Jumping into the lively debate over the future of Paul Rudolph's brutalist government building in Goshen, NY, The New York Times has asked a number of debaters to weigh in on whether even ugly, unpopular buildings deserve to be saved.
If you've seen the comments following our recent post on the controversy surrounding the fate of Rudolph's 1971 Orange County Government Center, you're likely familiar with the spirited debate surrounding the topic. Now, The New York Times has gotten into the act, following on an article on the topic by Robin Pogrebin published over the weekend that connected the Rudolph debate to conversations taking place across the country around aging modernist buildings: "between preservationists, who see them as historic landmarks, and the many people who just see them as eyesores."
Bringing in five distinct voices, The Times has managed to capture a variety of perspectives on the wider preservation debate. Anthony M. Daniels, a frequent contributor to New Criterion, argues that the only reason to preserve a brutalist building is for a lesson in the harm they can cause. "Thus it would be worth preserving one of Le Corbusier's concrete monstrosities just to remind everyone of his astonishing and arrogant incompetence."
On the other side of the spectrum, noting ever-changing tastes, David J. Brown, from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, argues that "Rather than simple aesthetics or stylistic currency, then, we should consider the innovation and architectural significance of these places and the ways in which they advance our understanding of building design."
FULL STORY: Are Some Buildings Too Ugly to Survive?

Maui's Vacation Rental Debate Turns Ugly
Verbal attacks, misinformation campaigns and fistfights plague a high-stakes debate to convert thousands of vacation rentals into long-term housing.

Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.

In Urban Planning, AI Prompting Could be the New Design Thinking
Creativity has long been key to great urban design. What if we see AI as our new creative partner?

King County Supportive Housing Program Offers Hope for Unhoused Residents
The county is taking a ‘Housing First’ approach that prioritizes getting people into housing, then offering wraparound supportive services.

Researchers Use AI to Get Clearer Picture of US Housing
Analysts are using artificial intelligence to supercharge their research by allowing them to comb through data faster. Though these AI tools can be error prone, they save time and housing researchers are optimistic about the future.

Making Shared Micromobility More Inclusive
Cities and shared mobility system operators can do more to include people with disabilities in planning and operations, per a new report.
Urban Design for Planners 1: Software Tools
This six-course series explores essential urban design concepts using open source software and equips planners with the tools they need to participate fully in the urban design process.
Planning for Universal Design
Learn the tools for implementing Universal Design in planning regulations.
planning NEXT
Appalachian Highlands Housing Partners
Mpact (founded as Rail~Volution)
City of Camden Redevelopment Agency
City of Astoria
City of Portland
City of Laramie