May I ask why you are concerned with industry standards? Or why your method isn't quick and efficient enough, and what would be sufficiently efficient?

As for your overlap problem, you have 2d buildings that are drawn with some fixed perspective, but then you put two of them next to each other and the perspective doesn't work. Solving that problem may require altering your art style.

@SethBattin I'm not concerned with industry standards necessarily... but more so I have a lot of work to do and would like to know if there are faster approaches to what I'm doing.

There's always a better way. :) But unless you define what goal you are trying to reach, your question isn't answerable (because people could just keep listing improvements indefinitely). That is somewhat contrary to the SE format, where questions need to be answerable. It would be better to narrow your question to only the particular problem you encountered with overlapping assets, because those issues could be overcome.

@SethBattin I really dislike the idea of discouraging the asking of a perfectly good question because the OP has managed to hack together a solution they are not happy with.

@ClassicThunder I was actually trying to make the question more answerable. We all have many (good) questions about how to improve our projects, but most of those questions don't have single concrete answers. There are gamedev help sites that don't explicitly restrict open-ended discussion, but this isn't one of them. There's nothing about this site's rules that are meant to discourage anyone. But there are rules about what you ask here. To the OP: I encourage you to join the chat if you can't fit your question into this site's preferred format.

@SethBattin I think I found a good way. I think modular indexed buildings are the way to go. See updated answer

@Growler Please put your answer in an answer and accept it if it does what you need.

@ClassicThunder I think my question is generic enough that it can help many people in game design. No?

@SethBattin Then recommend how to improve it directly or state how it doesn't work with the format instead of asking questions that look a lot like "don't prematurely optimize" criticisms. Anyways I'm of the opinion the question is a good fit and no one (even you) has voted to close it so it doesn't even to seem to be up for debate.

@Growler I like the question in fact I upvoted it. From reading it it seemed to be asking "How do I form my art assets to fit within a tiled environment" which seems very pertinent and doesn't require an opened debate to define subjective criteria.

@Growler You might think about going with the 3-building method and leaving an empty tile between those. That should avoid overlaps while not having to sacrifice your current art style. If that is not dynamic enough, maybe have between 2 and 4 buildings, leaving a space between each array.

@JoshPetrie I have a good, concrete method to do this. I think it's applicable to the general method of tilemapping. Please reopen.

@ClassicThunder I agree, that part was ok.

@ClassicThunder Okay I've changed the title of the question

@SethBattin So fantastic! We closed a good question because is had a small off topic subjective bit attached.

@SethBattin Please reopen and allow me to post my objective approach to do this.

I'm sorry, I can't unilaterally vote to reopen your question. If you remove the non-objective parts of your question, I would be happy to cast my vote to reopen it.

@sethBattin do you recommend posting as a new question and then answering again? I have a good idea how to make it more objective

@Growler No! Please, please, please, edit this one. That was the whole point of my comments. You can always edit your question, and you should. You had a decent problem about overlapping tiles. Make that the point of the question, instead of generic efficiency and industry-standards fluff.