Preservation of the nation’s and the city’s history is important work. Generations learn and evolve only because their past is known to them. Buildings or sites can be the source of community pride, tourism, and stark reminders of what we can achieve or learn about ourselves as a people. But sometimes the push to designate buildings and sites as “historic,” while honorable can also become a cause célèbre, devoid of true significance and stoked by a desire to “win” versus a need to preserve something truly historical.

When the owner of 5250 Unruh Avenue in Philadelphia’s industrial district received a nominating petition seeking to designate his old warehouse a “historic building” under the city of Philadelphia’s historic preservation ordinance (preservation ordinance), he was confused. The petition, drafted by a local activist group, mentioned an architect, Walter Geissinger, whose firm became famous in the early 1900s after Geissinger had retired from it, made claims about the visibility of the building from public thoroughfares (which were not accurate), and touted historical events and details that had nothing to do with the building (or Geissinger). The owner knew that the building was not historic, had no relation to any historical people or events in Philadelphia, and considered the issue to be dead on arrival.