This is something of a follow-up to something I posted over a decade ago; that in many ways, gigantic buildings like the Sears ("Willis") Tower and World Trade Center really don't make sense except as a statement of ego. The cost then was about 5-10x the cost of construction on a normal scale, and there are developments with the war in Ukraine that make this even more so.
Specifically, we're seeing how "Shahed" drones can, when they crash into an apartment building (war crime, yes), put several families out of a home and make significant portions of the building uninhabitable. We are seeing how warfare, at least by the Russian and Iranian model, is to attack hospitals, schools, and apartment buildings with swarms of drones.
Now in the best of situations, this is bad, and it's even worse when one realizes that to get to shelters, residents need to go down stairs or the elevators--exposing them to more danger from those same drones. And in that light, I think we need to remember the example of the U.S.S. Samuel B. Roberts, which famously tricked the Yamato into firing on her as if she were a cruiser--using armor piercing shells that simply went through Roberts, as well as other ships like the escort carrier Gambier Bay.
In other words, architecture can try to withstand this kind of assault (like a cruiser or battleship), or it can simply serve as a target for very expensive munitions, and while jet Shaheds are relatively cheap, their price is still....about the price of a home, $100-200k.
And so we might wonder whether, as we consider this new (and horrific) way of war, we might combine de-Sovietization (removal of gigantic apartment complexes) with smaller scale (and nicer) buildings that....let's just admit it....would be far more inviting to not only residents, but also prospective businesses that might want to set up shop, and--as the mess of war recedes--even tourists.
Really, for the past 150 years or so, urban planning has been working on a model built around the steam engine--where factories and buildings were made ever more massive more or less to keep the steam engine working and justify its cost. Now that the production of energy can be done on a much smaller scale, it's time to reconsider that model.