Many people consider that the function of a building should be the primary consideration at the design stage

Many people consider that the function of a building should be the primary consideration at the design stage. The appearance of the building from the outside is a relatively unimportant factor. While a building must serve its intended purpose, I disagree that this is necessarily the most important factor in the design. The intended purpose of a building is, of course, very important. In terms of commercial design, most shop facades, for example, have large glass windows, so that passers-by will be attracted by the goods on display. This is essential for the purpose of sales, although these shop fronts are an eyesore, and do not blend in with the conservation of historic buildings of which they often form an ugly part. From the perspective of housing design, the population density in many cities is extremely high, and exorbitant rents are charged for land. In order to make city living affordable, hideous high-rise buildings are the only solution to provide apartments for urban dwellers. The design of buildings to serve a specific function, however, does not mean that their aesthetic qualities should be ignored. In some countries, there has been a recent revival of interest in the architectural design of buildings. Although the construction of ugly utilitarian structures like multi-storey car parks is an inevitable consequence of modem living, new or renovated houses, shops and offices can combine pleasing design with their useful function. The centres of cities like Paris show that it is possible for historic buildings to possess character, which is not incompatible with their commercial purposes as stores, offices and apartments. In conclusion, I believe that the outward appearance is just as important for planners and architects to consider as the function of buildings.