In some cities building and office owners have an architectural freedom and not a weak dependence on regulations, therefore, they can make their own design of buildings. In my opinion, this trend has more advantages than disadvantages.
The main advantage is aesthetic appeal both for the residents of the city and for tourists, as the entire city is likely to become more beautiful, more modern and more interesting for people. For instance, in countries like Iceland, the freedom given to architects has resulted in famous buildings such as Harpa Concert Hall designed by Olafur Eliasson, which attracts considerable attention and millions of tourists every year. Additionally, the architecture freedom is a considerable part of people’s self-expression and if they live in ordinary and uninteresting homes, it can adversely affect their psychological state.
On the other hand, this trend has some disadvantages, one of which is the lack of visual harmony in the cityscape. On the other hand, this trend has some disadvantages, one of which is the lack of visual harmony in the cityscape. When individual owners independently design buildings, there is a risk of stylistic inconsistency and architectural discordance, but for the most part, it depends on personal taste. Also, Design structures are usually designed so that they fit into the environment in terms of style.
To draw a conclusion, even If this trend has any downsides, they are insignificant when weighed against its major advantages. The overall positive impact on a city’s character and creative expression renders this approach advantageous and valuable for urban development in the long term.