The architecture and construction of housing and office apartments are determined by the local government. However, some people believe that they should freedomly design new homes. The viewpoint contributed a few factors, I think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
There are some compelling reasons why the government interferes with local design. The regional authorities introduce and enact policies to protect historic value architects and perverse it over time. It contributed to the unique aesthetic of this local, which attracted domestic and foreign tourists. Moreover, a large number of buildings not only maintain culture but also boost regional economic growth. For example, Hoi An- an ancient town in Viet Nam has millions of travelers to experience that support Hoi An reach record revenue every year and by this way, inhabitants can advertise the image of local. Furthermore, create more job opportunities for citizens by selling souvenir products and playing activities in this region.
However, certain designs controlled by regional authorities have limited points. Therefore, freedom constructs generate many comforts and positives with citizens. Firstly, build houses based on a few factors including budget and style, which express personalization and unique individuals. For instance, wealthy people tend to have great houses such as mansion, villas. In contrast, limited financial citizens prefer houses that are small as well as simple style. Secondly, if citizens do not construct houses they desire, architecture careers will disappear. This impact on detrimental economic because the absence innovative of architectect particles that make demand to buy houses of people decrease.
In conclusion, building houses with tight control by the government can preserve cultural design as well as stimulate the local economy. Freedom constructs bring diverse hometowns.