Purposes

**Comparing and Contrasting**
==**Since urban planning is one of the newest carriers on the field, when it first came out, the urban planner and the architects used to fight all the time, architects would accuse urban planners of interfering with aesthetic matters about which they were not qualified to judge. Planners would accuse architects of designing buildings solely as objects, with little attempt to take account of their context or of their likely impact on the surroundings. But at the end even though they realized their purposes were not the very same, their work goes hand by hand with each other so urban planners asked architects to care not just for the design of the building but also for the place they're building it in, and architects asked the urban planners to be concerned not only with the land use but also with the structure that is going to be built in it. The city of Caracas now days, is a traffic city, the highways and streets should be re-structured by good urban planners who know what they're doing, and the old buildings should be taken care of by architects who are aware of the new advances the field has been upgraded to. We now live in a city that refuses to replace her old buildings for more structurally strong ones, buildings that go accord the time and it's not because it keeps maintained the old ones because here, that word seems to be missing from the dictionary; take for example the viaduct that used to connect the city of Caracas with La Guaira, if maintained correctly and if the urban planners and architects of the same would've considered that the place where they built it wasn't the most stable one, maybe the displacement of the ground would not have taken it down with it.**==