>>1965589>Yes fuckwit, a shop with housing on top. Like in any goddam city around the world, except, amazingly enough, most American downtowns.As established already, you don't understand economics and therefore don't realize the significance of a tourism economy or why a 2,000 year head start on city building makes a difference. Your concept of American downtowns comes from a handful of propaganda images from urbanism shills who paint a woefully incomplete picture of American history in places like fucking Lawton, Oklahoma (population: ~90k median income: $41,566 with 19% formally below the poverty line in 2023).
You have this childish concept that if the 70s urbanists hadn't come in and bulldozed the historic buildings for parking lots and a shopping mall, that somehow today downtown Lawton would be a vibrant, bustling neighborhood with lots of hard-working young people living in the apartments above quaint novelty shops, like Venice Italy.
But no. That's not what it would be like. No one with money would live there. Everyone would still live in detached homes with yards in the residential neighborhoods. Remaining buildings would be empty or occupied by burnouts and druggies. Few businesses would operate from there. There would be a strip mall near the highway where all the chain stores currently in the Central Plaza would set up shop and that's where the residents of the city (as well the surrounding rural region and passing traffic) would take their business.
Maybe crumbling 100 year old lead-filled buildings with outdated electrical wiring would be preferable to parking lots and indoor shopping malls. Certainly it would be nicer for urbanist bloggers to wank about. But it wouldn't be anything like Venice.
>different roof levels, random setbacks, and 3+ facade materials will increase the costYeah but without knowing exactly costs relative to the total it's pointless to bring up.
