It has widely been argued that freedom should be given when choosing a design and in the process of construction of housing and office buildings. I believe that the advantages of choosing our own design would outweigh the disadvantages.
Firstly, it would be extremely boring for all buildings in a certain town to all have similar design. Furthermore, unique and fascinating design could contribute to adding value to the building, which would stimulate the purchase and sale of the property. Secondly, design could serve other purposes apart from just being beautiful. Clever designers are capable of designing buildings which could insulate heat or sound depending on the purpose of the building. For example, many villages in Thailand have design houses using a particular material that would reduce the heat from entering the house, which would ensure that people could stay inside the house without having to turn on their air-conditioner. This proves to provide a lot of benefits to the owner.
On the other hand, if the authorities were to intervene with the construction of houses, the safety standard would definitely be higher. For example, Japan, a country which has experienced many earthquakes, has houses that are built to a very high standard in terms of safety since it could withstand many natural disasters. This is due to the strict control of the design and building process from the government. Moreover, the town may looked more organized if design are being strictly controlled.
To conclude, if freedom was allowed in designing and construction, the building being built would better serve its usage and more creativity would be involved in designing. Therefore, cities should not intervene with the process.