Archives July 2023

Greek Architecture is concerned with simplicity, proportion, perspective, and harmony in buildings. Greek architecture includes some of the finest and most distinctive buildings ever built. Examples of Greek architecture include temples, theatres, and stadia, all of which become common features of towns and cities from antiquity onwards.

Greek architects would go on to greatly influence architects in the Hellenistic period and in the Roman world, providing the foundation for the classical architectural orders which would dominate the western world from the Renaissance to the present day.

The Classical Architectural Orders:-

There are five orders of classical architecture – Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, Tuscan, and Composite – all named as such in later Roman times. Greek architects created the first three and hugely influenced the latter two which were composites rather than genuine innovations. An order, properly speaking, is a combination of a certain style of column with or without a base and an entablature (what the column supports: the architrave, frieze, and cornice). The earlier use of wooden pillars eventually evolved into the Doric column in stone. This was a vertical fluted column shaft, thinner at its top, with no base and a simple capital below a square abacus. The entablature frieze carried alternating triglyphs and metopes. The Ionic order, with origins in mid-6th century BCE Asia Minor, added a base and volute, or scroll capital, to a slimmer, straighter column. The Ionic entablature often carries a frieze with richly carved sculpture. The Corinthian column, invented in Athens in the 5th century BCE, is similar to the Ionic but topped by a more decorative capital of stylized acanthus and fern leaves. These orders became the basic grammar of western architecture and it is difficult to walk in any modern city and not see examples of them in one form or another.

What Materials did Greek Architects Use?

The Greeks certainly had a preference for marble, at least for their public buildings. Initially, though, wood would have been used for not only such basic architectural elements as columns but the entire buildings themselves. Early 8th century BCE temples were so constructed and had thatch roofs. From the late 7th century BCE, temples, in particular, slowly began to be converted into more durable stone edifices; some even had a mix of the two materials. Some scholars have argued that certain decorative features of stone column capitals and elements of the entablature evolved from the skills of the carpenter displayed in more ancient, wooden architectural elements.

The stone of choice was either limestone protected by a layer of marble dust stucco or even better, pure white marble. Also, carved stone was often polished with chamois to provide resistance to water and give a bright finish. The best marble came from Naxos, Paros, and Mt. Pentelicon near Athens.

Temples, Treasuries & Stoas:-

The ancient Greeks are rightly famous for their magnificent Doric and Ionic temples, and the example par excellence is undoubtedly the Parthenon of Athens. Built in the mid 5th century BCE in order to house the gigantic statue of Athena and to advertise to the world the glory of Athens, it still stands majestically on the city’s acropolis. Other celebrated examples are the massive Doric Temple of Zeus at Olympia (completed c. 460 BCE), the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus (completed c. 430 BCE), which was considered one of the wonders of the ancient world, and the evocative Temple of Poseidon at Sounion (444-440 BCE), perched on the cliffs overlooking the Aegean. The latter is illustrative of the Greek desire that such public buildings should not just fulfil their typical function of housing a statue of a Greek deity, and not only should they be admired from close-up or from the inside, but also that they should be admired from afar. A great deal of effort was made to build temples in prominent positions and, using sophisticated geometry, architects included optical ‘tricks’ such as thickening the lower parts of columns, thickening corner columns, and having columns ever so slightly lean inwards so that from a distance the building seemed perfectly straight and in harmony. Many of these refinements are invisible to the naked eye, and even today only sophisticated measuring devices can detect the minute differences in angles and dimensions. Such refinements of architectural style indicate that Greek temples were, therefore, not only functional structures but also that the building itself, as a whole, was symbolic and an important element in the civic landscape.
Greek temples, at least on the mainland, followed a remarkably similar plan and almost all were rectangular and peripteral, that is their exterior sides and façades consisted of rows of columns. Notable exceptions included the magnificently eccentric Erechtheion of Athens with its innovative Caryatid columns and the temples of the Cyclades which, although still Doric, only had columns on the front façade (prostyle), which was often wider than the length of the building. So too, temples from Ionia tended to differ from the norm, usually having a double colonnade (dipteral). However, returning to the standard Greek temple layout, the rectangular peristyle of columns (8 x 17 in the case of the Parthenon, 6 x 13 for the temple of Zeus at Olympia) surrounded an inner chamber or cella with the whole standing on a stepped platform or stylobate and the interior paved with rectangular slabs. The roof was usually raised along a central ridge with a slope of approximately 15 degrees and was constructed from wooden beams and rafters covered in overlapping terracotta or marble tiles. Decorative acroteria (palms or statues) often stood at each point of the pediment. Finally, the doors to temples were made of wood (elm or cypress) and often decorated with bronze medallions and bosses.

Many temples also carried architectural sculpture arranged to tell a narrative. Pediments, friezes, and metopes all carried sculpture, often in the round or in high relief and always richly decorated (with paint and bronze additions), which retold stories from Greek mythology or great episodes in that particular city’s history.
Temples also indicate that Greek architects (architektones) were perfectly aware of the problems of providing stable foundations able to support large buildings. Correct water drainage and the use of continuous bases on foundations above various layers of fill material (conglomerate soft rocks, soil, marble chips, charcoal, and even sheepskins) allowed large Greek buildings to be built in the best positions regardless of terrain and to withstand the rigours of weather and earthquake over centuries. Indeed, absolute stability was essential, as even a slight settling or subsidence in any part of the building would render useless the optical refinements discussed above. It is remarkable that the vast majority of Greek buildings that have collapsed have done so only because of human intervention – removing blocks or metal fixtures for reuse elsewhere – weakening the overall structure. Structures not interfered with, such as the Temple of Hephaistos in the Athens agora, are testimony to the impressive durability of Greek buildings.

Other structures which were constructed near temples were monumental entrance gates (such as the Propylaia of Athens’ acropolis) and small buildings to house dedications, often from specific city-states. These very often borrowed architectural elements from the temple such as columned façades and friezes. An excellent example is the Treasury of the Athenians at Delphi (490 BCE).
The stoa was another structure common to many temple complexes from the 7th century BCE onwards. This was a long, narrow row of columns backed by a plain wall and roofed. Often placed at right-angles to create an enclosed open space, stoas were used for all manner of purposes such as meeting places and storage. The agora or market place of many ancient Greek towns would be composed of a large open square surrounded by a stoa. One unusual stoa is that of the Sicilian colony of Selinus. This was constructed between 580 and 570 BCE and was a trapezoid in shape. More interestingly, the nearby shops all present the same façade despite being different types of buildings. This is evidence that there was some sort of centrally controlled planning authority which ensured harmony of architecture in important public places. Certainly, during the 5th century BCE there were professional town planners, the most famous of which was Hippodamos who is often credited with planning the Piraeus and Rhodes. Interestingly, there is very often a correspondence between architectural changes in towns and changes in political regime. One final function of the stoa in Hellenistic times was in the gymnasium and palaistra complexes, notably at the great sanctuaries of Olympia, Delphi, and Nemea. These stoas were used to create an enclosed space for physical exercise and provide a practice area for such field events as the javelin and discus.
Temples, treasuries, and stoas then, with their various orders, arrangements of columns and architectural sculpture, have provided the most tangible architectural legacy from the Greek world, and it is perhaps ironic that the architecture of Greek religious buildings has been so widely adopted in the modern world for such secular buildings as courthouses and government buildings.

The Greek Theatre:-

Another distinctive contribution of Greek architecture to world culture was the amphitheatre. The oldest certain archaeological evidence of theatres dates from the late 6th century BCE but we may assume that Greeks gathered in specified public places much earlier. Indeed, Bronze Age Minoan sites such as Phaistos had large stepped-courts which are thought to have been used for spectacles such as religious processions and bull-leaping sports. Then from the late 6th century BCE we have a rectangular theatre-like structure from Thorikos in Attica which had a temple dedicated to Dionysos at one end. This would suggest it was used during Dionyistic festivals, at which dramas were often presented. However, it was from the 5th century BCE that the Greek amphitheatre took on its recognisable and most influential form. This was an open-air and approximately semi-circular arrangement of rising rows of seats (theotron) which provided excellent acoustics. The stage or orchestra was also semi-circular and backed by a screen or skene, which would become more and more monumental in the following centuries. Monumental arches often provided the entrances (paradoi) on either side of the stage.

Examples abound throughout the Greek world and many theatres have survived remarkably well. One of the most celebrated is the theatre of Dionysus Eleutherius on the southern slope of Athens’ acropolis where the great plays of Sophocles, Euripedes, Aeschylus, and Aristophanes were first performed. One of the largest is the theatre of Argos which had a capacity for 20,000 spectators, and one of the best preserved is the theatre of Epidaurus which continues every summer to host major dramatic performances. Theatres were used not only for the presentation of plays but also hosted poetry recitals and musical competitions.

The Greek Stadium:-

Another lasting contribution of Greek architecture to world culture was the stadium. Stadiums were named after the distance (600 ancient feet or around 180 metres) of the foot-race they originally hosted – the stade or stadion. Initially constructed near natural embankments, stadia evolved into more sophisticated structures with rows of stone or even marble steps for seating which had divisions for ease of access. Conduits ran around the track to drain off excess rainfall and in Hellenistic times vaulted corridors provided a dramatic entrance for athletes and judges. Famous examples include those at Nemea and Olympia which had seating capacities of 30,000 and 45,000 spectators respectively.

Greek Domestic Architecture:-

Considering more modest structures, there were fountain houses (from the 6th century BCE) in many Greek cties where people could easily collect water and perhaps, as black-figure pottery scenes suggest, socialise. Regarding private homes, these were usually constructed with mud brick, had packed earth floors, and were built to no particular design. One- or two-storied houses were the norm. Later, from the 5th century BCE, better houses were built in stone, usually with plastered exterior and frescoed interior walls. Also, there was often no particular effort at town planning which usually resulted in a maze of narrow chaotic streets, even in such great cities as Athens. Colonies in Magna Graecia, as we have seen in Selinus, were something of an exception and often had more regular street plans, no doubt a benefit of constructing a town from scratch.

In conclusion then, we may say that ancient Greek architecture has provided not only many of the staple features of modern western architecture, but it has also given the world truly magnificent buildings which have literally stood the test of time and continue to inspire admiration and awe. Many of these buildings – the Parthenon, the Caryatid porch of the Erechtheion, the volute of an Ionic capital to name just three – have become the instantly recognisable and iconic symbols of ancient Greece.

Roman Architecture continued the legacy left by Greek architects and the established architectural orders, especially the Corinthian. The Romans were also innovators and they combined new construction techniques and materials with creative design to produce a whole range of brand new architectural structures. Typical innovative Roman buildings included the basilica, triumphal arch, monumental aqueduct, amphitheatre, and residential housing block.

Many of the Roman architectural innovations were a response to the changing practical needs of Roman society, and these projects were all backed by a state apparatus which funded, organised, and spread them around the Roman world, guaranteeing their permanence so that many of these great edifices survive to the present day.

The Architectural Orders

Roman architects continued to follow the guidelines established by the classical orders the Greeks had first shaped: Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian. The Corinthian was particularly favoured and many Roman buildings, even into Late Antiquity, would have a particularly Greek look to them. The Romans did, however, add their own ideas and their version of the Corinthian capital became much more decorative, as did the cornice – see, for example, the Arch of Septimius Severus in Rome (203 CE). The Romans also created the composite capital which mixed the volute of the Ionic order with the acanthus leaves of the Corinthian. The Tuscan column was another adaptation of a traditional idea which was a form of Doric column but with a smaller capital, more slender shaft without flutes, and a moulded base. The Tuscan column (as it came to be known in the Renaissance period) was especially used in domestic architecture such as peristyles and verandahs. The Romans also favoured monolithic columns rather than the Greek approach of using several drums stacked on top of each other.

In addition, columns continued to be used even when they were no longer structurally necessary. This was to give buildings a traditional and familiar look, for example the front of the Pantheon (c. 125 CE) in Rome. Columns could be detached from the building yet remain attached to the façade at the base and entablature (free-standing columns); see, for example, Hadrian’s Library in Athens (132 CE). Finally, columns could become a part of the wall itself (engaged columns) and function as pure decoration, for example, the upper floors of the Colosseum exterior (last quarter 1st century CE).

Greek influence is also evidenced in the fact that late Republican innovation, such as the basilica and bath buildings, usually occurred first in the south of Italy in Campania (see especially Pompeii) which was closer to the long-established Greek colonies of Magna Graecia. It was from here that we have the oldest surviving dome building, the frigidarium (cold room) of the Stabian Baths at Pompeii (2nd century BCE). As with many other areas, the Romans took an idea and pushed it to its maximum possibility, and the huge imperial bath complexes incorporated soaring arches, arches springing directly from column capitals, and domes which spanned seemingly impossible distances.

The Augustan period saw a surge in building activity, innovation in design, and extravagant use of marble, symptoms of a Rome that was beginning to flex its muscles and with an increased confidence break away from the rigid tradition of earlier civilizations. This was also the time when increased imperial patronage allowed for ever bigger and more impressive building projects to be undertaken, not only in Rome itself but across the Empire, where buildings became propaganda for the might and perceived cultural superiority of the Roman world.

As the Empire expanded, ideas and even craftsmen became integrated into the Roman architectural industry, often following their familiar materials like marble to the sites of construction. The evidence of eastern influence can be seen in such features as papyrus leaves in capitals, sculptured pedestals, street colonnades, and the nymphaeum (ornamental fountain).

Materials & Techniques

The first all-marble building was the Temple of Jupiter Stator in Rome (146 BCE), but it was not until the Empire that the use of marble became more widespread and the stone of choice for the most impressive state-funded building projects. The most commonly used from Italy was Carrara (Luna) marble from Tuscany (see, for example, the 30 BCE Temple of Apollo on the Palatine). Marble was also readily available from across the empire; especially esteemed were the Parian marble of Paros in the Cyclades and Pentelic from Athens. Coloured varieties were also much favoured by Roman architects, for example, yellow Numidian marble from North Africa, purple Phyrgian from central Turkey, red porphyry from Egypt, and green-veined Carystian marble from Euboea. Foreign marble was, though, mainly reserved for use in columns and, due to the costs of transportation, imperial projects.

Besides marble, travertine white limestone was also made available from quarries near Tivoli, and its favourability towards precise carving and inherent load-bearing strength made it a favourite substitute for marble amongst Roman architects from the 1st century BCE. It was especially used for paving, door and window frames, and steps.

The Romans did not invent lime mortar but they were the first to see the full possibilities of using it to produce concrete. Concrete rubble had usually been reserved for use as a filler material but Roman architects realised that the material could support great weight and could, therefore, with a little imagination, be used to help span space and create a whole new set of building opportunities. They called this material opus caementicium from the stone aggregate (caementa) which was mixed with the lime mortar. The material had a thick consistency when prepared and so was laid not poured like modern concrete. The first documented evidence of its use is from 3rd century BCE Cosa and its first use in Rome seems to have been a 2nd century BCE warehouse. Also in the 2nd century BCE it was discovered that by using pozzolana (concrete made using volcanic sand, pulvis puteolanus), which had a high silica content, the concrete could set under water and was even stronger than normal concrete. By the 1st century BCE its use seems widespread in foundations, walls, and vaults. Perhaps the best example of its possibilities in construction is the Sanctuary of Fortuna Primigenia at Palestrina.In addition to the structural possibilities offered by concrete, the material was also a lot cheaper than solid stone and could be given a more presentable façade using stucco, marble veneer, or another relatively cheap material: fired brick or terracotta. Sun-dried mud bricks had been used for centuries and continued to be used for more modest projects up to the 1st century CE, but fired bricks had the advantage of durability and could be carved just like stone to resemble such standard architectural features as capitals and dentils.

Bricks were typically 59 cm square and 2.5-5 cm thick. Uncut they were used in roofing and drains, but for other uses they were usually cut into 18 triangles. There were also circular bricks, typically cut into quarters, which were used for columns. Bricks could also be used in domes such as that of the Temple of Asklepios Soter at Pergamon and even became a decorative feature themselves by using different coloured bricks (usually yellow and orange) and laid to create patterns.

Stucco was used to face brick walls and could be carved, like bricks could be, to reproduce the architectural decorations previously rendered only in stone. The stucco was made from a mix of sand, gypsum, and even marble dust in the best quality material.

Volcanic tufa and pumice were used in domes because of their light weight as in, for example, the Pantheon. Basalt was often used for paving and roads, laid as polygonal blocks, and Egyptian grey and pink granite was popular for obelisks and columns. Finally, terracotta was also used for moulded ornamentation on buildings and became a common embellishment of private homes and tombs.

Roman Architects

In the Roman world the credit for buildings was largely placed at the feet of the person who conceived and paid for the project rather than the architect who oversaw the realisation of it; therefore, he often remains anonymous. Those architects employed for specific projects by the emperor are better known. We know of Trajan’s favoured architect, Apollodorus of Damascus, famed for his skills in bridge building, for example, and who was responsible for, amongst other projects, Trajan’s Forum and Baths in Rome (104-9 CE). Severus and Celer were the architects responsible for the fantastic sounding revolving roof of Nero’s Golden House. In general, architects supervised whilst it was contractors (redemptores) who actually carried out the project based on the architect’s measured drawings.

Certainly, the most famous Roman architect is Vitruvius, principally because his On Architecture, a 10-volume study of architecture, has survived intact. We do not actually know much about his own work – only a basilica he constructed in Fano and that he did work for Julius Caesar and Augustus. On Architecture covers all facets of architecture, types of building, advice for would-be architects, and much more besides. One interesting point about the work is that it reveals that the ancient architect was expected to have many skills which nowadays would be separated into different specialisations. Vitruvius also encapsulated the essential ethos of Roman architecture: ‘All buildings must be executed in such a way as to take account of durability, utility and beauty.’ (On Architecture, Book I, Ch. III)

Key Roman Buildings

Aqueducts & Bridges – These sometimes massive structures, with single, double, or triple tiers of arches, were designed to carry fresh water to urban centres from sources sometimes many kilometres away. The earliest in Rome was the Aqua Appia (312 BCE), but the most impressive example is undoubtedly the Pont du Gard near Nimes (c. 14 CE). Roman bridges could make similar use of the arch to span rivers and ravines. Constructed with a flat wooden superstructure over stone piers or arches, examples still survive today. One of the best preserved is the granite Tagus Bridge at Alcantara (106 CE) which has arches spanning over 30 metres.

Basilicas – The basilica was adopted by the Christian church but was conceived by the Romans as a place for any large gathering, with the most common use being law courts. They were usually built along one side of the forum, the city’s marketplace, which was enclosed on all sides by colonnades. The basilica’s long hall and roof were supported by columns and piers on all sides. The columns created a central nave flanked on all sides by an aisle. A gallery ran around the first floor and later there was an apse at one or both ends. A typical example is the Severan Basilica at Lepcis Magna (216 CE).

Baths – Roman baths display the typical Roman ability for creating breath-taking interior space using arches, domes, vaults, and buttresses. The largest of these often huge complexes were built symmetrically along a single axis and included pools, cold and hot rooms, fountains, libraries, under-floor heating, and sometimes inter-wall heating through terracotta piping. Their exteriors were usually plain, but within they were often sumptuous with the lavish use of columns, marble, statues and mosaics. One of the finest and certainly best surviving examples is the Baths of Caracalla in Rome (completed 216 CE).

Private Homes – Perhaps more famous for their richly decorated interior walls using fresco and stucco, Roman private residences could also enchant with atrium, peristyles, gardens and fountains, all ordered in harmonious symmetry. For a typical example, see the House of the Vettii at Pompeii (1st century BCE – 79 CE).

Even more innovative, though, were the large apartment blocks (insula) for the less well-off city-dwellers. These were constructed using brick, concrete, and wood, sometimes had balconies, and there were often shops on the ground floor street front. Appearing as early as the 3rd century BCE, by the 1st century BCE examples could have 12 stories, but state-imposed height restrictions resulted in buildings averaging four to five stories (at least at the front side as there were no such restrictions for the rear of the building). Some of the very few surviving examples may be seen at Ostia.

Temples – The Roman temple was a combination of the Etruscan and Greek models with an inner cella at the rear of the building surrounded by columns and placed on a raised platform (up to 3.5 metres high) with a stepped entrance and columned porch, the focal point of the building (in contrast to Greek temples where all four sides could be equally important in the urban landscape). Surviving practically complete and a typical example is the Maison Carrée at Nimes (16 BCE). Temples were usually rectangular but could take other forms such as circular or polygonal, for example, the temple of Venus at Baalbeck (2nd-3rd century CE).

Theatres & Amphitheatres – The Roman theatre was of course inspired by the Greek version, but the orchestra was made semicircular and the whole made using stone. The Romans also added a highly decorative stage building (scaenae frons) which incorporated different levels of columns, projections, pediments, and statues such as is found in the theatre at Orange (27 BCE – 14 CE). A similar approach was taken with façades of libraries – see, for example, the Celsus Library in Ephesus (2nd century CE). Theatres also display the Roman passion for enclosing spaces, especially as they were often (partially or completely) roofed in wood or employed canvas awnings.

The fully enclosed amphitheatre was a particular favourite of the Romans. The Colosseum is the largest and most famous, and it is a typical example copied throughout the empire: a highly decorative exterior, seats set over a network of barrel vaults, and underground rooms below the arena floor to hide people, animals and props until they were needed in the spectacles.

Triumphal Arches – The triumphal arch, with a single, double, or triple entrance, had no practical function other than to commemorate in sculpture and inscription significant events such as military victories. Early examples stood over thoroughfares – the earliest being the two arches set up by L.Stertinius in Rome (196 BCE) – but later examples were often protected by steps. Topped by a bronze four-horse chariot, they became imposing stone monuments to Roman vanity. The Arch of Constantine (c. 315 CE) in Rome is the largest surviving example and is perhaps the last great monument of Imperial Rome.

Walls – Aside from the famous military structures such as the Antonine and Hadrian’s Wall (c. 142 CE and c. 122 CE respectively), even more modest Roman walls offer a surprising number of variations. The width of Roman walls could also vary tremendously from the thinnest at 18 cm to a massive 6 m thick. Rarely were marble and fine stone blocks used as this was too expensive. Large square blocks were used to create ashlar masonry walls, that is, close-fitting blocks without any use of mortar. Much more common was the use of brick (usually triangular shaped and set with mortar) and small stones facing a concrete mix core. The bricks and stones could be arranged in various ways:

opus incertum – first appeared in the 3rd century BCE and used small irregular chunks of stone smoothed on one side.

opus reticulatum – from the 2nd century BCE and used pyramid-shaped chunks with 6-12 cm square base and height of 8-14 cm. The stone was set with the base facing outwards and laid in diagonal arrangements.

opus mixtum – common from the 1st century CE, this was a combination of opus reticulatum with a layer (course) of horizontal brick every fourth course and at the edges of the wall.

opus testaceum – common from the 1st century CE and used courses of brick only.

opus vittatum – used an alternative course of brick with two courses of tufa blocks with a rectangular side facing outwards and diminishing in size towards the inner surface. It was especially popular from the 4th century CE across the Empire.

Despite the decorative effect of these various arrangements of stone and brick, most walls were actually covered both inside and out with white plaster stucco for protection against heat and rain for the outside and to provide a smooth surface for fine decorative wall painting on the inside.

Conclusion

Roman architecture, then, has provided us with magnificent structures that have, quite literally, stood the test of time. By combining a wide range of materials with daring designs, the Romans were able to push the boundaries of physics and turn architecture into an art form. The result was that architecture became an imperial tool to demonstrate to the world that Rome was culturally superior because only she had the wealth, skills, and audacity to produce such edifices. Even more significantly, the Roman use of concrete, brick, and arches twinned with building designs like the amphitheatre and basilica would immeasurably influence all following western architecture right up to the present day.

Sustainability, the long-term viability of a community, set of social institutions, or societal practice. In general, sustainability is understood as a form of intergenerational ethics in which the environmental and economic actions taken by present persons do not diminish the opportunities of future persons to enjoy similar levels of wealth, utility, or welfare.

The idea of sustainability rose to prominence with the modern environmental movement, which rebuked the unsustainable character of contemporary societies where patterns of resource use, growth, and consumption threatened the integrity of ecosystems and the well-being of future generations. Sustainability is presented as an alternative to short-term, myopic, and wasteful behaviours. It can serve as a standard against which existing institutions are to be judged and as an objective toward which society should move. Sustainability also implies an interrogation of existing modes of social organization to determine the extent to which they encourage destructive practices as well as a conscious effort to transform the status quo so as to promote the development of more-sustainable activities.

Forms of sustainability:-

Sustainability is at the core of concepts such as sustainable yield, sustainable society, and sustainable development. The term sustainable yield refers to the harvest of a specific (self-renewing) natural resource—for example, timber or fish. Such a yield is one that can in principle be maintained indefinitely because it can be supported by the regenerative capacities of the underlying natural system. A sustainable society is one that has learned to live within the boundaries established by ecological limits. It can be maintained as a collective and ongoing entity because practices that imposed excessive burdens upon the environment have been reformed or abolished. Sustainable development is a process of social advancement that accommodates the needs of current and future generations and that successfully integrates economic, social, and environmental considerations in decision making.

In contemporary debate, sustainability often serves as a synonym for sustainable development. On other occasions, it is associated more exclusively with environmental constraints or environmental performance, and the expression environmental sustainability is used to emphasize that point. Parallel references can be found to the terms social sustainability, economic sustainability, and cultural sustainability, which allude to threats to long-term well-being in each of those domains. Local sustainability emphasizes the importance of place. Corporate sustainability is another common usage, which relates both to the survivability of the individual corporation and to the contribution that corporations can make to the broader sustainability agenda. Central here is the notion of the so-called triple bottom line—that businesses should pay attention to social performance and environmental performance as well as to financial returns. The notion of corporate sustainability is also connected to debates about reforming corporate governance, encouraging corporate responsibility, and designing alternative (sustainable, green, or ethical) investment vehicles.

How to create a sustainable future:-

While numerous practices are cited as threats to sustainability, such as political corruption, social inequality, the arms race, and profligate government expenditures, environmental issues remain at the heart of the discussion. Of course, what is conducive to environmental sustainability remains a matter of intense debate. Approaches range from a moderate “greening” of current social institutions to a radical transformation of the global political and economic order. A gradual adjustment toward sustainability relies on governmental initiatives to orient production and consumption into less environmentally destructive channels. That implies a reengineering of industrial and agricultural processes, a transformation of land-use practices, and a shift in household consumption. Potentially renewable resources should be managed to conserve their long-term viability; nonrenewable resources should be extracted at rates that allow an ordered transition to alternatives; emission of waste and toxic substances must remain within the assimilative capacities of natural systems; and more-vigorous measures must be taken to preserve species, habitats, and ecosystems. Managing long-term environmental issues such as climate change and the loss of biodiversity is of critical importance to efforts to achieve sustainability.

Governments can deploy an array of policy tools to effect such changes, including regulation, fiscal instruments, negotiated agreements, and informational tools. Yet many problems resist solution because the offending (unsustainable) practices are often linked to deeply entrenched practices and constraints and supported by established definitions of values and interests.

Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content:-

There are also a number of radical takes on sustainability. For some environmentalists, true sustainability is possible only in small-scale communities, where humans can live in close contact with natural processes and rhythms. According to that view, the catastrophic practices of industrial civilization must give way to a different mode of living where humans “walk lightly” on the planet, harmonizing their activities with natural cycles. While other radical environmentalists may accept a high-tech postindustrial civilization, for them too there must be a clear break with existing economic practices and power structures.

Theorizing sustainability:-

Discussion of sustainability within academia has ranged across many perspectives. Economic analysts have sometimes defined the concept in terms of nondeclining per capita income flows over time, or long-term economic growth, with minimal environmental impacts and debated how to maintain the capital endowments needed to sustain those income flows. Controversy over the substitutability of natural and human-made capital has divided proponents of weak and strong sustainability: the former argue that the two types of capital are largely interchangeable, whereas the latter insist that natural capital is increasingly the scarcest factor of production. In addition, ecosystem services, such as the provision of clean water or crop pollination, are often undervalued aspects of natural capital that should be incorporated into economic discussions of sustainability.

Ecologists and systems theorists have tended to approach sustainability in terms of physical interdependencies, energy flows, and population dynamics. They have emphasized the design features that suit social systems for long-term survival, including robustness, resiliency, redundancy, and adaptability. For their part, political analysts have focused on the ideological and normative implications of sustainability, on the character of green political projects, and on the public policy implications.

Islamic Architecture, building traditions of Muslim populations of the Middle East and elsewhere from the 7th century on. Islamic architecture finds its highest expression in religious buildings such as the mosque and madrasah. Early Islamic religious architecture, exemplified by Jerusalem’s Dome of the Rock (AD 691) and the Great Mosque (705) in Damascus, drew on Christian architectural features such as domes, columnar arches, and mosaics but also included large courts for congregational prayer and a mihrab. From early times, the characteristic semicircular horseshoe arch and rich, nonrepresentational decoration of surfaces were employed. Religious architecture came into its own with the creation of the hypostyle mosque (see hypostyle hall) in Iraq and Egypt. In Iran a mosque plan consisting of four eyvans (vaulted halls) opening onto a central court was used. These brick-built mosques also incorporated domes and decorated squinches (see Byzantine architecture) across the corners of the rooms. Persian architectural features spread to India, where they are found in the Taj Mahal and Mughal palaces. Ottoman architecture, derived from Islamic and Byzantine traditions, is exemplified by the Selimiye Mosque (1575) at Edirne, Tur., with its great central dome and slender minarets. One of the greatest examples of secular Islamic architecture is the Alhambra. For full treatment of the subject, see Islamic arts.

Byzantine Architecture, building style of Constantinople (now Istanbul, formerly ancient Byzantium) after AD 330. Byzantine architects were eclectic, at first drawing heavily on Roman temple features. Their combination of the basilica and symmetrical central-plan (circular or polygonal) religious structures resulted in the characteristic Byzantine Greek-cross-plan church, with a square central mass and four arms of equal length. The most distinctive feature was the domed roof. To allow a dome to rest above a square base, either of two devices was used: the squinch (an arch in each of the corners of a square base that transforms it into an octagon) or the pendentive. Byzantine structures featured soaring spaces and sumptuous decoration: marble columns and inlay, mosaics on the vaults, inlaid-stone pavements, and sometimes gold coffered ceilings. The architecture of Constantinople extended throughout the Christian East and in some places, notably Russia, remained in use after the fall of Constantinople (1453). See also Hagia Sophia.

Neoclassical Architecture, revival of Classical architecture during the 18th and early 19th centuries. The movement concerned itself with the logic of entire Classical volumes, unlike Classical revivalism (see Greek Revival), which tended to reuse Classical parts. Neoclassical architecture is characterized by grandeur of scale, simplicity of geometric forms, Greek—especially Doric (see order)—or Roman detail, dramatic use of columns, and a preference for blank walls. The new taste for antique simplicity represented a general reaction to the excesses of the Rococo style. Neoclassicism thrived in the United States and Europe, with examples occurring in almost every major city. Russia’s Catherine II transformed St. Petersburg into an unparalleled collection of Neoclassical buildings as advanced as any contemporary French and English work. By 1800 nearly all new British architecture reflected the Neoclassical spirit (see Robert Adam; John Soane). France’s boldest innovator was Claude-Nicolas Ledoux, who had a central role in the evolution of Neoclassical architecture. In the United States Neoclassicism continued to flourish throughout the 19th century, as many architects looked to make the analogy between the young country and imperial Rome when designing major government buildings. The style also spread to colonial Latin America.

Green Architecture, philosophy of architecture that advocates sustainable energy sources, the conservation of energy, the reuse and safety of building materials, and the siting of a building with consideration of its impact on the environment.
In the early 21st century the building of shelter (in all its forms) consumed more than half of the world’s resources—translating into 16 percent of the Earth’s freshwater resources, 30–40 percent of all energy supplies, and 50 percent by weight of all the raw materials withdrawn from Earth’s surface. Architecture was also responsible for 40–50 percent of waste deposits in landfills and 20–30 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.
Many architects after the post-World War II building boom were content to erect emblematic civic and corporate icons that celebrated profligate consumption and omnivorous globalization. At the turn of the 21st century, however, a building’s environmental integrity—as seen in the way it was designed and how it operated—became an important factor in how it was evaluated.
The rise of eco-awareness

In the United States, environmental advocacy, as an organized social force, gained its first serious momentum as part of the youth movement of the 1960s. In rebellion against the perceived evils of high-rise congestion and suburban sprawl, some of the earliest and most dedicated eco-activists moved to rural communes, where they lived in tentlike structures and geodesic domes. In a certain sense, this initial wave of green architecture was based on admiration of the early Native American lifestyle and its minimal impact on the land. At the same time, by isolating themselves from the greater community, these youthful environmentalists were ignoring one of ecology’s most important principles: that interdependent elements work in harmony for the benefit of the whole.
Influential pioneers who supported a more integrative mission during the 1960s and early ’70s included the American architectural critic and social philosopher Lewis Mumford, the Scottish-born American landscape architect Ian McHarg, and the British scientist James Lovelock. They led the way in defining green design, and they contributed significantly to the popularization of environmental principles. For example, in 1973 Mumford proposed a straightforward environmental philosophy:
McHarg, who founded the department of landscape architecture at the University of Pennsylvania, laid the ground rules for green architecture in his seminal book Design with Nature (1969). Envisioning the role of human beings as stewards of the environment, he advocated an organizational strategy, called “cluster development,” that would concentrate living centres and leave as much natural environment as possible to flourish on its own terms. In this regard McHarg was a visionary who perceived Earth as a self-contained and dangerously threatened entity.
This “whole Earth” concept also became the basis of Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis. Named after the Greek Earth goddess, his hypothesis defined the entire planet as a single unified organism, continuously maintaining itself for survival. He described this organism as
During the 1970s the Norwegian environmental philosopher Arne Naess proposed a theory of “deep ecology” (or “ecosophy”), asserting that every living creature in nature is equally important to Earth’s precisely balanced system. Working in exact opposition to this philosophy, the politics and economics of that decade accelerated the development of green awareness. The lack of business regulation in the United States meant unlimited consumption of fossil fuels. Meanwhile, the 1973 OPEC oil crisis brought the cost of energy into sharp focus and was a painful reminder of worldwide dependence on a very small number of petroleum-producing countries. This crisis, in turn, brought into relief the need for diversified sources of energy and spurred corporate and government investment in solar, wind, water, and geothermal sources of power.
Green design takes root:-

By the mid-1980s and continuing through the ’90s, the number of environmental advocacy societies radically expanded; groups such as Greenpeace, Environmental Action, the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, and the Nature Conservancy all experienced burgeoning memberships. For architects and builders a significant milestone was the formulation in 1994 of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards, established and administered by the U.S. Green Building Council. These standards provided measurable criteria for the design and construction of environmentally responsible buildings. The basic qualifications are as follows:

Sustainable site development involves, whenever possible, the reuse of existing buildings and the preservation of the surrounding environment. The incorporation of earth shelters, roof gardens, and extensive planting throughout and around buildings is encouraged.
Water is conserved by a variety of means including the cleaning and recycling of gray (previously used) water and the installation of building-by-building catchments for rainwater. Water usage and supplies are monitored.
Energy efficiency can be increased in a variety of ways, for example, by orienting buildings to take full advantage of seasonal changes in the sun’s position and by the use of diversified and regionally appropriate energy sources, which may—depending on geographic location—include solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, water, or natural gas.
The most desirable materials are those that are recycled or renewable and those that require the least energy to manufacture. They ideally are locally sourced and free from harmful chemicals. They are made of nonpolluting raw ingredients and are durable and recyclable.
Indoor environmental quality addresses the issues that influence how the individual feels in a space and involves such features as the sense of control over personal space, ventilation, temperature control, and the use of materials that do not emit toxic gases.
The 1980s and early ’90s brought a new surge of interest in the environmental movement and the rise to prominence of a group of more socially responsive and philosophically oriented green architects. The American architect Malcolm Wells opposed the legacy of architectural ostentation and aggressive assaults on the land in favour of the gentle impact of underground and earth-sheltered buildings—exemplified by his Brewster, Mass., house of 1980. The low impact, in both energy use and visual effect, of a structure that is surrounded by earth creates an almost invisible architecture and a green ideal. As Wells explained, this kind of underground building is “sunny, dry, and pleasant” and “offers huge fuel savings and a silent, green alternative to the asphalt society.”

The American physicist Amory Lovins and his wife, Hunter Lovins, founded the Rocky Mountain Institute in 1982 as a research centre for the study and promotion of the “whole system” approach favoured by McHarg and Lovelock. Years before the LEED standards were published, the institute, which was housed in a building that was both energy-efficient and aesthetically appealing, formulated the fundamental principle of authentic green architecture: to use the largest possible proportion of regional resources and materials. In contrast to the conventional, inefficient practice of drawing materials and energy from distant, centralized sources, the Lovins team followed the “soft energy path” for architecture—i.e., they drew from alternative energy sources.

The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (Max Pot; founded in 1975 in Austin, Texas, by the American architect Pliny Fisk III) in the late 1980s joined with others to support an experimental agricultural community called Blueprint Farm, in Laredo, Texas. Its broader mission—with applications to any geographic location—was to study the correlations between living conditions, botanical life, the growing of food, and the economic-ecological imperatives of construction. This facility was built as an integrative prototype, recognizing that nature thrives on diversity. Fisk concluded that single-enterprise and one-crop territories are environmentally dysfunctional—meaning, for example, that all of a crop’s predators converge, natural defenses are overwhelmed, and chemical spraying to eliminate insects and weeds becomes mandatory. In every respect, Blueprint Farm stood for diversified and unpredictable community development. The crops were varied, and the buildings were constructed of steel gathered from abandoned oil rigs and combined with such enhancements as earth berms, sod roofs, and straw bales. Photovoltaic panels, evaporative cooling, and wind power were incorporated in this utopian demonstration of the symbiotic relationships between farming and green community standards.

The American architect William McDonough rose to green design fame in 1985 with his Environmental Defense Fund Building in New York City. That structure was one of the first civic icons for energy conservation resulting from the architect’s close scrutiny of all of its interior products, construction technology, and air-handling systems. Since then, McDonough’s firm established valuable planning strategies and built numerous other green buildings—most significantly, the Herman Miller factory and offices (Holland, Mich., 1995), the corporate offices of Gap, Inc. (San Bruno, Calif., 1997), and Oberlin College’s Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies (Oberlin, Ohio, 2001).

McDonough’s main contribution to the evolution of sustainable design was his commitment to what he has called “ecologically intelligent design,” a process that involves the cooperation of the architect, corporate leaders, and scientists. This design principle takes into account the “biography” of every aspect of manufacture, use, and disposal: the choice of raw ingredients, transport of materials to the factory, fabrication process, durability of goods produced, usability of products, and recycling potential. McDonough’s latest version of the principle—referred to as “cradle-to-cradle” design—is modeled after nature’s own waste-free economy and makes a strong case for the goal of reprocessing, in which every element that is used in or that results from the manufacturing process has its own built-in recycling value.

Principles of building green:-

The advances in research and in building techniques achieved by the above-mentioned green design luminaries have been compiled into a reliable database of environmental construction methods and sustainable materials—some of which have been in use for thousands of years yet remain the basis for contemporary advances in environmental technology. For private residences of the 21st century, the essential green design principles are as follows:

Alternative energy sources. Whenever feasible, build homes and communities that supply their own power; such buildings may operate entirely off the regional power grid, or they may be able to feed excess energy back onto the grid. Wind and solar power are the usual alternatives. The quality of solar collectors and photovoltaic panels continues to improve with the advance of technology; practical considerations for choosing one supplier over another include price, durability, availability, delivery method, technology, and warranty support.
Energy conservation. Weatherize buildings for maximum protection against the loss of warm or cool air. Major chemical companies have developed responsibly manufactured, dependable, moisture-resistant insulating materials that do not cause indoor humidity problems. Laminated glass was also radically improved at the end of the 20th century; some windows provide the same insulation value as traditional stone, masonry, and wood construction. In regions that experience extreme heat, straw-bale or mud-brick construction—used since ancient times—is a good way to save money and energy.
Reuse of materials. Use recycled building materials. Although such products were scarce in the early 1990s, since the early 21st century they have been readily available from a burgeoning number of companies that specialize in salvaging materials from demolition sites.
Careful siting. Consider using underground or earth-sheltered architecture, which can be ideal for domestic living. Starting at a depth of about 1.5 metres (5 feet) below the surface, the temperature is a constant 52 °F (11 °C)—which makes the earth itself a dependable source of climate control.
Lillis Business Complex; University of Oregon
Lillis Business Complex; University of Oregon
Individual, corporate, and governmental efforts to comply with or enforce LEED standards include recycling at household and community levels, constructing smaller and more efficient buildings, and encouraging off-the-grid energy supplies. Such efforts alone cannot preserve the global ecosystem, however. On the most basic level, the ultimate success of any globally sanctioned environmental movement depends as much on its social, psychological, and aesthetic appeal as on its use of advanced technologies.
The environmental movement in the 21st century can succeed only to the extent that its proponents achieve a broad-based philosophical accord and provide the same kind of persuasive catalyst for change that the Industrial Revolution offered in the 19th century. This means shaping a truly global (as well as optimistic and persuasive) philosophy of the environment. Much depends on the building arts and integrative thinking. Architects will have to abandon 20th-century specialization and reliance on technology and, with builders and clients, help support grassroots, community-oriented, and globally unifying objectives. In the words of Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson,
The ultimate test of man’s conscience may be his willingness to sacrifice something today for future generations whose words of thanks will not be heard.

Challenges to architecture:-

If architecture is to become truly green, then a revolution of form and content—including radical changes in the entire look of architecture—is essential. This can only happen if those involved in the building arts create a fundamentally new language that is more contextually integrative, socially responsive, functionally ethical, and visually germane.

The potentialities of environmental science and technology must be creatively examined. Already there exists a rich reservoir of ideas from science and nature—cybernetics, virtual reality, biochemistry, hydrology, geology, and cosmology, to mention a few. Furthermore, just as the Industrial Revolution once generated change in many fields in the 19th century, so too the information revolution, with its model of integrated systems, serves as a conceptual model in the 21st century for a new approach to architecture and design in the broader environment.
Understand the importance of incorporating sustainable design thinking and practice in buildings and city spaces
Understand the importance of incorporating sustainable design thinking and practice in buildings and city spacesSee all videos for this article
As community governments begin to legislate state-of-the-art green standards, they must encourage appropriate artistic responses to such regional attributes as surrounding topography, indigenous vegetation, cultural history, and territorial idiosyncrasy. For instance, communities might encourage innovative fusions of architecture with landscape—where trees and plants become as much a part of architectural design as construction materials—so that buildings and their adjacent landscapes essentially merge. In such thinking, buildings are not interpreted as isolated objects, and the traditional barriers between inside and outside and between structure and site are challenged.
Likewise, green architecture in the 21st century has similar obligations to the psychological and physical needs of its inhabitants. Buildings are most successful when they respond to multiple senses—meaning that truly green design engages touch, smell, and hearing as well as sight in the design of buildings and public spaces.
Continuing advances in environmental technology have significantly strengthened the goals of sustainable architecture and city planning over the last decade. Yet many people consider the environmental crisis beyond their comprehension and control. Though technological solutions are necessary, they represent only one facet of the whole. Indeed, the transfer of responsibility to engineers and scientists threatens the social and psychological commitment needed for philosophical unity.
Increasing numbers of people seek new symbiotic relationships between their shelter and the broader ecology. This growing motivation is one of the most promising signs in the development of a consensus philosophy of the environment. As the environmental movement gains momentum, it underlines the anthropologist Margaret Mead’s observation:

7Dplans.com is a web-based stage to help you to carry on with a delightful life in a Wonderful home and house plan. We are here to help you to assembled wonderful, agreeable , renowned and affordable home to full fill your all Fantasies. We will help you in Arranging, Construction Planning ,Electrical Planning , Plumbing Planning and Inside Planning Thinking about the significance of Vaastu for your home. Is it feasible for a design to mirror the considerations of a draftsman? In the space of engineering, it’s obviously true’s that the plan cycle is generally formed by the client, their way of life, their necessities, and their financial plan, with little consideration given to the individual preferences of the actual draftsmen.

We put stock in making our plans tasteful and completely utilitarian. With in-house creation unit, robotized and imaginative mechanical headways and a client centered viewpoint.

Engineering and Inside Plan of your house is similarly pretty much as significant as some other angle inside your home. While developing or restoring a space, gigantic significance is given to engineering however any space can’t be known as a fantasy home except if equivalent exertion is put towards inside arranging and planning of such space. It is this course of stylistic layout where you really want to look for the assistance of the best home inside originators, we can truly switch a structural delight over completely to a plan wonder.

Choices of format House plans will be given working drawing contain underlying drg, electrical and plumbing drg, entryway window detail, furniture design, and front rise (2D+3D – 2 choices in particular)

PLOT SIZE                   LAYOUT PLAN        WORKING DRAWINGS

0-50 SQYRDS                   FREE                          9999/-

51-150 SQYRDS               999/-                           14999/-

151-300 SQYRDS             1799/-                         17999/-

301-400 SQYRDS             1999/-                         19999/-

401-500 SQYRDS             2499/-                         24999/-

You can Purchase itemized design working drawings for your home arrangement. You will get Compositional Drawings I.E Primary Drawing, Plumbing, Electrical, Furniture Design, Brickwork detail, front Rise (2d+3d, 2 choices ) while purchasing Building Drawings. You will get 2 Choices for Floor Plan.

Purchase Inside Drawings with an exceptionally ostensible expense house plan.

To purchase this drawing, send an email with your plot size and area to info.7dplans@gmail.com and one of our specialists will reach you to take the cycle forward.

Chipping away at itemized drawings for your workers for hire and entryway window plan. Extra drawings like primary drawings, electrical drawings, plumbing drawings, 2-D, and three dimensional rises.

Inside Planning work like Misleading roof Drawing, kitchen detail drawing, wood-work configuration support, furniture Drawings, and deck plans, are accessible at an ostensible expense of RS:- 40/sq. ft. To purchase this drawing, send an email with your plot size and area to info.7dplans@gmail.com and one of our specialists will reach you to take the interaction forward.

our other social links

Instagram

7Dplans.com is a web-based stage to help you to carry on with a delightful life in a Wonderful home and house plan. We are here to help you to assembled wonderful, agreeable , renowned and affordable home to full fill your all Fantasies. We will help you in Arranging, Construction Planning ,Electrical Planning , Plumbing Planning and Inside Planning Thinking about the significance of Vaastu for your home. Is it feasible for a design to mirror the considerations of a draftsman? In the space of engineering, it’s obviously true’s that the plan cycle is generally formed by the client, their way of life, their necessities, and their financial plan, with little consideration given to the individual preferences of the actual draftsmen.

We put stock in making our plans tasteful and completely utilitarian. With in-house creation unit, robotized and imaginative mechanical headways and a client centered viewpoint.

Engineering and Inside Plan of your house is similarly pretty much as significant as some other angle inside your home. While developing or restoring a space, gigantic significance is given to engineering however any space can’t be known as a fantasy home except if equivalent exertion is put towards inside arranging and planning of such space. It is this course of stylistic layout where you really want to look for the assistance of the best home inside originators, we can truly switch a structural delight over completely to a plan wonder.

Choices of format House plans will be given working drawing contain underlying drg, electrical and plumbing drg, entryway window detail, furniture design, and front rise (2D+3D – 2 choices in particular)

PLOT SIZE                   LAYOUT PLAN        WORKING DRAWINGS

0-50 SQYRDS                   FREE                          9999/-

51-150 SQYRDS               999/-                           14999/-

151-300 SQYRDS             1799/-                         17999/-

301-400 SQYRDS             1999/-                         19999/-

401-500 SQYRDS             2499/-                         24999/-

You can Purchase itemized design working drawings for your home arrangement. You will get Compositional Drawings I.E Primary Drawing, Plumbing, Electrical, Furniture Design, Brickwork detail, front Rise (2d+3d, 2 choices ) while purchasing Building Drawings. You will get 2 Choices for Floor Plan.

Purchase Inside Drawings with an exceptionally ostensible expense house plan.

To purchase this drawing, send an email with your plot size and area to info.7dplans@gmail.com and one of our specialists will reach you to take the cycle forward.

Chipping away at itemized drawings for your workers for hire and entryway window plan. Extra drawings like primary drawings, electrical drawings, plumbing drawings, 2-D, and three dimensional rises.

Inside Planning work like Misleading roof Drawing, kitchen detail drawing, wood-work configuration support, furniture Drawings, and deck plans, are accessible at an ostensible expense of RS:- 40/sq. ft. To purchase this drawing, send an email with your plot size and area to info.7dplans@gmail.com and one of our specialists will reach you to take the interaction forward.

our other social links

Instagram

7Dplans.com is a web-based stage to help you to carry on with a delightful life in a Wonderful home and house plan. We are here to help you to assembled wonderful, agreeable , renowned and affordable home to full fill your all Fantasies. We will help you in Arranging, Construction Planning ,Electrical Planning , Plumbing Planning and Inside Planning Thinking about the significance of Vaastu for your home. Is it feasible for a design to mirror the considerations of a draftsman? In the space of engineering, it’s obviously true’s that the plan cycle is generally formed by the client, their way of life, their necessities, and their financial plan, with little consideration given to the individual preferences of the actual draftsmen.

We put stock in making our plans tasteful and completely utilitarian. With in-house creation unit, robotized and imaginative mechanical headways and a client centered viewpoint.

Engineering and Inside Plan of your house is similarly pretty much as significant as some other angle inside your home. While developing or restoring a space, gigantic significance is given to engineering however any space can’t be known as a fantasy home except if equivalent exertion is put towards inside arranging and planning of such space. It is this course of stylistic layout where you really want to look for the assistance of the best home inside originators, we can truly switch a structural delight over completely to a plan wonder.

Choices of format House plans will be given working drawing contain underlying drg, electrical and plumbing drg, entryway window detail, furniture design, and front rise (2D+3D – 2 choices in particular)

PLOT SIZE                   LAYOUT PLAN        WORKING DRAWINGS

0-50 SQYRDS                   FREE                          9999/-

51-150 SQYRDS               999/-                           14999/-

151-300 SQYRDS             1799/-                         17999/-

301-400 SQYRDS             1999/-                         19999/-

401-500 SQYRDS             2499/-                         24999/-

You can Purchase itemized design working drawings for your home arrangement. You will get Compositional Drawings I.E Primary Drawing, Plumbing, Electrical, Furniture Design, Brickwork detail, front Rise (2d+3d, 2 choices ) while purchasing Building Drawings. You will get 2 Choices for Floor Plan.

Purchase Inside Drawings with an exceptionally ostensible expense house plan.

To purchase this drawing, send an email with your plot size and area to info.7dplans@gmail.com and one of our specialists will reach you to take the cycle forward.

Chipping away at itemized drawings for your workers for hire and entryway window plan. Extra drawings like primary drawings, electrical drawings, plumbing drawings, 2-D, and three dimensional rises.

Inside Planning work like Misleading roof Drawing, kitchen detail drawing, wood-work configuration support, furniture Drawings, and deck plans, are accessible at an ostensible expense of RS:- 40/sq. ft. To purchase this drawing, send an email with your plot size and area to info.7dplans@gmail.com and one of our specialists will reach you to take the interaction forward.

our other social links

Instagram