Landmarks and Historic Registered Buildings vs. “Old” Buildings
You pass buildings like this every day, brick facades, worn materials, and details that carry the stories of another era. Some are carefully maintained, while others sit untouched. And some are one permit away from being replaced entirely.
Projects like the Peck Center in Fernandina Beach, Florida show how quickly that line can blur, where a building that feels like part of the everyday streetscape carries constraints that shape what can and can’t be changed.
From the outside, it reads like many other older buildings. But its status introduces a different set of considerations, ones that directly influence scope, approvals, and how decisions are made from the outset.
From the outside, there’s often no clear distinction until you’re the one making decisions about it.
At first, the project feels straightforward. Then the question comes up:
That’s where things shift.
A building’s status, listed, eligible, or unrecognized, doesn’t just describe it. It influences what you can do, how the project moves forward, and what’s at stake if you get it wrong.
Age Does Not Mean Historic
That question isn’t something you can answer just by looking at a building.
In the United States, a building typically needs to be around 50 years old before it’s even considered for historic designation, but that’s merely a starting point.
What matters is whether the building still retains the features that convey its significance. Some do. Others don’t.
At the same time, designation isn’t one-size-fits-all. A building may be recognized at the local, state, or national level, or be considered a contributing structure within a historic district. Each of these comes with its own review process, which can vary depending on the governing agency and jurisdiction. In many cases, projects must also align with guidance from the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, which influences how historic properties are evaluated and treated.
The Two Core Pillars of Historic Status
Reflects why a building matters based on its association with events, people, architectural design, or its ability to provide historical information.
Reflects how much of the building’s original character remains, including its location, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
These are often evaluated through established criteria:
- Criterion A (Event) – associated with significant historical patterns
- Criterion B (Person) – associated with significant individuals
- Criterion C (Design/Construction) – architectural or artistic significance
- Criterion D (Information Potential) – ability to yield important historical information
When a building meets these thresholds, everything changes
You’re no longer just dealing with age, you’re dealing with meaning. And that meaning begins to influence what can be altered, what must be preserved, and how the project moves forward.
Two buildings from the same era can be treated very differently depending on how they’re evaluated and by whom. Local and state perspectives don’t always align, and in some cases, even eligibility alone can introduce constraints.
This is where having the right team early matters, not just to confirm whether a building is historic, but to understand what that status means for scope, schedule, and risk before decisions are made.
What Changes When You Own a Historic Property?
With an older building, decisions are typically driven by condition, what needs to be repaired, replaced, and how quickly you can move.
With a historic building, you’re also managing what the building represents and that shows up quickly.
Materials can’t always be treated the same way. Even routine work like cleaning or façade repairs may require a different approach.
On projects like the David Stott Building in Detroit, façade work requires careful evaluation where material selection, cleaning methods, and repair techniques all need to align with the building’s historic character to avoid irreversible damage.
What might seem like routine work on a typical building becomes far more nuanced, requiring a deeper understanding of how materials behave and how interventions will perform over time.
The goal isn’t just to fix the building, it’s to preserve what makes it significant.
That often means prioritizing repair over replacement and ensuring that any new work aligns with the original design, materials, and craftsmanship.
If a building is listed or even eligible there may be additional layers of review tied to local or state requirements. In some cases, historic easements introduce an additional layer of oversight, where a third-party organization holds a legal interest in the property to ensure its long-term preservation.
These easements can influence what work is permitted and often require additional coordination and approvals, which can extend timelines and add complexity to the process. As a result, project may involve multiple stakeholders, each with their own requirements and priorities.
Treating a historic building like it’s just old doesn’t always create immediate issues, but when it does, they’re often more difficult and costly to undo.
This is often where projects begin to shift from straightforward repair scopes to more deliberate, evaluated approaches that consider both preservation requirements and long-term performance.
The Mindset Shift Clients Don’t Expect
Most projects begin the same way: scope, budget, and timeline.
Then historic status enters the frame, and now you’re having to make decisions that affect not only the building, but its broader context and community.
“What actually matters here?”
“What happens if we change this?”
That shift shows up in the work.
You prioritize repairs where possible. You plan for long-term performance. You consider how today’s decisions affect what remains tomorrow.
Because once certain elements are lost, they don’t come back the same way.
From the outside, it may still look like just another older building.
But once you understand what you’re working with, the decisions carry different weight.
It’s not just about what needs to be fixed; it’s about what you’re choosing to preserve, and what won’t come back the same way once it’s gone.
For consultants, this means taking a systematic and thorough approach, one that respects the building’s architecture while also planning for long-term performance. The goal isn’t to create a patchwork of short-term repairs, but to develop thoughtful solutions that support the building over time.
It also means supporting clients through what can often be a complex process, coordinating with local and state agencies, navigating preservation requirements, and maintaining clear communication so projects move forward smoothly.
When done well, preservation isn’t a constraint, it’s a framework that leads to better, more informed decisions.
