I have been an architect for…

I have been an architect for 34 years.

The problem with municipal approval processes is not the competency of the "Architect" but the amount of increasing red-tape and expanding submission requirements. Is more information better, does it result in a better outcome, or does it simply satisfy what's legally required to reduce risk and liability, especially on the part of the municipality?

Each time there's a desire to improve the approval system(s), another layer of approvals is required. Planning/Building staff/teams can't make decisions, provide contradictory opinions and conflicting requirements, which further delay approvals and construction start dates. Site Plan Approval now takes more work than producing a Building Permit application.

Having a 3rd party architect retained to assist an architect through the approval processes, review for compliance to the Ontario Building Code and conduct site reviews, is only proposed to reduce municipal building and planning staff and costs, and mitigate so-called liability. It's another cost, ultimately to the client.

My competency and professional training and experience is certainly more than other players in the construction industry and municipal planning staff. Why is it that the architects have to be the ones that are impacted to improve the situation. I did the OBC exams several years ago so I could continue to operate my practice. These exams were meant to create a level playing field of knowledge, throughout the industry. For some reason, the engineers and contractors, the biggest and most numerous participants, were allowed to opt-out by the government. Then the requirement for architects was dropped, not necessarily out of fairness, but because I suspect their competency was never the real issue.

Is public safety the real issue or is it only an excuse used to initiate and rationalize these changes? Why doesn't the Provincial Government tackle the real two issues: 1. Ignorance of other participates in the industry; and, 2. Creating a "streamlined" approval process that doesn't ADD more requirements but reduces them?
It must be reinforced that architects, as a self-governing profession, have their own checks and balances to protect the public.