The old building can be considered a historical place and valuable for citizens and tourists as well. The major question is whether it is better to spend the funds on restoring old buildings or spend them on building new housing and roads. In my sight of view, keeping a balance between these two expenses can meet the needs of the cities.
Preserving old houses especially those with historic records, would attract many tourists from all over the world. Nevertheless, by securing old buildings that are historical heritage, the next generations will be more eager to gain knowledge about their culture. If the restoration process succeeds, it will upgrade the appearance of the city which means it would be more pleasant for both citizens and tourists.
On the other hand, the housing problem is getting more serious, especially in big cities. Ignoring this problem could make it bigger and bigger so it is better to address this problem by spending enough amount of funds. However providing new housing seems much more expansive compared to old building restoration, but in the long-term, the problem of housing shortage will vanish. Also, solving the problem of traffic congestion needs time, money and effort. Of course, developing roads and providing public transportation can reduce the traffic issues but there should be money to be spent on so it is better to consider a share for solving this problem.
Overall, spending money on both old buildings and housing could result in developments in different aspects but this should be considered that ignoring one of them can lead to massive problems in the near future.