Miami urbanists see challenges of small-scale infill, but benefits win. How to incentivize?

[youtube=] Two items via Transit Miami.  First, above, the smartest short video I have ever seen, Victor Dover of Dover Kohl on the merits and challenges of small-scale infill.  Second, a guest post by one of Victor's co-workers, Jason King, from which I will copy a teaser: "You can say that the urban fabric of Paris (and indeed  all great cities) is composed of some basic elements: civic buildings; townhouses and small scale urban buildings in between, typically with cafes and stores at street level; variations on public space; and pedestrian streets.

"What if Paris could only keep one of these elements?  Which is the more essential to Paris’ identity?  My guess is that newlyweds would still go to Paris from throughout the world to sit in cafes and wonder upward at the cast iron balconies even if Paris lacked the Eiffel Tower.  I doubt that the parks and plazas of Paris would be used as much, or at all, if they required a freeway commute to reach.

"Paris does not have to choose, but as urbanists in Miami we must prioritize.  The popular dialogue in Miami concerning these four elements seems to value the reverse order.  Starchitect new buildings (the stadium, Arsht Center, etc.) and experimental forms of landscape architecture (Bicentennial Park) are most likely to be on the minds of the city and county commisioners. But the streets and buildings of our daily routine need, if only by virtue of being more plentiful items than the other two, far more consideration than they are currently given."  Full post here.