This has also been the case for many of Frank Loyd Wright's houses. Many of his "architectural masterpieces" have been wrought with issues almost since they were built:
When researching the engineering defects and customer complaints of Wright-designed residences, I can’t shake the stereotype of a pretentious and bratty artiste abusing the largess of monied patrons who are willing to tolerate such behavior in hopes that their social status will reflect the golden light of artistic genius. This is a commonly accepted personality trait of Great Artists.
http://www.beltstl.com/2006/06/case-against-frank-lloyd-wrig...
The problem with modern architecture is that it requires a genius to pull off, and the vast majority of architects, and I would say projects by geniuses, do not even come close.
It's an amazing expression of grandeur and power, especially as a model. But in person... it is too big, too ambitious, too set apart from the city it dominates.
In my city, we have an old high school built in 1905 whose interior was refurbished and remains in service as part of a university. The replacement high school, built in the 70s, is a brutalist dump infested with mold and falling apart. The 1970 building will be torn down at great expense soon, while the 1905 building has a good chance of still being in use in some form 100 years from now.