Should new homes be constructed to look like older ones in each area? The answer to this question is debatable. Although opponents of this argue that allowing people to design their own houses fosters creativity and diversity, advocates believe that preserving the area’s style and atmosphere should always be prioritized. I agree with the second opinion.
On the one hand, giving individuals the freedom to stylize their own residences produces a town that is full of diversity in style and color. Furthermore, this creates a challenge between different architects, and this leads to innovation and progress. Dubai is a stark example of the effectiveness of this approach, given the diversity in its buildings, and how this led to building some of the most remarkable buildings in the world.
However, such approach leads to losing the province’s traditions and original atmosphere. Conversely, if we allowed people to innovate and modernize their houses without changing the general style of the city, we would achieve the needed balance between progress and tradition. Living examples of this approach are Nordic and Swiss countries that maintain the beautiful sloping roof top and traditional look of buildings while improving the facilities inside.
In summary, while some people advocate for allowing people to build their houses in their preferred style to encourage innovation and progress, others believe in setting wide rules in building design, because this will protect the area’s tradition and identity. I believe in the second opinion because I think maintaining the area’s distinctive identity should always be a priority.