Some cities have few rules about how homes and offices should be built, allowing people to design them as they like. While this gives freedom and creativity I believe the drawbacks outweighs the benefits because it can cause problems with urban planning and the overall look of a city.
On the one hand, being freely to decide the design of people’s housing style can satisfy the needs of each individual. Homeowners and business owners can create spaces that are able to fully meet their demands and preferences. For example, unlike many traditional skyscrapers that are build in the rectangular shape, the Gherkin in London is know for its unique cucumber shape, attracting a lot of interest from over the world. Additionally, these creative and innovative building designs often attract a lot of attention from tourists and investors, which possibly become tourist destinations. Therefore, the local economy could be boosted up significantly due to the creativity in designing houses and buildings.
Contrastingly, if people are given too much freedom in building design, there will be lack of aesthetic harmony, leading to the chaotic and unattractive look of the city. For instance, skyscrapers, which are huge and noisy, can not construct among the historical areas or else it would be irrelevant and could destroy the traditional beauty of a town. Besides, along with the chaos because of the freedom in designing buildings, safety issues also should not be underestimated. Poorly designed buildings may not follow safety standards, increasing the risk of collapses, fires or poor ventilation.
In my opinion, the government should allow some flexibility in construing houses and buildings. However, they should still enforce basic rules for humans safety and city planning. Cities can plan special zones for attractive architecture, meeting tourists demands while keeping historic and business areas well-organized.