This is a good article. Buildings certainly can be art, but before anything else they have fullfil their function. This especially applies to public buildings because of the special role they play as focal points for public activity in cities.
I do take issue with the statements that great buildings can have glaring functional flaws and that "inspirational space usually works at cross-purposes to efficient function" though. If it can't inspire AND function, how can it qualify as a truly great building?