While a few people believe that the government must control the design of new buildings, many think that no restrictions should be imposed on the architecture of buildings that are fully funded by its owners. I agree with the latter thought as it is the prerogative of rightful individuals to construct buildings as it suits them.
Admittedly, there are some minor benefits when the government enforces certain conditions for the common good of the society. For instance, some governments force the builders to have a parking space in the ground floor to avoid parking the cars on the road side. This is beneficial for the society as there will be more space on the road and it in turn potentially reduces the traffic congestion due to parking cars on the road. Moreover, some governments enact rules to preserve the aesthetic feeling of the city. For example, in Paris new tall buildings are not allowed to maintain the traditional look of the city.
Nevertheless, the state should not interfere with the rights of building owners. As private property owners, people are entitled to erect buildings, according to their own taste as long as it is not causing any inconvenience to the general public. Furthermore, the authority should not restrict the artistic freedom of the architects and the home owners. To illustrate, if Saudi government had imposed resting on building Burj Khalifa based on its planned height, we would not have got the world's tallest building which is an engineering marvel.
To conclude, owners of the building must be granted every right to design the building of their choice as long as the basic government rules are followed. Snatching the right of artistic freedom would be detrimental for the development of all forms of art, including architecture.
While a few
people
believe that the
government
must
control the design of new
buildings
,
many
think
that no restrictions should
be imposed
on the architecture of
buildings
that are
fully
funded by its
owners
. I
agree
with the latter
thought
as it is the prerogative of rightful individuals to construct
buildings
as it suits them.
Admittedly
, there are
some
minor benefits when the
government
enforces certain conditions for the common
good
of the society.
For instance
,
some
governments
force the builders to have a parking space in the
ground floor
to avoid parking the cars on the road side. This is beneficial for the society as there will be more space on the road and it in turn
potentially
reduces
the traffic congestion due to parking cars on the road.
Moreover
,
some
governments
enact
rules
to preserve the aesthetic feeling of the city.
For example
, in Paris new tall
buildings
are not
allowed
to maintain the traditional look of the city.
Nevertheless
, the state should not interfere with the rights of
building
owners
. As private property
owners
,
people
are entitled
to erect
buildings
, according to their
own
taste as long as it is not causing any inconvenience to the
general public
.
Furthermore
, the authority should not restrict the artistic freedom of the architects and the home
owners
. To illustrate, if Saudi
government
had imposed resting on
building
Burj
Khalifa based on its planned height, we would not have
got
the world's tallest
building
which is an engineering marvel.
To conclude
,
owners
of the
building
must
be granted
every right to design the
building
of their choice as long as the basic
government
rules
are followed
. Snatching the right of artistic freedom would be detrimental for the development of all forms of art, including architecture.
8Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
8Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
8Mistakes