; and f) equal
attention to design given to all facades in sensitive location.
• Materials and colors. Exterior finishes should be consistent with the context of the surrounding area.
Color selection shall coordinate with the predominant colors and values of the surrounding
landscape and architecture. High-quality building materials are required. Natural materials and
colors in the earth tone and wood tone range are generally preferred. Concrete surfaces should be
colored, textured, sculptured, and/or patterned to serve design as well as a structural function.
• Walls, Fences and Screening. Walls, fences and screening shall be used to screen parking and
loading areas, refuse collection areas and mechanical equipment from view. Screening of
mechanical equipment shall be designed as an integrated architectural component of the building
and the landscape. Utility meters and transformers shall be incorporated into the overall project
design.
• Exterior Lighting. Exterior lighting should provide safety for building occupants, but not create glare
or hazard on adjoining streets or be annoying to adjacent properties or residential areas.
• Landscape Design. Landscaping shall be designed as an integral enhancement of the site and
existing tree shall be preserved as much as possible. Water -conserving landscape design shall be
required. A landscaped berm around the perimeter of parking areas is encouraged. Smaller scale,
10
seasonal color street trees should be proposed along pedestrian -oriented streets while high -
canopy, traffic -tolerant trees should be proposed for primary vehicular circulation streets.
Staff s Comments. The review criteria for Environmental and Design Review Permits require that the
proposed design (architecture, form, scale, materials and color, etc.) of all new development 'relate' to
the predominant design or 'character -defining' design elements existing in the vicinity.
Scale
The project is proposed to be sited into an existing west -to -east trending hillside, which slopes from
Foster Hall down to the athletic fields. The perceived mass of the new science building will be two -
stories along the west elevation and three -stories along the east elevation. Staff believes both the
surrounding mature redwood trees and the immediately adjacent buildings (Foster Hall and the 'old'
Gymnasium) also help to create an appropriate context of scale for the project (see "Design Review
Narrative/Statement of Intent including Visual Simulations", dated October 1, 2014; Exhibit 7).
Colors and Materials
The project proposes `earthtone' exterior colors to complement those on the other campus buildings.
The building design proposes equally use of stucco exterior materials, "high performance concrete
panels" and window "curtain walls" with aluminum sun control. louvers. Staff supports the project's intent
to create an energy-efficient building design and the use of 'contemporary' design materials. The use of
stucco will match the overwhelmingly predominant exterior material of the other campus buildings.
A Materials and Color Board will be provided during the Board's meeting.
Conceptual Design Review:
On August 5, 2014, the Board reviewed the concept design for the project and expressed unanimous
support for the proposed contemporary, energy-efficient, building design and pedestrian -oriented site
improvements, and provided the following comments:
• The proposed vine plantings should be protected by a physical barrier;
• The columnar trees should be planted in conjunction with the vine plantings;
• The staircases proposed along the south and east building elevation should incorporate landings to
eliminate 20 -step runs;
• The staircase proposed along the south building elevation should be wider or flared at the athletic
field;
• Details on the use and improvements on the "basement" area should be presented; and
• A Lighting Plan with lighting level details, for the converted east surface parking lot, should be
presented.
Staff s Comments. Staff has concluded that the formal submittal has generally responded well to the
Board's August 5, 2014 conceptual review comments.
The formal design review submittal proposes 'green wall' vine plantings (Trumpet vines or Disticus
buccinatoria) in 3' -tall powder -coated metal raised planters, trained on vertical cable assemblies on
the southern staircase and the first floor portion of the east building fagade..
The formal design review submittal does not incorporate any additional plantings, including
columnar trees, with the proposed vine planting. In the applicant's response to the Board's
comments, the applicant indicates that columnar trees could not be incorporated along the east
building elevation, in that; it would necessitate shifting the new building to the west and reducing
circulation along the new pedestrian 'spine' or science garden, located between new building and
Foster Hall (see the applicant's responses to the Board's concept review comments; Exhibit 9).
The formal design review submittal does not incorporate additional landings to eliminate 20 -step
runs in the new staircases proposed along the south and east building elevations. In the applicant's
11
response to the Board's comments, the staircases have been redesigned with a shallower riser and
a deeper tread. Rather than flared, the proposed staircase along the south building elevation has
been widened and redesigned to 'dog leg' at the base of the staircase so that it is parallel with the
athletic field, allowing 'green wall' vine plantings to be trained on vertical cable assemblies similar to
those proposed along the east building fagade.
The formal design review submittal does not provide additional details on the use and
improvements proposed in the "basement" area of the new science building beyond a mechanical
equipment mezzanine. In the applicant's response to the Board's comments, the exact function of
the "basement" area continues to be undetermined though its proximity to the athletic field lends
itself to a training/fitness area and restrooms. The formal design review submittal (Sheet A2.00a)
includes several reiterations of possible functions and improvements for the "basement" area.
The formal design review submittal includes a Lighting Plan with photometric lighting levels for the
project. This Lighting Plan proposes to meet the City's minimum lighting levels for building
entrances, parking areas and walkways between building entrances and parking areas while
minimizing off-site glare.
Staff requests the Board's comments on the following:
• Whether the project adequately responds to the Board's conceptual review comments; i.e.,
that 1) the vine plantings be protected by a physical barrier; 2) columnar trees be planted in
conjunction with the vine plantings; 3) the staircases proposed along the south and east
building elevation incorporate landings to eliminate 20 -step runs; 4) the staircase proposed
along the south building elevation should be wider or flared at the athletic field; 5) details on
the use and improvements on the "basement" area should be presented; and 6) a Lighting
Plan with lighting level details, for the converted east surface parking lot, shall be presented.
San Rafael Design Guidelines:
On November 15, 2004, the City Council adopted (by Resolution No. 11667) the interim San Rafael
Design Guidelines to give the City staff direction in the design of new development in accordance with
the San Rafael General Plan 2020 Community Design Element's implementing programs. These
guidelines provide a framework of design principles that builds on the strength of the existing character
of an area and that strives to improve the visual unity of the area. Planning staff requests the Board's
guidance in evaluating the project for consistency with the following applicable historic building design
guidelines:
Historic /Architectural Significant Building Design Guidelines
The project proposes a new, 18,340 square foot, "Science and Innovation Center" building and
associated parking, circulation, drainage and landscaping modifications located within close proximity
of identified historic/architecturally significant structures, where the following specific design guidelines
apply:
• New buildings, additions or major remodels in the vicinity of a building listed in the San Rafael
Historical/Architectural Survey should respect the pattern, scale and design of the older building,
and not create visual distractions.
• Provide an appropriate transition in height between low rise and taller buildings, through example,
careful use of building stepbacks and variable roof heights.
• Windows should be properly proportioned and upper story windows should be vertically aligned with
windows and doors on the ground floor.
• On streets with a concentration of older buildings that have a well-defined design pattern or
rhythm, preserve and complement horizontal building lines, such as cornice lines and window
frames of adjacent architecturally significant buildings.
12
On streets with a concentration of older buildings that have a well-defined design pattern, the size
and proportion of window and door openings should be similar to those of surround facades.
Older buildings, particularly mixed-use buildings, tend to differentiate between the first floor and
upper floor fagade treatments. This is an appropriate design feature to emulate in new construction
adjacent to such buildings.
Relate new roof forms to those found in the area.
Staff s Comments. At staff's urging, a Historic Resource Evaluation was conducted on Foster Hall for
the project. This study determined that Foster Hall, while not currently `listed' as historic, is eligible for
listing in the California Register of Historical resources and should be considered a historic structure
under CEQA. This study further determined that the project is "sensitively sited and designed in a way
that does not present any project -specific or potential cumulative negative impacts to Foster Hall." This
study determined the proposed project is in compliance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation.
Planning staff has no additional issues or concerns with the site and building design of the project
beyond those listed elsewhere in this report.
NEIGHBORHOOD CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of hearing for the project was conducted in accordance with noticing requirements contained in
Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance. A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to all property owners and
occupants within a 300 -foot radius of the project site, the appropriate neighborhood group (the
Culloden/Quarry/Twin Oaks Homeowner's Association), and all other interested parties, 15 calendar
days prior to the date of this hearing. Additionally, notice was posted on the project site at three (3)
locations along the Mission Avenue frontage: 1) Northeast corner of Forbes and Mission Avenues; 2)
Northwest corner of Bryn Mawr Drive and Mission Avenue; and 3) Immediately east of the circular
driveway.
At the time of printing staff's report, no comments have been received as a result of this noticing.
CONCLUSION
Planning staff believes the level of details provided in the formal application design submittal meets the
applicable design -related General Plan Policies and Zoning Ordinance regulations and standards. Staff
requests the Board's recommendations to the Planning Commission on whether the project has
adequately responded to the recommendations provided by the Board during conceptual design review.
Staff further requests whether the project design should be granted 'Parking Modifications' to allow: 1)
the use of the City's reduced 'Downtown' parking space dimensions; 2) the continued use of the
existing 20' -wide service driveway rather than require a minimum 26' -wide driveway; and 3) the existing
campus parking to meet the parking demand for the project rather than provide the required 13
additional on-site parking spaces. Finally, staff welcomes additional comments or guidance on the any
site or building design details that would further improve the project.
EXHIBITS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Campus Map
3. Summary of MA Redevelopment Permits
4. Historic Resource Evaluation (Foster Hall)
5. Project Description
6. Design Review Narrative/Statement of Intent including Visual Simulations
7. Parking and Traffic Study
13
8. Transportation Demand Management Plan
9. Applicant's Responses to Concept Review Comments
Full-sized and half -sized plans and a reduced color lighting plan have been provided to the DRB
members only.
cc: Ted Lieser, Project Manager for Equity Community Builders LLC — P.O. Box 29585; San
Francisco, CA 94129
Mike Joyce — Chief Financial Officer, Marin Academy; 1600 Mission Ave.; San Rafael, CA
94901
Grant Hellar — Culloden/Quarry/Twin Oaks Homeowner's Assoc.; 352 G St.; San Rafael, CA
94901
14
Marin Academy campus
V 3pr
11E.
+C/J.SSlfinr:ll�
U 2Z0 A
Cti �o N h
.4v,
ti JM.4VV
np- n
,4 11,C
0
sr�ar�.
f20 w �ry.11F
` C114
JDz
0$ Y C=j
40
oV 700 o n CIL:]
�o
100 o Ioo aoo aoo
FEET
95
C
C
? 4 II
i
e
t +
AIJSSIOJyA J,�.
dflSS/ON.4 r
EXHIBIT I
571144F'
7D
yF102,2901799
:E
•y=
N
P-4
�
c
cn
�do
ej
I
��•
��
��t-,
Cwt
x
rp
°
�
141 NiMl4
EXHIBIT 2
A Summary of Development/Redevelopment Permits at the Marin Academy campus includes:
® December 1988 — Planning Commission conditionally approved an Environmental and
Design Review Permit (ED88-023) to allow the redevelopment of a `barracks' building,
located at the northeast corner of Mission and Cottage Avenues, construction of the
existing science building ("Thatcher Hall")
a January 1996 — Zoning Administrator conditionally approved an Environmental and Design
Review Permit (ED96-002) to allow the installation of site landscaping and lighting.
May 1997 — Planning Commission conditionally approved an Environmental and Design
Review Permit (ED95-090) and a Use Permit (UP97-004) to allow the construction of a new
gymnasium ("Athletic Center") and establish a Master Use Permit with a maximum
enrollment capacity of 385 students. The Commission requested MA establish a parking
plan to help alleviate the issue of student and employee parking on surrounding
neighborhood streets, which was incorporated into conditions of approval.
June 2000 — Planning Commission conditionally approved an Environmental and Design
Review Permit (ED00-047) to allow the replacement of the existing theater building, located
at the southwest corner of Mission and Cottage Avenues, with a larger "Performing Arts
Center".
March 2002 — Planning Commission conditionally approved an Environmental and Design
Review Permit (ED01-146) to allow the replacement of the existing fine arts center, located
at the northeast corner of Mission and Forbes Avenues, with a smaller "Visual Arts Center".
November 2002 — Planning Commission conditionally approves a Use Permit Amendment
(UP02-027) and an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED02-060) to allow an
increase in maximum enrollment capacity to 400 students and the redevelopment of tennis
courts, located behind the 'new' gymnasium ("Athletic Center"), to a new, 34 -stall, parking
area for faculty and staff. A condition of approval required MA to work with neighbors to
further alleviate the issue of student and employee parking on surrounding neighborhood
streets and amend their existing parking plan.
August 2003 — Planning Commission adopts a resolution (Resolution No. 03-29) approving
the amended Parking and Traffic Plan for MA, as required as a condition of approval of Use
Permit Amendment (UP02-027) and an Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED02-
060). The updated parking plan provided additional on-site and off-street parking spaces (a
total of 157 parking spaces), reducing the number of cars traveling to MA by utilizing public
transit (bus) services, and requiring on-going communication between MA and neighbors
and reporting to Planning staff.
o November 2004 — Planning Commission conditionally approved exterior renovation of the
administration building ("Bodie Brizendine Leadership Center") and redevelopment of a
medical office building, both located along the east Cottage Avenue street front, between
Fifth and Mission Avenues, with a new "Library" building.
a May 2007 — Zoning Administrator conditionally approved an Environmental and Design
Review Permit (ED07-017) to allow the comprehensive renovation and expansion of the
`athletic fields', located at the northwest corner of Mission Avenue and Bryn Mawr Drive.
EXHIBIT 3
p
& '110 M
I M ILIVIN billion
imagining change in historic environments through design, research, and technology
EXHIBIT 4
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 3
SUMMARY OF DETERMINATION....................................................................................................... 3
METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................ 4
11. CURRENT HISTORIC STATUS............................................................................ 5
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.................................................................................... 5
CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES...................................................................... 5
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RATINGS AND LANDMARK STATUS.............................................................. 5
CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODE..................................................................... 5
111. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION...................................................................... 6
SITE.......................................................................................................................................................
6
EXTERIOR............................................................................................................................................
6
INTERIOR...........................................................................................................................................
12
SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD................................................................................................
13
IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT........................................................................................
13
EARLYHISTORY.................................................................................................................................
13
NEIGHBORHOODHISTORY............................................................................................................
14
HISTORY OF PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AT THE SITE ............................................
21
OWNERSAND OCCUPANTS...........................................................................................................
24
CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY.................................................................................................
26
BUILDER..............................................................................................................................................
29
V. EVALUATION....................................:.................................................................29
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES..................................................................................
29
CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES ..................................
_z i j
INTEGRITY............................................. ............................... 33
CHARACTER -DEFINING FEATURES.................................................................................................. 34
VI. PROPOSED PROJECT ANALYSIS....................................................................... 35
PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................... 35
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ...................................... ............................... 36
SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS............................................................................... 37
PROJECT -SPECIFIC AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS........................................................................... 40
VII. CONCLUSION.................................................................................................... 40
VIII. REFERENCES CITED.......................................................................................... 41
PUBLISHEDWORKS...................................................................................:...................................... 41
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-1-
Historic Resouire Evaluation
Filial
PUBLIC RECORDS
INTERNET SOURCES
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
.,.... I ....................".........I....................................... 41
............................................................. 41
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-2-
Historic Resource .Evaluation
Final
I. INTRODUCTION
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
This Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) has been prepared for Foster Hall, which was constructed
in 1870 and is the oldest building on the Marin Academy campus. This report was prompted by a
request by the City of San Rafael for documentation of the historical significance of Foster Hall, in
advance of proposed new construction and related site and landscape alterations on the campus.
Foster Hall (APN 0111-6113) is a two story Italiante-style building, constructed as a residence for
San Francisco businessman Michael J. O'Connor.
POR. SAN PEORO, SANTA MARGARITA Y LAS GALLINAS RANCHO
`f
r5 4 1
GOSSp6i
i
co
m.raroA,.a 11-16
C� 6-000
HTO
rh ,
W 22
10
.E SS^
&Yy Mo Pork R.M. 9k,7 N.93 l \
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
Msenoes Mop Bk. fl -Pg. 16
County o/Marin, Coli/.
Figure 1: Marin County Assessor's Parcel Map, Subject Property lot outlined in red. Source:
http://www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/AR/MapBook/index.cfm, edited by Page & Turnbull.
SUMMARY OF DETERMINATION
Foster Hall is significant under California Register Criterion 1 (Events). The property is significant
both as representative of the development of private educational institutions in Marin County,. and as
the visual and symbolic center of two longstanding military academies, the Mount Tamalpais Military
Academy and the San Rafael Military Academy. The period of significance under this Criterion spans
from 18.92, when the Mount Tamalpais Military Academy attained the former O'Connor residence
and the residence was renamed Foster Hall, to 1967, when enrollment at San Rafael Military
Academy plummeted to a point where the school dissolved four years later with the completion of
that year's graduating class. Despite some changes to its original appearance, Foster Hall retains
sufficient integrity to convey its significance in relation to its period of significance. Therefore, Foster
Hall is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, and should be considered
a historic resource under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA.)
The proposed project for new construction at Marin Academy is sensitively sited and designed in a
way that does not present any project -specific or potential cumulative negative impacts to Foster
Hall. The .proposed project is in compliance with the Secretag of'tbe Interior's Standards for Rebabilitation.
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-3-
Historic Resourre Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, Calrfonna
METHODOLOGY
This report follows Page & Turnbull's standard outline for Historic Resource Evaluation Reports,
and provides a review of the building's current historic status, a building description, and historic
context for the building. The report also includes an evaluation of the property's eligibility for listing
in the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources. Based
on these findings, the proposed project is evaluated using the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (Standards.)
Page & Turnbull prepared this report using research collected at various local repositories, including
the Marin County Assessor, the Marin History Museum Library, and the Anne T. Kent California
Room at the Marin County Library. Research was also collected using online sources including the
City of San Rafael Building Division website, the Online Archive of California, ProQuest historical
newspaper database, United States Federal Census records, and the digital Sanborn Fire Insurance
Map collection.
All photographs in the report were taken by Page & Turnbull in October 2013 unless otherwise
noted.
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
4-
Historic Resomrce Evalmation Foster Hall, Marin Academy
Final I San Rafael, California
II. CURRENT HISTORIC STATUS
The following section examines the national, state, and local historical ratings currently assigned to
Foster Hall.
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
The National Register of Historic Places (National Register) is the nation's most comprehensive
inventory of historic resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service
and includes buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural,
engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level.
Foster Hall is not currently listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES
The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant
architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be
listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and
National Register -listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can
also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or. citizens.
The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on
those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places.
Foster Hall is not currently listed in the California Register of Historical Resources.
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RATINGS AND LANDMARK STATUS
The City of San Rafael in 1986 adopted an architectural survey which identified and rated the
architectural significance of approximately 295 structures. Foster Hall was not included in this survey
and therefore has no local Property Classification rating associated with it. Additionally, the City of
San Rafael maintains a register of sixteen local historic landmarks and three historic districts. Foster
Hall is not currently listed as a City of San Rafael Local Landmark, nor is it located in a San Rafael
designated historic district.
CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODE
Properties listed or under review by the State of California Office of Historic Preservation are
assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code .(Status Code) of "1" to "T' to establish their
historical significance in relation to the National Register of Historic Places (National Register or
NR) or California Register of Historical Resources (California Register or CR). Properties with a
Status Code of "1" or "T' are either eligible for listing in the California Register or the National
Register, or are already listed in one or both of the registers. Properties assigned Status Codes of "3"
or "4" appear to be eligible for listing in either register, but normally require more research to
support this rating. Properties assigned a Status Code of "5" have typically been determined to be
locally significant or to have contextual importance. Properties with a Status Code of "6" are not
eligible for listing in either register. Finally, a Status Code of "T' means that the resource has not
been evaluated for the National Register or the California Register, or needs reevaluation.
Foster Hall is not listed in the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) database
with any Status Code, which means that the building has not been formally evaluated using California
Historical Resource Status Codes. .
January 2, 2094 Page ds' Turnbull, Inc.
-s-
Historic Resource Evaluation Foster Hall, Marin Academy
Final San Rafael, California
III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION
SITE
Foster Hall is located on the campus of Marin Academy in San Rafael, on the north side of Mission
Avenue between Bryn Mawr Drive and Forbes Avenue. The building is situated on a large lot which
includes approximately five other campus buildings, sports fields, surface parking areas, an outdoor
student plaza, and a garden. Foster Hall is set back from the street and is accessed via a circular drive
from Mission Avenue. The lot slopes upwards from street grade to the north, leading to open space
of Mountain Park and Boyd Memorial Park.
Figure 2: Aerial photograph of subject property, marked with a red pin. Source: Google Maps, edited by Page &
Turnbull.
EXTERIOR
Foster Hall is two full stories and sits on a raised basement. The roof is hipped with a flat peak, and
the roofline includes seven dormers. The building is clad in stucco.
Primary (South) Fagade
The primary facade of the building faces south and is arranged largelf symmetrically, descending in
bay width from five bays at the first story, three at the second story, and one at the dormer (Figure
3).
Janmary 2, 2014 Pa%e 6, TurnGmll, Irrc.
-6-
Historic Resoune Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, lblarin Academy
San Rafael, California
Figure 3: Foster Hall, primary (south) facade.
At first.story center, a straight stair at center rises to a porch which spans the width of the first story.
A low railing with balusters runs the width of the porch. The porch is supported by eight squared
columns with simple squared capitols and has a flat roof. The porch also has stairs to grade at its east
and west perimeters. The primary entrance, located at center within a bay that projects slightly from
the facade, is a pair of glazed and paneled wood leaf doors below a semicircular transom window, set
within a paneled entry alcove which has a pair of paneled and glazed leaf doors at its front (Figure
4). The entry.is flanked by four sets of French doors with four lite transoms; the door directly to the
right of the main entrance has been recently reconfigured slightly for ADA compliance (Figure 5).
primary entrance.
Figure 5: Detail, French doors.
Figure G: Detail, molding, brackets,
and dormer.
The second story, three bays in width, includes eight lite paired casement windows with four lite
transoms at each bay. A recessed bay at the left of the fagade (further described. in the West Facade
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-7-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
description) includes a pair of four -lite casement windows under a two lite transom. All windows at
the second story are inset into the depth of the facade. The second story terminates with a band of
compound molding, above which the overhanging eaves are supported by hollow -carved wood
brackets alternating with faceted panels (Figure 6). Two panels have been replaced with awning
windows.
The dormer has a hipped roof and presents a square facade with two double hung wood sash lambs
tongue windows under three semicircular transoms (Figure 6). The arches of the transom windows
are repeated blind at the east and west parts of the dormer, and the dormer eaves are supported by
paneled pilasters with floral caps and carved brackets.
East Fagade
The east facade of the building includes the main building as well as a one story auxiliary building and
a one story addition. The three structures, though attached, will be described separately in sequence.
At the first story, the main building's front porch is accessed via a straight stair. The remainder of the
first story is characterized by paired multi lite casement windows under multi lite transoms. At the
rear (north) of the first story, the facade steps back and includes a north -facing typical window group
and a metal pedestrian door under a single lite transom, accessed via a straight stair.
Figure 7: East facade, left (south) and center. Figure 8: East facade, rear (north)
where it adjoins the auxiliary
building.
The second story steps back from the depth of the first story, and includes five paired four lite
casement windows with two lite transoms, arranged slightly asymmetrically, inset within the thickness
of the facade. At the rear (north) of the second story, the facade steps back further and includes one
window of the typical configuration. The second story terminates with the same cornice
arrangement as the primary facade. Two arched dormers, both with triple hung windows with arched
two lite top panes, are located at left and center.
The east facade of the auxiliary building, which is clad in stucco and capped with a hipped roof,
includes five jalousie windows towards the left and center (Figure 9). A stucco vent pipe is located
on the facade, left of center. The remainder of the facade is obscured by thick foliage. The facade
terminates with overhanging eaves supported by carved wood brackets that are the same as those at
the main building. Three large chimney stacks are visible at the roofline.
January 2, 2094 Page & Turnbull Inc:
-8-
Historic Resoarre Evaluation
Final
Foster Halo Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
The east fagade of the one story addition, which is one story and clad in stucco, is completely
obscured by foliage (Figure 9, visible at right).
Figure 9: Ea
West Fa4ade
foliage) visible at far right.
:overed with
Similar to the east facade, the west facrade includes the main building as well as a one story auxiliary
building and a one story addition. The three structures, though attached, will be described separately
in sequence.
At. the main building, at far right (south), the front porch is accessed via a straight stair. At center,
there are two sets of eight -lite wood casement windows .under four -lite transoms. At left, within a
projecting volume, a rectangular bay includes five narrow wood sash double hung windows with
ogee lugs; three at the front of the bay and one at each side. The bay terminates with panel molding
and a cornice with carved modillions supported by carved brackets. At the rear of the house (north),
the west fagade of the first story includes a ramp that accesses a contemporary glazed entry door
below a two -lite transom (visible, Figure 12).
At the second story, the volume main building steps back and includes two sets of four -lite wood
casement windows under two -lite transoms, as well as a small four -lite casement window at center, all
inset within the thickness of the facade. At left, within a projecting volume, there are two sets of
four -lite wood casement windows under four -lite transoms, inset within the thickness of the facade.
The second story terminates with the same cornice arrangement as the primary fagade. A. hipped
dormer at right (south) includes two double hung wood sash windows. An arched dormer at left
(north) includes a triple hung window with an arched two lite top pane. This dormer gives access to a
metal fire escape platform, with a ladder that goes down to the bay window below.
Janmag 2, 2014 Page & TarnGnll, Inc.
-9-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
Sar, Rafael, Caltfonna
Figure 10: Main building, west facade.
The west fagade of the auxiliary building includes three square jalousie windows with two-part
screens, and a contemporary entry door under a jalousie transom (Figure 12). The volume of the
auxiliary building at the west fagade is intersected with the rear (north) one story addition. The
auxiliary building terminates with overhanging eaves supported by carved wood brackets that are the
same as at the main building.
The one story addition at the rear (north) includes, from right to left, a jalousie window, a four lite
metal sash window, a nine -lite metal sash window, and a three. contiguous wood panel doors (Figure
11). The south -facing portion of the addition includes two jalousie windows. The one story addition
terminates with a flat roofline (a portion of which steps up at left) and has a flat roof.
Figure 11: West facade, rear addition.
building.
January 2, 2094 Page & TuruGull, Inc.
-10-
Histotrc Resource Evaluation Foster Hall, Marin Academy
Final San Rafael, California
North Facade
The north facade of the building is the rear facade, and includes the rear of the main building as well
as the rear of the one story addition (the one story auxiliary building's north facade has been
subsumed by the one story addition). These facades will be described separately.
The north facade of the main building is organized into two bays; a narrower bay at left (east), and a
wider bay at right (west) that steps back in volume approximately six feet (Figure 13). At the first
story, the left bay is subsumed by the auxiliary building. The right bay includes two sets of two tall
narrow double hung wood sash windows with ogee lugs.
The second story of the main building includes, at left, a four lite casement window under a single -
lite transom, and a pair of four -lite wood casement windows under a two -lite transom. At right, there
is a pair of four -lite wood casement windows under a two -lite transom and, atfar right, a small
square four -lite wood sash casement window. All windows at this facade are inset within the
thickness of the facade. The facade terminates with the same cornice arrangement as the primary
facade. There are two dormers at the rear facade; at left, there is an arched dormer with a single hung
window under a two -lite arched transom, and, at right, there is a hipped dormer that includes two
single hung wood sash windows under arched single -lite transoms.
The north (rear) facade of the one story addition is organized into two volumes (Figure 14). The left
volume is one story in height,. includes a metal utility door, a small shed -roof addition, and is
overgrown nearly completely with foliage. The right volume is one story as well, though has an
industrial height approximately five feet taller that the left volume. The right volume includes a metal
pedestrian door and two twelve -lite metal sash windows, where the middle six panes pivot as awning
windows. The remainder of the right volume is overgrown with foliage. The roofline is flush and the
roof is flat. A tall braced pipe chimney is located at the center of this farsade.
_ R.1
�h e i
FIrN
Figure 13: North (rear) facade, main building.
Landscape and Grounds
Figure 14: North (rear) facade, one story addition.
Directly south of Foster Hall, there is a circular drive which provides access to the building from
Mission Avenue. The circular drive creates a circular lawn which includes several large trees, a paved
walk from Foster Hall, a central flagpole, two paved platforms which historically held cannons but
now hold benches, and the sign for Marin Academy. East of the circular drive there is a two story
campus building, and west of the circular drive there is downsloping open lawn space and a parking
area.
Ja uta�y 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-11-
Historic Resomrce Evalmation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, Calafonda
East of Foster Hall there is a downslope area that includes several large trees, beyond which are the
campus sports fields. North of Foster Hall there are additional campus buildings, including two
gymnasiums and several maintenance buildings.
Across Mission Avenue to the south there are several additional campus buildings, including the
Bodie Brizandine Leadership Center and the Performing Arts Center. These buildings are located on
Cottage Drive, a one-way street that dead -ends at the entry to Marin Academy.
Figure 15: View of Foster Hall from
drive.
circular.
Figure 17: View to the south, of Cottage Avenue
and additional Marin Academy campus
buildings.
INTERIOR
Figure 16:, View of Foster. Hall from the athletic
fields to the east.
Figure 18: Thatcher Hall, and the circular drive.
Interior spaces that were observed for this report included the publically accessible lobby and central
stair. These areas are largely characterized by contemporary materials, including linoleum flooring
and acoustic ceiling tile. Some original finishes are extant, including the turned wood bannister and
balusters of the central stair, with bands of floral molding, as well as brass window fixtures and some
brass door fixtures. Although the central stair remains intact, other interior spatial arrangements have
been reconfigured to serve as offices for the school administration.
Jameary 2, 2014 Page & TmrnGmll, Inc.
-12-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, Calzfonna
The immediate surroundings of Foster Hall include several Marin Academy campus buildings of
contemporary construction, including Thatcher Hall to the east (circa 1990), the Gymnasium to the
northeast (circa 1930 with circa 1990 renovations), the Athletic Center to the north (1998), the Visual
Arts center .to the west (2003), and the Performing Arts. Center across Mission Avenue to the south
(2003). An. additional campus building, the Bodie Brizendine Leadership Center, located across
Mission Avenue to the southeast of Foster Hall, was constructed circa 1925 and remodeled in 2006.
The neighborhood surrounding the campus is primarily residential to the north of Mission Avenue,
and minced commercial, residential, and civic to the south of Mission Avenue. Several historic estates
are located in proximity .to Foster Hall:
■ Falkirk Cultural Center, 1408 Mission Avenue, is a Clinton Day designed Queen Anne
Victorian listed on the National Register of Historic Places;
■ San Rafael Elk's Club, 1312 Mission Avenue, formerly the Maple Lawn Estate, was
constructed for the Boyd -Cook family;
■ Marin History Museum, 1125 B Street, is located in the Boyd Gate House, a Gothic Revival
house commissioned in 1879 by Ira Cook and listed on the San Rafael historic register.
■ William Bradford House, 333 G Street, is a Stick -Eastlake style building built in 1883, is
listed on the National and local registers.
IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT
EARLY HISTORY
The earliest inhabitants of the San Rafael area were members of the Coast Miwok Indian tribes,
whose villages extended from Sausalito north to Bodega Bay.l Prior to European contact, native
population in the area was relatively low, estimated between 2,000 and 5,000 people across Marin and
Sonoma counties? Miwok people organized themselves in small triblets of about one hundred
persons, and sheltered in redwood or tule structures. The Coast Miwok were hunters, gatherers,
fishermen, and basket makers, and did not make fabric, pottery, conduct agriculture, or keep
domestic animals. Middens or shellmounds, which contain shell, bones, currency, jewely; tools, and
1 "Native Americans of San Rafael",.The California Ibrissions Resource Center, accessed online, 19 November
2013, http://www.missionscalifornia.com/content/native-americans-san-rafacl.htinl.
2"1Vlission San Raphael Arcangel", Church of Saint Raphael & Mission San.Raphael Archangel, accessed
online, 19 November 2013,http://www.saintraphael.com/Default.aspx?tabid=57.
January 2, 2014 Page dam' Turnbull, Inc.
-93-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
skins have been found in Marin County, and the City of San Rafael, known as Nanaguini in the
Miwok language, includes 63 known archelogical sites associated with historic Native settlement.3
First known contact between the Coast N iwok and European explorers happened in 1597 when Sir
Francis Drake paused briefly during his north Pacific voyages in what became known as Drakes Bay.
Lasting Eurpopean settlement of the area did not occur until 1817 with the establishment of Mission
San Rafael Arcangel, which was located at the current -day intersection of Mission Avenue and A
Street. The location was chosen in part because of its steady good .climate, integral to- the mission's
intended use as a healing center for Natives that had fallen ill at the foggy and cold Mission Dolores
in San Francisco 4 The Mission San Rafael Archangel shifted from an "assistencia" to a general
purpose mission in 1822, but full grounds were never built; the Mission remained housed in a single
building which contained a hospital, chapel, padre's quarters, and storage. Population at Mission San
Rafael Arcangel reached a peak of 1,051 in 1826, four years after Mexican independence from Spain.
Population dropped sharply in the years following the Secularization Act of 1833, and by 1840, there
were only 150 Natives residing at Mission San Rafael Arcangel.In 1844, the Mexican government
granted 22,000 acres of land that had formerly been part of Mission San Rafael Archangel to
Timothy Murphy, a native of Ireland who developed a sucessful meatpacking and trapping business,
and had served as administrator at the Mission since 1837. California became the thirty-first state in
1850, and San Rafael became the seat of justice of the newly -formed Marin County in 1851.
NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORY
By the mid -1850s, San Rafael had become a bustling community with a stage road that connected it
to San Quentin Point and from there, ferry service to the city of San Francisco. Although 48 blocks
had been platted in 1850 in the city's nascent "downtown", the main road remained a dusty route
used primarily by cattle drovers moving herds out of the hilly pastureland on their way to San
Francisco and Sacramento markets. Lumber milling and shipping became an important industry in
San Rafael, starting with the effort of Isaac Shaver in the mid 1860s. A paper mill helmed by Samuel
P. Taylor provided the paper for the area's first newspaper, the Marin County Journal, in 1861.
The arrival in 1870 of the San Rafael and San Quentin Point Railroad, followed rapidly by the more
extensive North Pacific Coast Railroad in 1874, had the effect of transforming San Rafael into the
transportation and later the commercial center of Marin County. Extensive investments in the
residential future of the city were. made by some of San Francisco's leading businessmen, primary
amongst which was William T. Coleman. Coleman was a wealthy commission merchant who had
made a name for himself at the head of San Francisco's Vigilance Committee in the 1850s. In 1871,
Coleman purchased 1100 acres in San Rafael, and hired San Francisco civil engineer Hammond Hall
to lay out a subdivision with lots ranging from 1 to 20 acres.5 He also replanted the area, which had
been cleared for agriculture and grazing, with imported eucalyptus. To provide these lots with water,
he established the Marin County Water Company, and laid out plumbing that came to service most
of San Rafael. Coleman also made civic contributions to San Rafael, including funding the
construction of a new county courthouse, which when it was completed in 1873 became the first
public building to be equipped with gaslights. 6 By 1875, the national magazine Harber's Weekly
described San Rafael as "The Suburbs of San Francisco."? Between 1874 and 1880, the combination
3 Tsim D. Schneider, "Shell Mounds of China Camp and Tomales Bay State Parks, Marin County", accessed
online 19 November, 2013, http://www.scahome.org/publications/proceedings/Proceedings.21Schneider.pdf.
4" Mission San Raphael Arcangel", http://www.saintraphael.com/Default.aspx?tabid=57.
5 Frank Keegan, San Rafael Mann's Mission City (Northridge, California, Windsor Publications, 1987) 56.
6 Kaagan, 58.
t Kaagan,.60,
January 2, 2014 Page & ThrnGull, Inc.
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hal! Mann Academy
San Rafael, Cal foma
of improved transportation and increasingly available residential development saw the population of
San Rafael rise from 600 to 2,276.8
Because of its consistently temperate climate and relative proximity, Marin County betaine a popular
destination with San Franciscans for weekend and suminer getaways. Visitors would take a ferry to
Sausalito then catch a train that brought them north to San Rafael and beyond. Resort hotels
including the Albion, the Marin Hotel, and the Tamalpais Hotel, were built to serve these visitors.
One of the largest, the Hotel Rafael, was built in 1887 and owned by wealthy businessmen including
Coleman, railroad scion James Mervyn Donahue, and railman and broker A. W. Foster. The hotel
had 101 rooms, an observation tower, cottages, tennis courts, stables and rolling lawns. Described in
1880, the process of getting between the grand hotels of San Rafael and San Francisco was as easy as
walking "down to the spot, a short distance from the hotels, wait on a platform for the tap of a bell,
step into an elegant car, and in eight or ten minutes .step off the car onto the steamer." v
The familiarity and ease of transport led San Rafael by the end of the nineteenth century to become a
popular residential choice for both summer and year-round estates for San Francisco's wealthy.
Along the city's northern perimeter, several such estates were constructed, including William
Colernan's (1130 Mission Avenue), Ira B. Cook's (1312 Mission Avenue), German Consulate William
Lichtenberg's (201 Locust Avenue), president of the North Pacific Coast Railroad James Walker's
(1408 Mission Avenue, later named Falkirk), and wholesale merchant Michael J. O'Connor's (now
Foster Hall at Marin Academy.) The city had the full complement of services by the close of the
century, including public and private schools, recreation clubs, public parks, banks, and hospitals. San
Rafael had become a quiet retreat from urban life, with large homes at the outskirts, a modest
business center downtown, and a leisurely bucolic pace. In the 1920s, a character in a Gertrude
Atherton novel exclairrls, "Oh God, let me climb. Yank me up into the paradise of San Francisco
Society, Burlingame, Alta, Menlo Park, Atherton, Belvedere, San Rafael."10
PROJECT SITE HISTORY
The earliest development on the current -day site of Marin Academy took place in 1866, when the
Reverend Charles F. Mel established an all79irls school in an effort to attract families to settle in San
Rafael.'I The girl's academy didn't last; in 1868, Miel sold the building to wholesale hardware
merchant Michael. J. O'Conner, who moved it to Fifth Avenue, added a third story, and opened it as
the Tamalpais Hotel. The Tamalpais Hotel also had cottages for out-of-town visitors, located just
west of the hotel along what is today known as Cottage Avenue.
Across the site from his hotel, Michael J. O'Conner built a home for his family (Figure 22). The.
October 27, 1869 edition of the San .Francisco Chronicle included a brief article entitled "San Rafael
Improvements", which detailed the extending path of the San Quentin Railroad Company into the
town of San Rafael, and extolled the impending construction of a "palatial residence on the outskirts
of this village" for Michael J. O'Conner, a partner in the San Francisco hardware merchant firm
Conroy & O'Conner. The building was described to be;
"of the Italianate style of architecture and two stories and an attic high. The building has a
frontage of fifty feet with a projection of fourteen feet. The depth of the main building is
forty-eight feet, and from this extends a projection of fifty-three feet. The ground floor
8 Kaagan, 63.
9J. P. Munro -Fraser, History of Marin County, California (San Francisco, Alley, Bowen & Co. Publishers, 1880)
314.
10 Kaagan, 69.
11 "Death of Former San Rafael Pioneer;" [Marin Journal, November 20, 1902.
Jantuasy 2, 2014 Page & TnrnGnll Inc.
' -15-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hag Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
contains the library, parlor, billiard and dining rooms, while the projection has the kitchen,
winerooms, etc. Up -stairs is a parlor and the bedrooms. The building is of California
redwood and will cost $25,000. John Simms is the builder. The edifice is to be supplied with
gas and water works and ready for occupation early in January next.1172
Figure 20: Photograph of Foster Hall, formerly the O'Connor house, included in the 1908 Mount
Tamalpais Military Academy annual calendar. Source: Marin County Historical Society.
The land- surrounding O'Connor's house included horse stables and outbuildings, and 25 acres of
parkland, including wide walks, abundant shade trees, flowers, and lawns.13 After O'Connor's death
in 1889, his property and land were willed to his widow Fanny C. O'Connor and daughters Fanny
and Mary. In 1892, the house and land were purchased by Arthur W. Foster, one of the owners of
the Northwest Pacific Railroad and a board member of the Mount Tamalpais Military Academy. The
Mount Tamalpais Academy had been established in San Rafael in 1890, and was by 1891 holding
classes and boarding students at the former Tamalpais Hotel and cottages, directly south across
Mission Avenue from O'Connor's estate. Foster did not reside at the house: he donated the building
directly to the Academy; the building was then given the name Foster Hall. Mount Tamalpais
Academy changed. its name to the Mount Tamalpais Military Academy in 1892.
12 "San Rafael Improvements," San Francisco Chronicle, October 27, 1869.
13 "The Tamalpais of the Future;" Marin Journal, February 4, 1904.
January 2, 2014 Page dam' Turnbull, Inc.
-9G-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Mann Academy
San Rafael, Cafifknia
O'
SIXTH 0
Figure 21:1893 Sanborn Map shows the newly -acquired Foster Hall, across Sixth (Mission) Avenue
from the Mount Tamalpais Academy campus.
The Academy used Foster Hall as a Junior School, to separate its younger students from the older
boys. A plan for expansion, detailed in an announcement in the Marin Journaiof the addition of
Foster Hall to the campus, included new campus buildings to flank. Foster Hall, and the clearing of
the Tamalpais Hotel site for military drills and exercises.
ow
_AW .0.
Figure 22: Projected enlargement of the Mount Tamalpais Military Academy Campus, after purchase
of the O'Connor residence, no date (estimated 1892). Source: Marin County History Collection.
January 2,.2094 Page &Turnbull, fn,
-97-
W
T
ANRdMIa RCOVENY 'y
3U
Q----=�
--
ToNfluva NCRREMY.
O -------------
FIFTH.__
i
Figure 21:1893 Sanborn Map shows the newly -acquired Foster Hall, across Sixth (Mission) Avenue
from the Mount Tamalpais Academy campus.
The Academy used Foster Hall as a Junior School, to separate its younger students from the older
boys. A plan for expansion, detailed in an announcement in the Marin Journaiof the addition of
Foster Hall to the campus, included new campus buildings to flank. Foster Hall, and the clearing of
the Tamalpais Hotel site for military drills and exercises.
ow
_AW .0.
Figure 22: Projected enlargement of the Mount Tamalpais Military Academy Campus, after purchase
of the O'Connor residence, no date (estimated 1892). Source: Marin County History Collection.
January 2,.2094 Page &Turnbull, fn,
-97-
Historic Resox-ce Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, Caftfmlia
Despite these aims, the campus largely retained its original form through the mid -1920s, with only
the construction of a driveway by 1907 and the construction of a swimming pool and a dormitory
building by 1924. Foster Hall was used as a dining hall and as a dormitory during these years.
/ —1z,
T'fN
99
II
II
'I
II
y j ii
II
o 6T
100
CSAI
ju
M: TNMN[PN/.f
39 1! ; M/[/TARY AlROCMY
I [bTTAe[5 --
��� � MT. TAMALPATS
� i p ;%� M/L/TRAY //CAOEMY
JO'
!! i • n H
a\--------------- -- -- - ---- - .- -.-- -- - - - - --
Figure 23: 1907 Sanborn Map shows only the construction of a driveway at the Foster Hall site.
January 2, 2014 Page ds TrsrnGull, Inc.
-18-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
r ti•�J
1
,
�4
6n�
� \
1(W3VYJ(J AMY1171ty S1Ud7NWbj shy
1 'I
a• 1 II ,
1
� II
� I•
'I
----------------------I as
L -T-1 5i AAAX'hl AMW ;J11
MdWft J#
•! �V =='c— -:✓ ^ Q ------------------
2 ----_'ss------------- ---__ _- -- ---- -ai
Figure 24:1924 Sanborn Map shows little development around Foster Hall, with the exception of the
construction of a dormitory building to the east and a swimming pool to the northeast.
After 1925, when the Mount Tamalpais Military Academy was purchased by A. L. Stewart and
reopened as the San Rafael Military Academy, changes carne rapidly to the campus. 14 Former
barracks from Mare Island were floated across Richardson Bay and rolled through San Rafael to be
placed on the lawn flanking Foster Hall. A gymnasium was constructed northeast of Foster Hall, and
a small hospital building was constructed to the northwest of Foster Hall. South of Mission Avenue,
the cottages and the building that had formerly housed the Tamalpais Hotel were demolished, and a
new classroom building was constructed along Cottage Avenue. West of cottage Avenue, another
classroom building was constructed. Foster Hall itself was used still as a dining hall and dormitory,
with the rear part of the building used as the kitchen. By 1950, an addition was built at the rear of the
building to house a central heating plant.
14 Further information about Mount Tamalpais Military Academy, San Rafael Military Academy, and Nfarin
Academy is included in a later section of this report.
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
_99_
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
------------------6 (Wlg) 'Ad NOISSIW
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
-XfiV90U7,Y AYY1171W 73,YAY AWY ?
•I q
lel
s
aMIX
a
FEF
q¢ c� �o��i !°h, fp; niIitsJU
c
,•-•• � 1� �e�b zS—
Figure 25:1950 Sanborn Map shows extensive changes to the campus, including new dormitories in
front of Foster Hall, new buildings south of Mission Avenue, the demolition of the former Tamalpais
Hotel building, a new gymnasium and hospital building north of Foster Hall, and a central heating
plant addition to Foster Hall.
After 1950, few changes were made, during a period of financial struggle for San Rafael Military
Academy. After the campus was purchased by the Episcopal Diocese of California in 1959, capital
improvements were made through the 1960s. In 1958, building permits were taken out for the
construction of a steel building to contain a gym. In 1960, the school built an auditorium with a
science wing south of Mission Avenue. The school also purchased the Jewish Community Center
north of Mission Avenue at this time.
San Rafael Military Academy closed its doors in 1971, and when the school reopened as Marin
Academy in 1972, campus buildings were updated to reflect the needs of the student body and the
education objectives of the school. Foster Hall remained the focal point of the campus. The barracks
buildings that used to flank Foster Hall were demolished in 1982. Thatcher Hall, on the site of
former barracks housing, was constructed in the early 1990s, and the Athletic Center was completed
in 1998. The Performing Arts Center, the Visual Arts Center, and the Library were constructed in the
2000s. The administration building on Cottage Avenue, constructed in 1926, was remodeled in 200.6
and renamed the.Bodie Brizendine Leadership Center. Championship Field, on the site of the 1930s
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-20-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, Calzfonna
football field, was renovated to include state-of-the-art turf, lamer play space, and tiered spectator
seating in 2007.
HISTORY OF PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AT THE SITE
In 1890, Dr. Arthur Crosby, who was Pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in San Rafael, along
with a group of prominent men from San Rafael, San Francisco, and around the Bay Area, decided to
start a school to help encourage people to move to Marin. 15 These gentlemen originally wanted to
start a college but decided it would be best to first establish a prestigious elementary and high school
and then create a college with its graduates. Mount Tamalpais Academy opened in 1890 with 21
students in a building located on the corner of 4th and E Streets. By the second year, the school
enrollment had increased to 70, and the Board purchased the Tamalpais Hotel and cottages, recently
available after the death of Michael O'Connor in 1889. The merger in 1892 with the Laurel Hall
Military Academy of San Mateo gave the school the name it would carry for the next 35 years: The
Mount Tamalpais Military Academy. In 1892, Arthur W. Forster, an Academy board member and
wealthy banker and businessman, purchased the former O'Conner mansion, which would serve as
the campus for the school's younger cadets.
The Mount Tamalpais Military Academy was the only school in the west to offer mounted and
cavalry artillery training, and many of the students brought their horses with them to school. The
student body came from all over the western United States, Mexico, Guatemala, San Salvador,
Ecuador, Columbia, Costa Rica, the Philippines, China, Tahiti and Siam for excellent academics and
training. The school was led through these years by Crosby, who also taught English, history, Latin
and English Bible. On his faculty was Henry E. Green who later became Marin County District
Attorney and then Superintendent of Schools.
Figure 26: Football and mounted training, Mount Tamalpais Military Academy, 1904. Source: Anne T.
Kent California Room, Marin County Free Library.
During an era of virulent anti -Chinese sentiment, both Arthur Crosby and Arthur Foster were
advocates for the rights of Chinese immigrants in San. Rafael. 16 Around the turn of the twentieth
15 William: Vanderbilt,. "Mount Tamalpais Military Academy, 1890-1925," The Mann County Historical Society
Bulletin, December 1993.
16 "San. Rafael History: Community Leaders Championed Chinese Mission" posted by Marilyn L. Geary on San
Rafael Patch, December 7, 2011, accessed November 2013. http://sanrafael.patch.com/groups/around-
town/p/san-rafael-history-community-leaders-championed-chinese-mission
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-29-
Historic Resource Evaluation Foster Hall, Marin Academy
Final San Rafael, California
century, Chinese people were living and working in San Rafael primarily as farm workers, railroad
laborers, cooks and other domestic servants. Many attended religious services at the Presbyterian
Church, where Crosby had been pastor prior to establishing the Academy. Crosby employed Fon
Ton Jue, an immigrant from China who had been in San Rafael since 1881, as both chef and manager
of the commissary at the Academy, a job Fon held for forty-one years. During this time, according to
a biography written by his son, Fon influenced Crosby to allow immigrant Chinese boys to work and.
study at the Academy. Arthur Foster sponsored the immigration of many family members of his
cook Jung Gang, in order that they attend the Academy.
After the death of Arthur Crosby in 1915, Major Newell F. Vanderbilt, a former student and
Commandant of the Academy since 1909, became headmaster. The arrival of World War I saw
increased importance at the campus; in 1917 and again in 1918 the Academy was commissioned by
the War Department to conduct a Citizens Military Training Camp consisting of a five week, ten
hour day with intensive course work in military tactics. The Academy received the commendation of
the War Department for its excellence in preparing the men for military service; 249 men who
received this special training at the Academy were called into service during World War I.
The overall curriculum at the Academy was well rounded, and reflected the contemporary role of a
military academy, which was not strictly to prepare soldiers but rather as a general preparatory school
for college -bound students, or those going into the business world. In addition to rigorous
.academics, piano lessons from local instructors and dancing lessons were given once a month in the
evenings. Attendance at church was -strongly recommended but the final decision was left to the
parents. Supervised study hours were maintained five evenings each week.
After a surge in enrollment associated with World War I, by the mid -1920s enrollment at the Mount
Tamalpais Military Academy began to decline. In 1925, the board of directors sold the Academy to
Alpheus Lloyd (A. L.) Stewart, a local businessman who had completed military service in World War
I. Stewart renamed the school The San Rafael Military Academy, and began to expand the campus;
four dormitories were shipped by barge from Mare Island, rolled up Fifth Avenue, and placed
flanking Foster Hall. 17 The original Tamalpais Hotel buildings and cottages were torn down, and an
administration building was constructed along Cottage Avenue. Expanded sports facilities included, a
pool, tennis courts, and football field, all located north of Mission Street. The school's first football
game was played .in September 1932 against St. Vincent's of Vallejo.
t' Jocelyn Moss, "History of San Rafael Private Schools," The Marin County Historical Society Bulletin, August
1989,
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
_22_
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
FosterHal4 Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
Figure 27: Cadets at San Rafael Military Academy, no date (estimated 1960). Source: San Rafael
Military Academy 50th Reunion Website. http://www.snua5O.com/Gallery/index.php.
After Stewart's death in 1948, his estate sold the San Rafael Military Academy to a nonprofit group
made up of parents and local business people. Although the school remained open, it struggled
financially through die 1950s and in 1959, the Episcopal Diocese of California assumed the school's
debt and became the school's landlord. New buildings were constructed though the 1960s, but these
improvements were not enough to counteract changing perception of both single -sex schools and
military schools. By the end of the 1960s, enrollment at the Academy had plummeted. The school
changed its name to The San Rafael Academy in an effort to remove the stigma of military
association. A merger was brokered with the Katharine Branson School, an all -girls school in Ross.
However, the board split on the matter of this merger, and the school corporation dissolved. The last
San Rafael Academy students graduated in June 1971.
During this time, a group of educators and individuals were seeking to establish a private
independent coed high school in Marin that would incorporate experiential learning and citizenship
with- intellectual development.18 The Episcopal Diocese granted this new school permission to open
on the grounds of the former San Rafael Nlilitary Academy. In August 1971, the school's name was
changed to Marin Academy and in September 1972, Marin Academy opened with a student body of
60 and a faculty of 15.
is "How Marin Academy Began", posted by Travis Brownley, Head of School, Marin Academy, September 10,
2012. Accessed November 2013. http://travisma.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/how-matin-academy-began/.
January 2, 2014 Page e9' Turnbull, The.
-23-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
FosterHal4 Marin Academy
San Rafael, Calafonua
Figure 28: Students in front to Foster Hall, 1978. Source: Marin Academy Library Collection.
In the first several years, students contributed their labor to campus improvements for the
betterment of the school. Changes at the campus after the establishment of Marin Academy included
the demolition, in 1982, of the barracks that flanked Foster Hall, and the construction of several new
buildings that meet the contemporary needs of the school. Foster Hall served initially as both
classroom space and, on the upper floors, housing for faculty; it now selves as classrooms and
administrative offices for the school.
OWNERS AND OCCUPANTS
1870 (original construction) —1889: Michael J. O'Connor
Michael J. O'Connor (1818 -1889) was born in New York and came to San Francisco at the
time of the Gold Rush. With his brother and cousin, O'Connor established a steel and
hardware firm known as Conroy & O'Connor.19 In 1870 O'Connor moved with his family
to San Rafael and commissioned the construction of the subject property. At the time of his
death, O'Connor's estate was valued at $325,000 and left to his widow, Fanny C. O'Connor
and two adopted daughters:20
1892: Arthur W. Foster
Arthur William Foster (1850-1930) was born in County Antrim, Ireland in 1850 and came to
California in the mid -1860's, settling in San Francisco, and later, moving his family to San
19 "Thomas J. O'Connor," listed in The. United States Catholic Historical Society Records and Studies (New York: The
United States Catholic Historical Society, 1916) 242.
20 "Michael J. O'Connor Estate",. Daily Alta California, July 19, 1889.
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-24-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
FosterHal4 Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
Rafael. Foster was a businessman, broker, and philanthropist, a founder of the Bank of San
Rafael (which subsequently became the Crocker Bank), president of the San Francisco and
North Pacific Railroad. He was a regent of the University of California for 27 years. With his
wife Louisiana Scott -Foster, Arthur Foster commissioned "Fairhills", the family's 180 -acre
estate in San Rafael. Foster did not reside at Foster Hall; he purchased the building from the
O'Connor estate in 1892 and donated it to the Mount Tamalpais Military Academy, at which
point the building was named in his honor.
1892-1925: Dr. Arthur Crosby (until his death in 1915) and Crosby family estate afterward
Dr. Arthur Crosby (1847-1915) was born in New Brunswick, New Jersey and obtained his
undergraduate degree from Rutgers University and a theological degree at Union Seminary in
New York. After several years of pastoral work on the East Coast, he was called to the
pastorate of the First Presbyterian Church in San Rafael in 1884. Along with a group of
likeminded businessmen, Crosby established the Mount Tamalpais Academy in 1890. He
was headmaster and teacher at the Academy until his sudden death in 1915; after which
ownership of the Academy was held by his estate until 1925.
1925-1950: A. L. Stewart
Alpheus Lloyd Stewart (1890-1948) was born in Stockton, California and shared an early
career there with his father,as a school supply sales merchant. After military service during
World War I, Stewart moved to Marin County and took over the struggling Mount
Tamalpais Military Academy in San Rafael. Renaming the school the San Rafael Military
Academy, Stewart served until the school's superintendent until his death in 1948. He was
survived at that time by his wife Dorris Stewart; the Stewart estate retained ownership of the
Academy until 1950.
1950-1959: Nonprofit group of parents of students and local business people.
The Stewart estate sold the San Rafael Military Academy to a nonprofit group of parents of
students and. local business people. The school struggled financially during this time and
sought a buyer.
1959-1972: The Episcopal Diocese of California.
In 1959 the Episcopal Diocese of California assumed the San Rafael IMlilitary. Academy's
debt and became the school's landlord. This financial security allowed the school to remain
open and expand its campus. As the 1960s came to a close, the perception of military
schools shifted, and enrollment plummeted dramatically. The school changed its name to
The San Rafael Academy in an effort to remove the stigma of military association and a
merger was brokered with the all -girls Katharine Branson School in Ross. The board split
over the merger, and in 1971 the school corporation dissolved, and the last San Rafael
Academy students graduated in June 1971.
1972 -current: Marin Academy.
A new school was immediately formed by a small group of educators and individuals who
had been seeking to establish a private coed high school in Marin county. The Episcopal
Diocese granted this new school permission to open on the grounds of the former San
Rafael Military Academy. In August 1971, the school's name was changed to Marin Academy
and in September 1972, Maim Academy opened with a student body of 60 and a faculty of
15.
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-25-
Historic Resource Evaluation Foster Hall, Marin Academy
Final San Rafael, Cal fonva
CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY
The following provides a timeline of the construction history of Foster Hall, including all known
building permits on file at the City of San Rafael Building Division:
• Two dormitory buildings demolished, per permit 19380, at F and Mission, July 7, 1983
• Porch of Foster Hall resurfaced, permit 36959, July 7, 1993
• Seismic and structural upgrades to Foster Hall, as per permit 38515, July 11, 1994
• Demolition of existing theater building and construction of new performing arts center,
permit 20005-016, May 5, 2000.
• Tennis courts replaced with parking lot, permit 130211-072, 12-16-2002.
Additional alterations to Foster Hall can be found in a review of historic photographs and Sanborn
Maps:
Figure 29: The earliest photograph of Foster Hall (c. 1900) shows what is likely the building's
original ornament, which includes horizontal wood siding, arched double -hung windows,
balustrades at the porchline and roofline, and quoining. The width of the first story of the
primary fagade is narrower than its current configuration by two bays, which is reflected in
the 1894 Sanborn Map, which shows the footprint of the building. Photograph Source: Marin
County Historical Museum.
January 2, 2014 Page dam' Turnbull, Inc.
-26-
Histotic Resource Evaluation Foster Hall, Marin Academy
Final San Rafael, California
Figure 30: In the 1907 Sanborn Map (left), a portion of the porch, at left, has been enclosed, but no
other changes are registered. In the 1924 Sanborn Map (right), a greater portion of the porch has been
enclosed, at left, and additions at the rear of the building are visible. These additions may have been
present in 1907; the 1907 Sanborn Map did not record the footprint of the rear of the building.
Figure 31: This sketch of Foster Hall by the San Rafael Assessor was made in February 1929 and is
inconclusive regarding the enclosure of the side porches. The text of the 1929 report says that the
building is clad at this point in stucco.
Januay 2, 2014 Page &Tiurnbull., Inc.
-27-
ti
—�
/
IIf
Uinniq NaU
i
199 I,
�I
Figure 30: In the 1907 Sanborn Map (left), a portion of the porch, at left, has been enclosed, but no
other changes are registered. In the 1924 Sanborn Map (right), a greater portion of the porch has been
enclosed, at left, and additions at the rear of the building are visible. These additions may have been
present in 1907; the 1907 Sanborn Map did not record the footprint of the rear of the building.
Figure 31: This sketch of Foster Hall by the San Rafael Assessor was made in February 1929 and is
inconclusive regarding the enclosure of the side porches. The text of the 1929 report says that the
building is clad at this point in stucco.
Januay 2, 2014 Page &Tiurnbull., Inc.
-27-
Hislofic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Aeademy
San Rafael, Cal forma
Figure 32: At left, a 1934 photograph of Foster Hall shows an updated facade including multi -light
casement windows and a stucco facade. Close inspection of the first story shows that the facade has
been built out to its full width. Overall, the primary facade reflects its contemporary appearance. At
right, a 1935 aerial photograph shows Foster Hall at center, flanked by barracks buildings. The rear
additions reflect their contemporary configuration. Source: San Rafael Military Academy Adjudicant
(yearbooks), 1934,1935. Accessed online, http://www.srma50.com/YearB.html.
.5
- MI.
-_
Figure 33: At left, a view of Foster Hall in 1964 as well as the circular drive and portions of the lawn.
Foster Hall fagade reflects its contemporary appearance. At right, two views of the circular lawn in use
by students. Source: San Rafael Military Academy Adjudicant ,1964 (left and right, top), and Marin
Academy Library Collection (right, bottom).
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
_28_
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Mann At
San Rafael, California
rlgure 34: At text, roster Hall atter the transition to Marin Academy. Facade reflects its contemporary
appearance. The barracks flanking Foster Hall are visible. At right, the front lawn in use by Marin
Academy students, 1981. Source: Marin Academy Library (left), and "How Marin Academy Began",
online, http://travisma.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/how-matin-academy-began/.
BUILDER
The 1869 San Francisco Chronicle named John Simms as the builder of the O'Connor home (Foster
Hall). Simms is listed in the 1878 Marin County Directory as a contractor in San Rafael, one half of
the building firm S.imrns & Murray. Originally from Scotland, Simms and his partner Adam Murray
were responsible for the construction of many of San Rafael's earliest buildings, including the Boyd
Gate House.21 After Simms' death in 1879, Murray changed the name of the business to A. Murray
Lumber Company.22
V. EVALUATION
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
The National Register of Historic Places is the nation's most comprehensive inventory of historic
resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service and includes buildings,
structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural, engineering; archaeological,
or cultural significance at the national, state, or local'level. Typically, resources over fifty years of age
are eligible for listing in the National Register if they meet any one of the four criteria of significance
and if they sufficiently retain historic integrity. However, resources under fifty years of age can be
determined eligible if it can be demonstrated that they are of "exceptional importance," or if they are
contributors to a potential historic district. National Register criteria are defined in depth in National
Register Bulletin Number 15. How to Apply the National Register Criteria far Evaluation. There are four basic
criteria under which a structure, site, building, district, or object can be considered eligible for listing_
in the National Register. These criteria are:
■ Criterion (Event): Properties associated with events that have made a
significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history;
21 `Bank of Marin Announces Doug Murray as VP, Private Banker", accessed online,
https.://www.bankofinarin.com/community/pres s -and -news /bank-of-matinannounces-doug-murray-as-vp-
private-banker.
zz The TIVIarin History Museum, Early San Rafael (San Francisco, Arcadia Publishing, 2008) 36.
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-29-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hag Mann Academy
San Rafael, California
■ Criterion B (Perron): Properties associated with the lives of persons significant
in our past;
■ Criterion C(Desi
gn/Construction): Properties that embody the distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that
represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that
represent a significant distinguishable entity whose components lack
individual distinction; and
■ Criterion- D (Information Potentia: Properties that have yielded, or may be
likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
A resource can be considered significant on a national, state, or local level to American history,
architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture.
Criterion A (Event)
Foster Hall is not eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion A (Event). Foster Hall is
representative of the development of private educational institutions in Marin County, and in San
Rafael specifically. The school was established as Mount Tamalpais Academy in 1890, at the tail end
of a period of rapid growth in Marin County, with the desired effect, stated at the outset by its
founder Dr. Arthur Crosby, of attracting college -bound,. and therefore middle class, people to San
Rafael. It is also representative of military academies, a type of educational institution that flourished
at the end of the nineteenth century and through the first half of the twentieth century, .and receded
in popularity after the second half of the twentieth century in the face of changing perceptions
regarding military service and single -sex education. Foster Hall functioned as the visual center of two
iterations of military academies that it housed; the Mount Tamalpais Military Academy and the San
Rafael Military Academy. However, the property was not the earliest private educational institution
in the area; St. Vincent's School for Boys had been opened in 1855. Nor was it the only private
educational institution in San Rafael; both the Dominican. Convent School (established in 1889) and
the Shelborne School (established as San Rafael College in 1878) were located in San Rafael. Nor is
Foster Hall able, at the National level of significance, to represent the military academy type:
although it has served as the visual center of two military academies, it was originally constructed for
residential use, and characteristic features of military academy sites, which would include barracks
(formerly located flanking Foster Hall) :and military formation practice grounds (historically
conducted south of Mission Avenue) are not present. Therefore, the property's association with this
context does not rise to a level such that it meets the threshold for individual significance for
inclusion in the National Register. It is therefore not eligible for listing in the National. Register under
Criterion A (Events).
Criterion B (Persons)
Foster Hall is not eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion B (Persons). The
original owner who commissioned the building as his residence, Michael J. O'Connor, was part-
owner of a prominent hardware firm in San Francisco, and later owner of the Tamalpais Hotel in San
Rafael, but neither O'Connor nor his spouse Fanny O'Connor were found to have made significant
lasting contributions to local, state or national history. Likewise the personal contributions of
property's next owner, Arthur W. Foster, to local, state or national history do not meet the threshold
for significance that would qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register. Subsequent
owner A. L. Stewart is likewise not significant for his personal contributions to local, state or national
history. Ownership of Foster Hall by institutional owners is,, addressed under Criterion A. Therefore,
Foster Hall isnot individually eligible for inclusion in the National Register under Criterion.B`
(Persons).
January 2, 2014 Page & Tia Mull, Inc.
-30-
Historic Resource Evaluation Foster H4 Marin Academy
Final San Rafael, Calafon=
Criterion C (Design/Construction)
Foster Hall is not eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion C
(Design/Construction). Foster Hall is an Italianate style building originally constructed as a residence
in 1870 by the locally prolific builder John Simms. The.building has no known architect. The building
as constructed exhibited design features that embody the distinctive characteristics of the Italianate
residence, including a largely symmetrical facade, hipped roof, narrow arched windows, simple,
unadorned single story porch, and widely overhanging eaves supported by decorative brackets. Some
of these design features remain, although facade modernization that occurred circa 1925 has
significantly diluted the building's ability to embody the Italianate residence type. This facade
modernization itself is not significant as a historic adaptation of the original property. The building is
not the work of a master architect or builder, nor does it possess high artistic values. Therefore, the
building is not eligible for inclusion in the National Register under Criterion C (Design/
Construction).
Criterion D (Information Potential)
Foster Hall is not eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion D (Information
Potential), which is primarily used to assess archeological resources. Analysis of Foster Hall for
inclusion in the National Register under Criterion D is beyond the scope of this report.
Summary
In summary, the property has not been found to be eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places under any of the criteria described above.
CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES
The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant
architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be
listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and .
National Register -listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can
also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens.
The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on
those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places.
In order for a property to be eligible for listing in the California Register, it must be found:significant
under one or more of the following criteria.
■ Criterion I (Events): Resources that are associated with events that have made
a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history,
or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.
• Criterion 2 (Persons): Resources that are associated with the lives of persons
important to local, California, or national history.
■ Criterion 3 (Architecture): Resources that embody the distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or
represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values.
■ Criterion 4 (Information Potential): Resources or sites that have yielded or have
the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of
the local area, California, or the nation.
Januag 2, 2014 Page & TnrnGn14 Inc.
-39-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
Resources eligible for the National Register are automatically listed in the California Register
of Historical Resources -.2-1
Criterion I (Event)
Foster Hall is eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 1 (Event). Foster Hall is
representative of the development of private educational institutions in Marin County, and in San
Rafael specifically. The school was established as Mount Tamalpais Academy in 1890, at the tail end
of a period of rapid growth in Marin County, with the desired effect, stated at the outset by its
founder Dr. Arthur Crosby, of attracting college -bound, and therefore middle class, people to San
Rafael. Foster Hall was acquired by Arthur W. Foster, a board member of Mount Tamalpais
Academy, in 1892 and was immediately donated to the Academy. Since that time, Foster Hall has
been in continuous operation as part of a private educational institution. Foster Hall is also
representative of military academies, a type of educational institution that flourished at the end of the
nineteenth century and through the first half of the twentieth century, and receded in popularity after
the second half of the twentieth century in the face of changing perceptions regarding military service
and single -sex education. Foster Hall functioned as the visual and operational center of the two
military academies that it housed; the Mount Tamalpais. Military Academy and the San Rafael Military
Academy. Despite some changes to its appearance (discussed further below), Foster Hall is able, at
the state level of significance, to transmit its role both as representative of the development of private
educational institutions in Marin County, and as the visual and `operational center of two military
academies. The property's association with these two contexts rises to a level such that it meets the
threshold for individual significance for inclusion in the California Register, and is therefore eligible
for listing in the California Register under Criterion 1 (Events). The period of significance under this
Criterion spans from 1892, when Mount Tamalpais Military Academy attained the former O'Connor
residence and the residence was renamed Foster Hall, to 1967, when enrollment at San Rafael
Military Academy plummeted to a point where the school dissolved four years later with the
completion of that year's graduating class.
Criterion 2 (Persons)
Foster Hall is not eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 2 (Persons). Foster Hall
is not associated with any persons significant at a state level and -therefore is not eligible for listing in
the California Register under Criterion C (Persons). The original owner who commissioned the
building as. his residence, Michael J. O'Connor, was part-owner of a prominent hardware firm in San
Francisco, and later owner of the Tamalpais Hotel in San Rafael, but neither O'Connor nor his
spouse Fanny. O'Connor were found to have made significant lasting contributions to state history.
Likewise the personal contributions of property's next owner, Arthur W.. Foster, to state history do
:not meet the threshold for significance that would qualify the property for inclusion in the California
Register. Subsequent owner A. L. Stewart is likewise not significant for his personal contributions to
state history. Ownership of Foster Hall by institutional owners is addressed under Criterion 1.
Therefore, Foster Hall is not individually eligible for inclusion in the California Register under
Criterion 2 (Persons).
Criterion 3 (Architecture)
Foster Hall is not eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 3 (Architecture). Foster
Hall is an Italianate style building originally constructed as a residence in 1870 by the locally prolific
builder John Simms. The building has no known architect. The building as constructed exhibited
design features that embody the distinctive characteristics of the Italianate residence, including a
largely symmetrical facade, hipped roof, narrow arched windows, simple, unadorned single story
23 California Office of Historic Preservation, TechnicalAsristant Series No. 7, How to Nominate a Resource to the Calsfornia Register
ofHfstoricResources (Sacramento, CA: California Office of State Publishing, 4 September 2001) 11. .
January 2, 2014 Page ¢v' ' Turnbull, Inc.
-32-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Mann Academy
San Rafael, Calfoniia
porch, and widely overhanging eaves supported by decorative brackets. Some of these design
features remain, although facade modernization that occurred circa 1925 has significantly diluted the
building's ability to embody the Italianate residence type. This fagade modernization itself is not
significant as a historic adaptation of the original property. The building is not the work of a master
architect or builder, nor does it possess high artistic values. Therefore, the building does not appear
to be individually eligible for inclusion in the California Register under Criterion 3 (Architecture).
Criterion 4 (Information Potential)
Foster Hall is not eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 4 (Information
Potential), which is primarily used to assess archeological resources. The analysis of Foster Hall for
inclusion in the California Register under Criterion 4 (Information Potential) is beyond the scope of
this report.
Summary
In summary, the property has been found to be eligible for listing in the California Register of.
Historical Resources under Criterion 1 (Event) described above.
INTEGRITY
In order to qualify for listing in the California Register, a property must possess significance under
one of the aforementioned criteria and have historic integrity. The process of determining integrity is
similar for both the city, the California Register and the National Register. The same seven variables
or aspects that define integrity—location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and
association—are used to evaluate a resource's eligibility for listing in the California Register and the
National Register. According to the National Kegister Bulletin. Ho2v to Apply the National Begzrter Criteria
for Evaluation, these seven characteristics are defined as follows:
Location is the place where the historic property was constructed.
Desi is the combination of elements that create the form, plans, space, structure
and style of the property.
Se_ttLg addresses the physical environment of the historic property inclusive of the
landscape and spatial relationships of the building/s.
Materials refer to the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a
particular period of time and in a particular pattern of configuration to form the
historic property.
Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people
during any given period in history.
Feeling is the property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular
period of time.
Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a
historic property.
Foster Hall retains integrity of location, having not been moved from the site where it was
constructed. It also retains integrity of setting; despite changes that have taken place to the
setting of Foster Hall throughout and since its period of significance, which include the
arrival and eventual demolition of barracks flanking Foster Hall, the construction of athletic
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbug Inc.
-33-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
buildings behind Foster Hall, and the construction of Thatcher Hall, Foster Hall has
remained at the visual and operational center of campus. It is the building with the highest
roofline on campus (due to its siting), and sightlines to the building remain intact from
Mission Avenue due to the continued use of the circular drive and lawn in front of Foster
Hall. Therefore, Foster Hall retains integrity of setting.
Foster Hall retains integrity of design. Although portions of the porch as originally
constructed have been enclosed, the building's symmetric form, symmetric window
arrangement, two story height, multiple dormers, full width first story porch, entry door and
porch access stairs all remain as constructed. Additions to the building, for plant operations,
are one-story and located at the rear of the building. Integrity of materials has been
compromised from those of the building's original construction; original horizontal wood
cladding, quoining, and double hung arched windows have been covered or removed and
replaced by stucco cladding and rectangular multi -lite casement windows. However, these
changes happened circa 1925, thirty-three years into a seventy-five year period of
significance; for this reason integrity of materials can be described as good. Integrity of
workmanship can be similarly described; although changes have been made to the building's
original workmanship details, some of these details remain (decorative brackdts, paneled
cornice; arched dormers with arched wood sash windows), and alterations to other
workmanship details happened thirty-three years into a seventy-five year period of
significance; for this reason integrity of workmanship can be described as good.
Foster Hall retains integrity of feeling because it is readily visually understood as the visual
and operational center of an educational campus. It also retains integrity of association
because it is still in operation as its historic use as a private educational institution.
In summary, despite some changes to its original facade, Foster Hall retains integrity for its
period of significance in all seven categories of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association.
CHARACTER -DEFINING FEATURES
For a property to be eligible for national, state or local designation under one of the significance
criteria, the essential physical features (or character -defining features) that enable the property to
convey its historic identity must be evident. To be eligible, a property must clearly contain enough of
those characteristics, and these features must also retain a sufficient degree of integrity.
Characteristics can be expressed in terms such as form, proportion, structure, plan, style, or materials.
The character -defining features of Foster Hall include:
• Historic footprint and massing of the building.
• Symmetrical massing and window arrangement at the first and second story of the primary
(south) facade;
• Central primary entrance;
• Fenestration pattern at the first and second stories of the east and west facade.
• Historic cornice arrangement, which includes a band of compound molding, hollow -carved
wood brackets, and faceted panels.
• All arched and hipped dormers with arched and/or triple and double hung windows;
• Hipped roof with flat pear;
• Full -width first -story porch at the primary (south) facade, and straight stairs at the center,
east and west; and
•. Spatial arrangements that support Foster Hall's visual prominence on campus, including the
circular drive and circular open space south of the primary (south) facade, and space directly
Jannary 2, 2014 • . Page & Turnhell, Inc:
-34-
Historic Resoutze Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Mann Acadwy
San Rafael, California
east and west of the building, sufficient that views of character -defining features at those
facades are not obstructed.
VI. PROPOSED PROJECT ANALYSIS
PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This description is based on EHDD's 100% schematic design for the Marin Academy Science and
Innovation Center, dated October 30, 2013.
The proposed new building will be sited east of Foster Hall, north of Thatcher Hall, and south of the
Gymnasium, on a sloped site that leads down to the campus' sports fields. The building will sit 50'
east of Foster Hall, and 25' west of the sports fields. The building's southern perimeter line is set
slightly north of the southern perimeter of Foster Hall. The building sits on a cast in place concrete
foundation, which, due to the slope of the lot, is exposed along the south and east facades. The
building's maximum roof ridge height is 106' 10" at the building's west perimeter, sloping down to a
general roof height of 103' 6". The building is two stories, with a full exposed basement story at the
east facade.
The building's primary facade faces west, towards Foster Hall. The, primary volume of the building at
this facade is clad in Portland cement plaster with integral color, and includes two bands of fixed and
awning aluminum sash windows along the top of the second story. A two story volume projects from
the primary volume of the building at this facade. This volume, to be called the Hub, is clad in a
mixture of high performance concrete panels and aluminum curtain walls, with areas of both exterior
aluminum sun control devices and steel cable vine screen. An automatic glazed vertical rolling door is
located left of center. The south facade of the Hub includes a pair of glazed leaf doors and an
automatic glazed vertical rolling door, and is clad at the second story in glazed aluminum sash curtain
wallwith painted extruded aluminum sunshades with Kynar finish. The north facade of the Hub
includes a pair of glazed leaf doors and is clad entirely in glazed aluminum sash curtain wall.
The south facade of the building is clad primarily in Portland cement plaster with integral color.
Fenestration at the south facade includes a two-story height glazed curtain wall at center, a glazed
entry door at far left, and a large fixed window at second story at left.
The north facade of the building is clad primarily in Portland cement plaster with integral color.
Fenestration at the north facade includes a two-story height glazed curtain wall at center, as well. as, at
the first story, a glazed entry door at far left, a glazed aluminum sash window wall at left center, and
an aluminum sash casement window at right, and, at the second story, an aluminum sash window
wall at left and an aluminum sash casement window at right.
The building's east facade, which will be visible from the sports fields, is organized into five visual
bays, separated by vertical full -height columns clad with Portland cement plaster with integral color.
Three bays are comprised of bands of aluminum fixed and awning windows at the first and second
story with exterior aluminum sun control devices. A central bay is composed of high performance
concrete panels with steel cable vine screen, and one central fixed and awning window. The far right
bay is Portland cement plaster with integral color. Left of center, the exposed basement story .steps
back from the overhanging volume of the first story, and includes a fully glazed aluminum sash
curtain wall with aluminum sash, and glazed entry doors at far left and far right. An area of
mechanical louvers is located at left, above the door. The first, story is supported here by painted steel
columns, and the exposed basement may be fronted by steel cable screen.
Jattuaty 2, 2094 Page dam' Turnbull, Inc.
-35-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, Califonna
All rooflines are flush, and mechanical equipment is located at the center of the roof. A band of
metal framed skylights runs on a north -south axis through the center of the building and along the
east perimeter of the building.
The proposed project includes extensive changes to extant landscape elements. Existing paving and
parking between Foster Hall and the proposed building is to be removed, replaced by a variety of
landscape treatments including perennial garden planting, food plots, and stormwater treatment
gardens. Hardscape elements include terracing with concrete sitewall. New reduced areas of paving
between Foster Hall and the proposed building include pedestrian and vehicular concrete pavers as
well as concrete unit pavers south of Foster Hall and across the existing circular drive. Changes to
the open space area within the circular drive include the replacement of some lawn areas with food
plots and stormwater treatment gardens. The flagpole and concrete platforms at the center of the
circle, and the existing Redwood tree, remain in place. The lawn west of the circular drive will be
altered to include food plots, and portions will be replaced with paving for new parking spaces.
New decking includes an event viewing deck between Thatcher Hall and the proposed building, and
a. maker deck north-east of the proposed building, both of black locust.. New stairs are planned along
the south side of the proposed building, aligned with the steps at the east perimeter of the porch of
Foster Hall, that lead directly from Foster Hall to the sports fields. Additional new stairs are planned
between the Gymnasium and the sports fields, and from the Athletic Center to the proposed
building.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
The California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) is state legislation (Pub. Res. Code §21000 et seq.),
which provides for the development and maintenance of a high quality environment for the present
day and future through the identification of significant environmental effects 24 For public agencies,
the main goals of CEQA are to:
1. Identify the significant environmental effects of projects; and either
2. Avoid those significant environmental effects, where feasible; or
3. Mitigate those significant environmental effects, where feasible.
CEQA applies to "projects" proposed to be undertaken or requiring approval from state or local
government agencies. "Projects" are defined as "...activities which have the potential to have a
physical impact on the environment and may include the enactment of zoning ordinances, the
issuance of conditional use permits and the approval of tentative subdivision maps."25 Historical and
cultural resources. are .considered .to be part of the environment. In. general, the lead agency must
complete the environmental review process as required by CEQA. The basic steps are:
1. Determine if the activity is a "project;"
2. Determine if the project is exempt from CEQA;
3. Perform an Initial Study to identify the environmental impacts of the Project and determine
whether the identified impacts are "significant. Based on the finding of significant impacts,
the lead agency may prepare one of the following documents:
a) Negative Declaration for findings of no "significant" impacts;
b) Mitigated Negative Declaration for findings of "significant" impacts that may
revise the Project to avoid or mitigate those "significant" impacts;
c) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for findings of "significant" impacts.
24 State of California, California Environmental Quality Act, accessed 19 November 2013,
http://ceres.ca,gov/topic/envLlaw/ceqa/summary.html.
2s Ibid.
January 2, 2014 Page Turnbull, Inc.
-36-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Halo Marin Academy
San Rafael, Calsfoma
Status of Existing Building as a Historical Resource
In completing an analysis of a project under CEQA, it must first be determined if the project site
possesses any historical resource. A site may qualify as a historical resource if it falls within at least
one of four categories listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a). The four categories are:
1. A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources
Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code
SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.).
2. A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k)
of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource survey
meeting the requirements of section 5024.1 (g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be
presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such
resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not
historically or culturally significant.
3. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency
determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering,
scientific; economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of
California may be considered to be an historical resource, provided the lead agency's
determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a
resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be "historically significant" if the resource
meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res.
Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852).
4. The fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources, not included in a local register of historical
resources (pursuant to section 5020.1(k) of the Pub. Resources Code), or identified in an
historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in section 5024.1(8) of the Pub. Resources
Code) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be an
historical resource as defined in Pub. Resources Code sections 5020.10) or 5024.1.
In general, a resource that meets any of the four criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5(a) is considered to be a historical resource unless "the preponderance of evidence
demonstrates" that the resource is not historically or culturally significant."26
Based on analysis and evaluation contained in Section VI of this report, Foster Hall meets the criteria
for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources, and should therefore be considered a
historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act.
SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS
The Secretary of the Interiors Standards f or Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings (Standards) provide guidance for reviewing proposed work on historic properties, with the
stated goal of making possible "a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations,. and
additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or
u Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, hic.
-37-
Historic Resomre Evaluation Foster Hall, Marin Academy
Final San Rafael, Califonna
architectural values."27 The Standards are used by Federal agencies in evaluating work on historic
properties. The Standards have also been adopted by local government bodies across the country for
reviewing proposed rehabilitation work on historic properties under local preservation ordinances.
The Standards are a useful analytic tool for understanding and describing the potential impacts of
substantial changes to historic resources. Conformance with the Standards does not determine
whether a project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historic resource.
Rather, projects that comply with the Standards benefit from a regulatory presumption that they
would have a less -than -significant adverse impact on an historic resource.28 Projects that do not
comply with the Standards may or may not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource.
The proposed project does not include alterations to Foster Hall. However, new construction is to be
located directly east of Foster Hall, close enough that it has potential to impact character defining
features of Foster Hall. Thus, the following analysis applies each of the Standards to the proposed
project, with the objective of determining its impact, if any, on Foster Hall.
Rehabilitation Standard 1: A Property will be used as it was historically or begiven a new use that requires
minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships.
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project does not include any changes to Foster Hall's
historic use, materials, features, or spaces. The character defining spatial relationships of Foster
Hall including the circular drive, circular open space, and open space directly to the east and
west of the building—are retained in the proposed project, which is sensitively sited 50 feet to
the east of the east perimeter of Foster Hall, set slightly back from the southern perimeter of
Foster Hall, and designed with a lower total roof height than Foster Hall. Thus, the proposed
project causes minimal change to Foster Hall's spatial relationships and is in compliance with
Rehabilitation Standard 1.
Rehabilitation Standard 2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal
of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationsh ps that characteri.Ze the properly will
be avoided
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project does not include the removal of distinctive
materials or the alteration of any features or spaces at Foster Hall. The historic spatial
relationships of Foster Hall— including the circular drive, circular open space, and open. space
directly to the east and west of the building—are retained in the proposed project, which is
sensitively sited 50 feet to the east of the east perimeter of Foster Hall, set slightly back from the
southern perimeter of Foster Hall, and designed with a lower total roof height than Foster Hall.
The proposed project includes minor changes to the width and arc of the circular drive and the
construction of a walkway between the circular open space and Foster Hall; these changes do not
impact the ability of the circular drive or the circular open space to preserve the visual
prominence of Foster Hall on campus. Thus, the proposed project does not negatively affect the
historic character of Foster Hall and is in compliance with Rehabilitation Standard 2.
Rehabilitation Standard 3: Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use.
Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from
other historical properties, will not be undertaken.
27National Park Service, The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, accessed online
19 November 2013, http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/.
28 CEQA Guidelines subsection 15064.5(b)(3).
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
-38-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project does not include any changes to Foster Hall that
would create a false sense of historical development, and therefore is in compliance with
Rehabilitation Standard 3.
Rehabilitation Standard 4: Changes to a property that have acquired significance in their own right will be
retained and preserved
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project does not affect any changes to Foster Hall that have
acquired historic significance, and therefore is in compliance with Rehabilitation Standard 4.
Rehabilitation Standard 5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes and construction techniques or examples
of craftsmanship that characterise a proper y will be preserved
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project does not include any changes to distinctive
materials, features, finishes, construction techniques, or examples of craftsmanship at Foster
Hall. Therefore the proposed project is in compliance with Rehabilitation Standard 5.
Rehabilitation Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced lY/here the
severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design,.
color, texture, and, where passible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary
and physical evidence.
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project does not involve the replacement of deteriorated or
missing features and is therefore in compliance with Rehabilitation Standard 6.
Rehabilitation Standard 7: Chemical orphysical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the
gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project does not entail the cleaning or repair of historic
materials, and is therefore in compliance with Rehabilitation Standard 7.
Rehabilitation Standard 8: Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources
must be disturbed, mitigation measure will be undertaken.
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project involves minimal excavation work. If any
archaeological material should be encountered during this project, construction should be halted
and proper mitigation undertaken. However, barring such discovery, the proposed project is in
compliance with Rehabilitation Standard 8.
Rehabilitation Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy
historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterie the property. The new work shall be
differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, si.Ze, scale and proportion,
and massing to protect the integrity of the property and environment.
Discussion. As designed, the proposed project includes new construction that does not destroy
historic materials or features of Foster Hall. The proposed project is also sensitively sited in a
way that does not destroy the historic spatial relationship between Foster Hall and the larger
campus. The proposed project is designed in a contemporary style, which differentiates it from
the historic Italianate residential appearance of Foster Hall. The proposed project includes areas
of stucco cladding that reference the stucco cladding of Foster Hall. It is also designed to be
compatible with the historic character and integrity of Foster Hall; proposed construction is set
January 2, 2094 Page & Tarnbrrll, Inc.
-39-
Historic Resowre Evaluation
Final
Foster Hall, Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
50' east of the eastern fagade of Foster Hall, set back from the southern perimeter of Foster
Hall's primary (southern) fagade, and has a roofline height lower than the full height of Foster
Hall. The proposed project also retains the circular drive and circular open space, which establish
Foster Hall's visual focus on campus. Therefore, the proposed project is in compliance with
Rehabiliiation Standard 9.
Rehabilitation Standard 10: New additions and a4acent or related new construction will be undertaken in
such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic properly and its
environment would be unimpaired
Dismssion. As designed, the proposed project will not impair the essential form and integrity of
Foster Hall if, in the future, it is removed, and therefore is in compliance with Rehabilitation
Standard 10.
PROJECT -SPECIFIC AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
On the whole, the proposed project complies with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards.
Proposed new construction would not negatively affect or diminish the integrity of Foster Hall.. All
of Foster Hall's character -defining features would remain intact and the overall scale,.massing, .forms,
spatial relationships, and aesthetics would continue to reflect its historic character. New construction
is differentiated from Foster Hall by its design, but compatible because of sensitive siting and
massing as well as areas of similar cladding and the retention of spatial character. defining features
including the circular drive and circular open space.
Likewise, the proposed project does not appear to cause any cumulative impacts that in combination
with other proposed projects or recently completed projects may compound or increase
environmental impacts. The last -newly constructed building on the Marin Academy campus was
completed in 2007 (Library Building), and. is located south of Mission Avenue, away from the direct
surroundings of Foster Hall. As of November 2013, no other new construction is underway or
proposed at the Marin Academy campus proximate to Foster Hall. Therefore, the proposed project
does not represent potential cumulative impact.
VII. CONCLUSION
Originally constructed in 1870 as a residence for Michael J. O'Connor, and donated to the Mount
Tamalpais Academy by Arthur W. Foster in 1892, Foster Hall is significant under California Register
Criterion 1 (Events). The property is significant both as representative of the development of private
educational institutions in Marin County, and'as the visual and operational center of two military
academies. The period of significance under this Criterion spans from 1892, when Mount Tamalpais
Military Academy attained the former O'Connor residence and the residence was renamed Foster
Hall, to 1967, when enrollment at San Rafael Military Academy plummeted to a point where the
school dissolved four years later with the completion of that year's graduating class. Despite some
changes to its original appearance, Foster Hall retains sufficient integrity to convey its significance in
relation to its period of significance. Therefore, Foster Hall is eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, and should be considered a historic resource under CEQA.
The proposed project for new construction at. Marin Academy is in compliance with the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. The project is sensitively sited and designed in a way that does
not impact Foster Hall's ability to transmit its historic significance or its eligibility for listing in the
California Register. Nor does the proposed project present any cumulative negative impacts to Foster
Hall, as the last newly constructed campus building was completed in 2007, and no additional
construction is currently underway or proposed on campus.
January 2, 2014 Page &TurnGull, Inc
-40-
Histoaic Resource Evaluation
Final
VIII. REFERENCES CITED
PUBLISHED WORKS
Foster H4 Marin Academy
San Rafael, Calrfoma
Keegan, Frank. San Rafael iVarin S 1Mission City. Northridge, California: Windsor Publications, 1987.
the Marin History Museum. Early San Rafael. San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, 2008.
Moss, Jocelyn. "History of San Rafael Private Schools," The Marin County Historical Society Bulletin,
August 1989.
Munro -Fraser, J. P. History of Marin County, California. San Francisco: Alley, Bowen & Co. Publishers,
1880.
no author. The United States Catholic Historical Society Records and Studies. New York: The United States
Catholic Historical Society, 1916.
Vanderbilt, William. "Mount Tamalpais Military Academy, 1890-1925." The Marin County Historical
Soczety Bulletin, December 1993.
PUBLIC RECORDS
California Office of Historic Preservation, Technical Assistant Series No. 7, How to Nominate a Resource to
the California Kegister of Historic Resources. Sacramento, CA: California Office of State Publishing, 2001.
State of California, California Environmental Quality Act, accessed 19 November 2013,
http://ceres.ca.gov/topic/envLlaw/ceqa/summary.htrnl.
National Park Service, The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment ofH. istoricPtvperties, accessed .
19 November 2013, http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/.
CEQA Guidelines subsection 15064.5(b)(3).
Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.
INTERNET SOURCES
"Native Americans of San Rafael", The California IvEssions Resource Center, accessed online, 19
November 2013, http://www.missionscalifornia.com/content/native-americans-san-rafael.html.
"Mission San Raphael ArcangeP', Church of Saint Raphael & Mission San Raphael Archangel,
accessed online, 19 November 2013,http://www.saintraphael.com/Default.aspx?tabid=57.
Geary, Marilyn L. "San Rafael History: Community Leaders Championed Chinese Mission" posted
on San Rafael Patch, December 7, 2011, accessed November 2013.
http://sanrafacl.patch.com/groups/around-town/p/san-rafael-history-community-leaders-
championed-chinese-mission
Jamiary 2, 2014 Page & TurnGul4 Inc.
-41-
Historic Resource Evaluation
Final
Foster Halo Marin Academy
San Rafael, California
Schneider, Tsim D. "Shell Mounds of China Camp and Tomales Bay State Parks, Marin County."
accessed online 19 November, 2013,
http://www.scahome.org/publications /proceedings/Proceedings.2l Schneider.pdf.
San Rafael Military Academy 50th Reunion Website. Accessed 19 November 2013.
http://www.srma50.com/Gallery/index.php.
Brownley, Travis. "How Marin Academy Began" Marin Academy website, posted September 10,
2012. Accessed 19 November 2013. http://travisma.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/how-marin-
academy-began/.
"Bank of Marin Announces Doug Murray as VP, Private Banker." Bank of Marin website, accessed
19 November 2013. https://www.bankofmarin.com/community/press-and-news/bank-of-marin-
announces-doug-murray-as-vp-private-banker.
January 2, 2014 Page & Turnb4 Inc.
-42-
PAGE & TTURNBULL
imagining change in historic environments through design, research, and technology
PAGE & `I'URNBULL is interested in the intersection between the built surroundings we have inherited and the way we live
now. Our mission is to imagine change within historic environments through design, research, and technology.
Page & Turnbull was established in 1973 as Charles Hall Page & Associates to provide architectural and conservation services
for historic buildings, resources and civic areas. We were one of the first architecture firms in California to dedicate our practice
to historic preservation and we are among the longest -practicing such firms in the country. Our offices are located in San
Francisco, Sacramento and Los Angeles.
Our staff includes licensed architects, designers and historians, conservators and planners. We approach projects with
imagination and flexibility and are committed to the conservation of significant resources—where these resources can be made
to function for present and future needs. Our services are oriented to our clients' time and budget. All our professional staff
meet or exceed the Secretary of the Interior's Historic Preservation Professional Qualification Standards.
ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES We emphasize the re -use of existing buildings and the thoughtful application of new design.
Solutions for new construction respect existing architectural values and the context of neighboring structures. When
analyzing buildings we are skilled in the assessment and treatment of the most significant architectural and historical spaces
and elements. We welcome the challenge of solving problems of repair, seismic strengthening, and integrating new systems.
Page & Turnbull ensures that projects comply with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for local, state
and federal agency review.
PLANNING & RESEARCH We complete evaluations for historic significance, Historic Structure Reports, National and
California Register nominations, Section 106 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) clearance, Historic American
Buildings Surveys, Historic Building Preservation and. Maintenance Plans and a variety of surveys, studies and planning reports.
Many of these are for repeat clients such as the National Park Service, California Department of Parks & Recreation and the
University of California.
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY The work of this studio ranges from condition surveys to materials analysis, sequential
dating, and adding to the historical record by uncovering the buried work of early craftspersons.
SUSTAINABILITY No ideas today are more compelling than those surrounding the principles of sustainability. We believe that
re -using existing buildings is a .corner stone of sustainability, one that spurs ongoing innovation. Beyond .incorporating advanced
building systems while protecting historic fabric, we seek new technologies, materials and methods to retain the "energy in
place" that every standing building represents and to minimize each project's overall footprint.
OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE We have been acknowledged by professional organizations and in publications,
but most importantly, by the fact that most of our work is from repeat clients and referrals. The National Trust for Historic
Preservation, the American Institute of Architects, the U.S. Government, California Preservation Foundation and others have .
honored us with more than 100 awards.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
BUILDING TECHNOLOGY
1000 Sansome St., Ste. 200, San Francisco, CA 94111 2401 C St., Ste. B, Sacramento, CA 95816 417 S. Hill St., Ste. 211, Los Angeles, CA 90013
CAROLYN KIERNAT, AIA PAGE & TU R N B U L L
Principal
PUBLICATIOMS
"The Walt Disney Family Museum: The Challenge of Addition, The Art of Subtrac-
tion" Heritage News, Spring 2009 (coauthor: Lada Kocherovsky, Assoc. AIA)
Carolyn Kiernat is a principal and an architect who is committed to the
transformation, reuse and renewal of historic structures. In her work, Carolyn
strives to balance innovative new design with complex regulatory requirements for
historic buildings. She has been both prime architect and preservation consultant on
major adaptive reuse projects, and has been involved in such projects as the Walt
Disney Family Museum in the Presidio of San Francisco and the new Exploratorium
at Pier 15. Carolyn has an educational background in architecture and materials
conservation, and is well -versed in reviewing projects for compliance with the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards. She has successfully completed the Federal
tax certification process for several major projects and is currently focused on the
CA
challenge of inserting contemporary programs into existing buildings.
-
Prior to joining Page & Turnbull in 1997, Carolyn worked for the National Park
Service, Ellerbe Beckett in Minneapolis, and Behnish & Partner in Stuttgart, Germany.
EDUCATION
Verona, Italy, Coursework in the conser-
Carolyn meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for
vation of stone and marble, 2005
Architecture and Historic Architecture.
Columbia University, MS Historic Preser-
vation, concentration in conservation,
1997
Arizona State University, BS Design
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
(Architecture), 1992
- Berkeley Art Musuem and Pacific Film Archives,. University of California, Berkeley.
Rehabilitation and adaptive re -use.
REGISTRATION!
- Berkeley Public Library, Berkeley, CA. Renovation and addition.
California: C28638
° Chronicle Building, San Francisco. Restoration of and Landmark Designation Re -
Arizona: 42387
port for 690 Market Street.
Exploratorium at Piers 15-17, San Francisco. Rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of
AFFI I,-ATIONS
historic piers into an interactive science museum.
Board Member/2012 President, AIA San
- Fairmont Hotel, San Francisco. Restoration, rehabilitation and tax certification.
Francisco
4 Ferry Building, San Francisco, Rehabilitation and tax certification.
Board member, San Francisco Architec-
a Glenn County Courthouse, Willows, CA. Rehabilitation and new addition to a
tural Heritage
historic courthouse.
Advisory Group, AIA National Historic
a Hacienda Garden Apartments, San Carlos, CA. Renovation of 1930's bungalows.
Resources Committee
o Hearst Memorial Mining Building, University of California, Berkeley. Renovation/
Sausalito Historic Landmarks Board
restoration.
�IONORS & Ai��l ARDS
13 Public. Health Service Hospital, Presidio of San Francisco. Rehabilitation and adap-
Public Health Services Hospital
tive reuse.
a San Francisco Public Libraries, Chinatown and Presidio branches, San Francisco.
2011 AIA San Francisco Chapter,
Honor Award for Historic Preservation
Principal -in -charge for consulting, preservation scope.
and Innovation in Rehabilitation
- Shriner's Hospital (Bridgepoint Assisted Living Facility), San Francisco.
Rehabilitation and tax certification.
Walt Disney Family Museum
- Sloan Residence, San Francisco. Residential remodel and rehabilitation.
2010 California Preservation Foundation
- Strand Theater, San Francisco, CA. Historic Resource Evaluation Report and pres-
Preservation Design Award
ervation consultation.
2010 AIA/San Francisco Chapter,
° The Old Mint, San Francisco. Rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, and tax certification
Merit Award for Historic Preservation and
Innovation in Rehabilitation
for this new city museum.
2009 San Francisco Business Times,
- University House, University of California, Berkeley. Renovation and restoration.
Real Estate Deal of the Year, Best
a Walt Disney Family Museum, Presidio of San Francisco. Rehabilitation and adaptive
Rehabilitation
reuse of historic barracks buildings for use as a museum, archives, and offices for
the Walt Disney Family Foundation.
Wawona Hotel, Yosemite National Park, CA. Historic Structure Report and kitch-
en renovation,
PUBLICATIOMS
"The Walt Disney Family Museum: The Challenge of Addition, The Art of Subtrac-
tion" Heritage News, Spring 2009 (coauthor: Lada Kocherovsky, Assoc. AIA)
STACYFARR PAGE & TURNBULL
Architectural Historian /Cultural Resources Planner
EDUCATMN
University of California, Berkeley, MS
Architecture, Urban History, 2012
University of California, Santa Barbara, BA
History of Art and Architecture, 2009
AFFILIATIONS
As an Architectural Historian and Cultural Resources Planner at Page & Turnbull,
Stacy has completed multiple historic resource evaluations and California
Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record forms for sites in San Francisco,
Oakland, the San Francisco Peninsula, and Seattle, Washington. She has contributed
to historic context statements and interpretive cultural history displays, and assisted in
the evaluation of potential cultural landscapes. As an Architectural Historian, Stacy is
adept at a broad range of research methods, from combing dusty archives to getting
out in the field to conduct oral histories. She brings 20 years of Bay Area residency to
her professional evaluative skills.
As a Cultural Resources Planner, Stacy is particularly interested in the interplay
between cultural practice and the built environment. Prior to joining Page & Turnbull,
Stacy contributed to the Bayview -Hunters Point Historic Context and Survey in San
Francisco, and was the primary author of the successful local landmark nomination
for Sam Jordan's Bar in that neighborhood. During an internship at the San Francisco
Planning Department, Stacy authored the successful local landmark designation for
Marcus Books, the oldest African American bookstore in the country. As an
independent consultant Stacy has contributed to the San Francisco city-wide African
American Historic Context Statement, and has assisted multiple residential clients in
Mills Act applications to the city of Oakland.
Society of Architectural Historians North- Stacy is an active member of the Society of Architectural Historians, San Francisco
ern California Chapter
San Francisco Architectural Heritage Architectural Heritage, and the National Trust for Historic Preservation. She meets
National Trust for Historic Preservation the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for History and
Architectural History.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Feasibility/Design Studies
Stephens Memorial Hall Accessibility Study, University of California at Berkeley,
Berkeley, CA. Historic research to support Page & Turnbull's design team in deter-
mining where to place public access upgrades within a historic building.
Historic Resource Evaluations
270 Beach Street Historic Resource Evaluation, Belvedere; CA. Research and
evaluation of a Victorian summer estate for eligibility for inclusion in. the local and
State historical registers.
1055 Green Street Historic Alterations Assessment, San Francisco, CA. Research
to determine if portions of a rear facade alteration were designed by Julia Morgan,
in advance of proposed further alterations.
3598 Jackson Street Historic Resource Evaluation, San Francisco, CA. Evaluation
of a residence designed by William Wurster for eligibility for listing.in the California
historical register.
Children's Hospital of Oakland Historic Resource Evaluation, Oakland, CA. Doc-
umentation, research and evaluation of a complex multi -building site and an adja-
cent historic residential neighborhood State and local historical register eligibility.
Hebe Daum Murals Historic Resource.Evaluation, San Francisco, CA. Documen-
tation, research and evaluation of recently discovered WPA murals at the former
San Francisco State Teacher's College site.
Marin Academy Historic Resource Evaluation and Proposed Project Analysis, San
Rafael, CA. Research and evaluation of a 1860s residence located within a private
school campus, and evaluation of compatibility for adjacent proposed construction.
Thomas Street Automotive Garage Historic Resource Evaluation and Peer Review,
Seattle, WA. Peer review and additional research .and evaluation of an automotive
garage in the South Lake Union District of Seattle, Washington for National, State
and local historical register eligibility.
University of San Francisco Lone Mountain Campus, Underhill Building Historic
Resource Evaluation, San Francisco, CA. Evaluation of a mid-century science lab
constructed at a historically female college for California historical register eligibility.
ARCHITECTURE 1000 Sansome Street, Suite 200 2401 C Street, Suite B 417 S. Hili Street, Suite 211
PLANNING & RESEARCH Son Francisco, California 94111 Sacramento, California 95816 Los Angeles, California 90013
BUILDING TECHNOLOGY 415.362.5154 / 415.362.5560 fax 916.930.9903 / 916.930.9904 fax 213.221.1200; 213.221.1209 fax
e �Art11
OCT 2 201
Project Description
The Marin Academy Science and Innovation Center will be a new 17,940 square foot building,
located generally in the north -central part of the Marin Academy campus, on a sloped hillside
between Foster Hall to the west, the Old Gym to the north, the Athletic Field to the east, and
Thacher Hall to the south (see Cover Sheet G0.01 of attached Plans). The building will consist
of 6 new science lab classrooms (2 biology, 2 chemistry, and 2 physics), a small independent
study lab, shared prep rooms adjacent to the labs, a central lobby and circulation space,
restrooms, and a field level basement. The basement will include either fitness and training
rooms, or an additiofial classroom. The building will be two floors over the basement, with
access from the upper floors to the athletic field via an elevator. It will be finished with
materials compatible with those of its adjacent buildings. Sustainability and environmental
stewardship are being considered in every aspect of its development.
Site enhancements will improve pedestrian safety and handicapped (ADA) access, as well as
vehicular circulation and parking (including the relocation of all parking spaces removed at the
new building site). Anew deck will be located between the new science building and Thacher
Hall, adjacent to new stairs to the athletic field. An educational garden and courtyard will
separate the building from Foster Hall and the gym and provide space for outdoor learning.
Additional site improvements include reconfiguration of the employee parking lot to the north,
widening of the service road to accommodate fire trucks and additional parking spaces, and
improvements to the circular driveway and entrance to Foster Hall. Upgrades to storm water
treatment are also included in our project plans.
In addition to the new building and site improvements, Marin Academy is requesting a modest
50 student enrollment increase, from the 400 students currently allowed under its Conditional
Use Permit.
Enrollment Cap Increase
Marin Academy is requesting a 12.5% increase in its enrollment cap, from 400 to 450
students. A recent analysis of class size and classroom occupancy at Marin Academy indicates
that the school can easily support an additional 50 students (approximately 12-13 per grade)
within its current physical plant (including the proposed science building). The operating
efficiencies generated by a higher enrollment cap are compelling and will help sustain the
school's reputation as a vibrant educational community. These qualities, and the school's
continued success, reflect well on the City of San Rafael and surrounding neighborhood.
EXHIBIT 5
Increasing Marin Academy's permitted enrollment will provide many benefits to the school and
the greater San Rafael community by;
Allowing more students to benefit from the school's highly regarded high school
education.
2. Helping the school manage tuition costs, making a Marin Academy education more
affordable and supporting the school's ongoing commitment to student financial
assistance.
3. Strengthening our existing partnerships with San Rafael community groups, including
Next Generation Scholars, Aim High, and organized youth athletic programs that utilize
MA's athletic facilities at more affordable costs.
4. Increasing student and employee patronage at local West End businesses.
Enrollment growth at the school would take place in a planned and gradual manner, over a
period of several years. Marin Academy has a strong track record of communicating with
neighbors and responding to neighborhood concerns when it must make changes to its campus
to prepare for the future and meet its educational objectives for our youth. Marin Academy
will continue its proactive engagement with neighbors and the greater San Rafael community.
2