I would be so happy about that.
I almost think the best thing would be to divide all remaining land into tiny Main Street lots. Have a thousand people making ten thousand risk-vs-reward decisions every year, on every block, as opposed to the current 10 people making 100 centralized decisions a year.
"Chaotic but smart" instead of "orderly but dumb," as Strong Towns says... that's what LC and every other urban center is ready to start doing again. There are several limiting factors
that all have to be relieved for an Urban Center to keep growing.
REITs and savvy investors, for example, are perfectly capable of being as dumb for the cityscape as urban renewal planners.
The problem with major neighborhood redevelopment wasn't just data diversity and "skin in the game" -- if it had been, private sector would be far more different than government-led efforts than it really is. The problem was skin in the game AND lack of small scale owners with massive redundancy/competition in their decisionmaking.
Markets don't function well and find market-clearing prices efficiently without high competition, which involves redundancy, which looks inefficient. Participants, in turn, can't make enough active decisions to help optimize a price or other outcome, however, if there's a fee on every action. Stock trading volume increased dramatically just by suspending some commissions and fees. Google wouldn't be the service that it is if it had to pay a permit fee for every A/B test of its user experience. We need to accept that rapid local iteration isn't going to benefit our built environment if we keep it illegal.
Similarly, if a resident or businessperson finds that building a park bench by the street in front of your property requires three hearings with separate city departments -- and then a new permit every time you tweak the design to see if it improves it -- there won't be a good streetscape that soon gets better and better with time.
We are sticking with a decision-making process that allows for just a few hopefully good planning decisions to be optimized, rather than a bunch to be prototyped, given real-world feedback and quickly improved. City councils and committees can't perform that function.
This seems like it ought to appeal to libertarians, populists, smart growthers and anti-corporate people on both left and right, as well as some of the more entrepreneurial American pro-corporate voices too. But I don't see it currently catching on anywhere.
No less a luminary than Andrés Duany, cofounder of the New Urbanism, worked from 2013-2018 or so on a nationwide urbanist initiative to do this. It was patterned on Lean Production in automotive and software, and backed by the nonpartisan Knight Foundation, but there were few to no jurisdictions willing to relax any of their ordinances to even test run a few of its outcomes. It seems like they got nearly nowhere. If somebody who planned Seaside, FL (the Truman Show backdrop) can't convince authorities that this will be stable and orderly, who would be able to tell them?