It will never come as long as it's cheaper to build blue plate glass dicktowers and severe monolith boxes than something dense, vibrant, and intentional - not to mentioning something functional and/or livable, and not just producing massive showrooms that celebrate wasted space. Fact is monumental architecture are vanity projects, funded by corpos looking to swing their balls around and make the next feature in Monocle. They're not going to throw money into anything less than something big, cheap, and shiny.

As an aside I won't hear any bullshit about concrete not being aesthetically good or valuable, or that it's exclusively alienating and we're all doomed to some megatower hellscape out of Dredd or Ballard. The Barbican is well trodden ground for a reason, ditto the Alexandra and Ainsworth estate. Smaller scale projects like Carlo Scarpa's Castelvecchio ren is a model for intervention with historical structures, or his cemetary in Treviso for the effectiveness of a quiet but vibrant monumentalism