Responding to a growing chorus of concern from homeowners, Palo Alto's Historic Resources Board assured residents on Thursday, Jan. 11 that it will not support adding their homes to the city's historic inventory without their consent.

While the ultimate decision on this policy will rest with the City Council, the board's 6-1 vote aims to soothe anxieties from homeowners whose properties were deemed eligible for a listing on the local Historical Resources Inventory in August. About half of the eligible homeowners have protested the designation, arguing that it would diminish their property values and complicate future efforts to remodel their homes.

The Jan. 11 vote came as the board was reviewing the third and final batch of the roughly 150 properties that consultants are evaluating for a possible listing on the historic inventory. Almost all were previously identified by the city as potentially historic in a 2001 survey but were not actually added to the local inventory. More than half of the homeowners have objected to being included, and the board signified Thursday that it will not proceed over their objections.

The Jan. 11 meeting focused on the 28 properties that consultants had deemed historical because of their association with "historical persons." From that list, 18 were also considered eligible for a listing because of other criteria like significance of architecture or important events.

While board members continued to assert their belief that it's critical to preserve old homes that were once occupied by significant local residents, there was little consensus on what exactly makes a former resident significant enough for such inclusion.

One property on Emerson Street was deemed significant because of its association with Martin Cathcart, a former City Council member and Stanford University law professor, according to the survey. Another one, on Edgewood Drive, is celebrated as the former home of Earl F. Roth, a "prominent local physician," according to the consultants. Yet another, on Chaucer Street, is included because Dallas E. Wood, the former owner, editor and columnist of Palo Alto Times, lived there.

While these people have made distinct contributions to Palo Alto in the city's early days, homeowners questioned whether their former homes really warrant the historical status that consultants are proposing. Carolyn Godfrey, who lives in the Middlefield Road home, objected to having her home included in the inventory just because it happens to be a former home of Earl C. Thomas, a former council member and civil engineer, according to consultants.

"We believe this connection to Mr. Thomas is ridiculously inadequate to justify putting our house on a historic register," Godfrey said. "Surely, 99% of Palo Alto have no idea who Earl C. Thomas is. They wouldn't know or care where he lived."

Simon Firth, who lives in College Terrace, marveled at the fact that this home was deemed historic in the 2001 survey because of its association with John Albee, who served as a city marshal and constable in the early days of Mayfield. The new survey actually concurred with Firth's critique and concluded that Albee is "not known to have made any particular personal or professional achievements that would be closely associated with the subject building," though it still recommends listing the Harvard Street home on the local inventory because of its architectural signifies.

"He's a perfectly nice guy… but doesn't have any historical significance," said Firth, whose home remained on the city's list because it is also eligible under criteria relating to architectural significance.

Firth urged the board to determine exactly what types of homes they want to protect and why they want to do so before the body moves ahead with placing new homes on the inventory.

"Prior to that, it seems like this is all premature and absolutely arbitrary," Firth said.

Board Chair Samantha Rohman proved sympathetic with that position. But even if some historic designations seem arbitrary, others are legit and the homes they are associated with warrant preservation, she argued.

As an example of the former, she cited the example of Dallas Wood.

"He was a journalist in Palo Alto. I'm sure he was a lovely person. Do we need him on this register because he worked in Palo Alto and lived in this house?" Rohman aside. "The state says yes. That's great. We can count on that. We may think otherwise."

She also pointed to 1001 Fulton St., which is deemed significant because of its association with Palo Alto's "difficult history with Chinese exclusion and racism against Chinese residents," the Page & Turnbull survey states. It was the residence of Ngum You and Rose Tong Jew, who were longtime leaders in Palo Alto's Chinese community.

Ngum You Jew, according to the survey, was the first Chinese person to own property within Palo Alto's city limits. The family also owned numerous local businesses, including Shanghai Café on Emerson Street and Varsity Grill on University Avenue.

"Yes, unfortunately due to the state, we need to take journalists and civic leaders who may not be what the appetite to preserve their heritage is today," Rohman said. "But along with that, we have the opportunity to preserve the multicultural Chinese and Black history of Palo Alto. Yes, we're taking the good with the bad."

Barrett Reiter, a consultant with Page & Turnbull, a firm that is assisting the city with its inventory update, assured the board that her firm vetted all the listings that were submitted as part of the 2001 inventory to make sure these people really are associated with the properties. The survey included a report on each property, explaining why the former resident is significant and what they had accomplished.

"This wasn't just a house that someone lived in for a year, and maybe they were important locally, and then they moved on to the next residence," Reiter said.

Despite concerns from the homeowners, the board unanimously agreed that the categorization proposed by Page & Turnbull is appropriate. The board then voted 6-1 to reassert its position that it will not be recommending for nomination any property that is subject to a homeowner's objections. Board member Gogo Heinrich, the lone dissenter, supported going even further and requiring an opt-in from property owners before their property is listed in the inventory.

Board members also agreed that they need to develop more incentives for homeowners whose properties may be eligible for a listing and that the city needs to do a better job of educating residents about the value of historical preservation. The board plans to hold a community meeting on this topic in February before its recommendations are forwarded to the City Council for a final decision.

Board member Margaret Wimmer lamented the fact that the conversation about the inventory update has largely focused on the drawbacks – rather than the benefits – of a historical listing.

"We're all concerned about property values, but I feel like the focus is so much on property values, I'd like to see the community put that aside to some degree and focus on the preservation and the celebration of the history of Palo Alto and the beautiful environment that we are so lucky to live in," Wimmer said.