I understand and I get angry a lot for this reason. We have a very bad system in Ontario. A rigid policy-led system mired with contradictions, inaction, and corruption. In a normal system, planning is about setting a direction for the built & natural environment along with all of its implications, including technical, aesthetic, social, economic, and environmental considerations. It's about many things... much more than architecture or engineering. Some topics include directing development to create the best possible outcomes (land use), the design of buildings & the public realm (urban design), protecting/improving the environment and reducing emissions, providing housing options and amenities for all, transportation and infrastructure, and much more. It's a very general profession that is supposed to fill the gap of a completely free market and is about taking a larger view than just the development of one site. It's supposed to, with responsibility and due process, provide and enforce an overarching vision for private developers and government. Sometimes, this has worked in Toronto... like the Port Lands and the new Villiers Island! I mean, just look at it... it's awesome! More often than not, at least here, planning has been on the sidelines of city building (ex. transit expansion), has been reduced to mundane paperwork, is set back by our corrupt provincial government and its Tribunal, and often has itself been used to avoid any change whatsoever (NIMBYism) and even for outright evil purposes (the urban renewal projects of the 20th century with the displacement and impoverishment of millions).
Still, it remains to be the best instrument to create physical change on a comprehensive level. There's a reason why some places are worth caring about and others are huge disappointments.
That's why I still have hope.
