Uhm, but I've heard it from a practicing IP lawyer that a building is normally regarded as a useful article and cannot be copyrighted in its utilitarian aspects.
I AM DEFINITELY NOT A LAWYER...
...But that's a general principle of copyright, it's even explicitly expressed right after part that says you *can* copyright a building: 17 U.S.C § 102(a)(8)
17 U.S.C § 102(b) wrote:
In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.
So, no, you cannot "copyright" the utilitarian aspect, that is, the purpose of the building, but you can copyright the appearance
of the building. In other words, if you make an a visually iconic design for a building other architects can't just mimic it without violating your copyright.
This copyright is distinct from the actual technical design documents themselves, which fall under a different category.
Here is a circular from the Copyright Office that goes over it: https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ41.pdf