The one thing that boggles me most about Disney World's Magic Kingdom theme park is that it is essentially one giant building, and the park guests and some vehi

The one thing that boggles me most about Disney World's Magic Kingdom theme park is that it is essentially one giant building, and the park guests and some vehicles all walk around on its roof. And that reminds me of the time when the entire city of Chicago was elevated, one building at a time, with jacks. And that reminds me of the Merchandise Mart, which was the largest building in the world by floor area when it was built (now surpassed by 40 or 50 buildings, often airport terminals), and at only 100m tall. And that reminds me that the Willis Tower (formerly Sears Tower) has only 10% more floor area, but has to go more than 4 times taller to get that much. So that gives me the idea that one could make a single building with a footprint of one square mile, with its foundation at 0m, floors at 3.5m, 7m, 10.5m, 14m, and roof at 17.5m . That would be 3.5 times as large as the largest building by volume, five times as large as the largest building by footprint, and 7 times as large as the largest building by usable floor area. It could easily hold 50000 housing units, plus enough support infrastructure for 100000 residents. And one could still build additional floors above roof level. Nothing would be more than 2 miles away from anything else (by Manhattan distance). It could all be built for $6 billion. The reason why our cities aren't giant Borg cubes is because of all the individuality, and the capacity for one person's individual preferences to override another's. In most US cities, you currently can't build right up to the property line, and cantilever your third floor out over center of the street. Doing that, building by building, in a city that allows it, would solve any housing crisis in short order.