I immediately find myself asking whether the mistake is to allow one person to govern so much of a design of something so large and multi-purpose as a city. Ma

I immediately find myself asking whether the mistake is to allow one person to govern so much of a design of something so large and multi-purpose as a city. Many places where people complain of a failed designed city are complaining about its uniformity, whereas most places that people rate highly will have an enormous range of styles, sizes, ages and even geometry. It seems like a more useful design would need to be organic. You could have an open competition for people to simulate how a real town would have grown over time taking into account what happened in that part of the world (famines, wars etc.) to end up with something that could look much more varied and interesting but which could be built to modern standards of efficiency and also can design things like roads and services more sustainably, instead of creating something that cannot be maintained for reasonable money (digging up roads all the time, tarmac etc.)