By Claude & Parth on 2026-03-28, City: Ottawa, View Transcript
The Emergency Preparedness and Protective Services Committee reviewed proposed changes to food premises licensing regulations, with significant public interest focused on new enforcement powers affecting music venues and entertainment establishments. Nine delegations spoke, primarily from the music industry, raising concerns about two specific enforcement provisions: mandatory relocation of sound equipment and required acoustic engineering reports. While staff emphasized these measures would only apply to repeat violators, delegates argued the vague language and lack of clear thresholds could threaten small venues' viability. The committee approved the licensing amendments to proceed to council on April 8th, with staff acknowledging they would continue conversations with stakeholders.
The city is streamlining licensing for businesses that serve food and offer entertainment. Currently, 170 of 189 licensed amusement places also operate as food premises, requiring two separate licenses. The new "expanded activity food premise" license consolidates both into a single $448 annual license, eliminating redundant inspections. Staff noted: "In a scenario where you have both a food premise and an amusement license, you wouldn't have to apply for both categories anymore. You would have one license." The changes also address modern business models like shared commercial kitchens and home-based food businesses, with low-risk home bakers being exempted from city licensing requirements while remaining subject to Ottawa Public Health oversight.
Multiple music industry representatives raised serious concerns about two proposed enforcement tools that would give the chief license inspector authority to mandate relocation of sound equipment or require professional acoustic engineering reports at the licensee's expense. Melanie Brulee of the Ottawa Music Industry Coalition stated: "If we're serious about downtown revitalization and building a strong nightlife economy, we need policies developed in meaningful collaboration with the creative industries sector with clear boundaries that allow operators, residents, and enforcement all to succeed." Delegates emphasized that acoustic reports can cost "tens of thousands of dollars" and that the measures lack clear thresholds for when they would be triggered. Aaron Benjamin of the Canadian Live Music Association noted: "much of this framework relies on discretionary decision-making without clearly defined thresholds that creates inconsistency or can create inconsistency in application and uncertainty for operators who are trying to comply in good faith."
A venue operator testified about investing nearly $100,000 in sound mitigation but being unable to resolve ongoing noise complaints because the city has not provided complaint location and timing data needed for acoustic studies. The operator stated they had made year-long requests for this information, which bylaw leadership cited privacy reasons and ongoing court matters as barriers to sharing. The operator said: "If somebody was to hand me this report, I would immediately perform the study and with that study, I would immediately know that there is this is the solution...or I would immediately know that this is not a viable space." The venue has experienced approximately 100 bylaw visits over the past year, with court being the only recourse, while the operator believes complaints may originate from "one single unit on a high floor" but cannot confirm without city data.
Significant discussion centered on what constitutes "repeat violations" that would trigger expensive enforcement measures. Staff clarified that repeat offenses must occur "over a period of time" rather than from a single event with multiple complaints, but acknowledged that repeat violations triggered by a single complainant could still activate enforcement powers. A councilor noted that multiple delegates "spoke even out of misunderstood concern" about the bylaw language, suggesting "lack of precision of the language" may be the root problem. Staff acknowledged they would "take away what we've heard here today and certainly welcome continuing those conversations."
Staff confirmed a comprehensive business licensing bylaw review is scheduled for May, which will examine the definition of "amusement license" and address concerns about when businesses need such licenses. The current system has 36-37 different licensing schedules. Additionally, an online business licensing system is planned for launch in November 2024, allowing residents and businesses to apply for and renew licenses online instead of visiting City Hall in person. Staff stated: "BO services is really looking forward to the online business licensing solution that we plan on implementing in November and this will make the application process much easier for residents to be able to apply."
Passed: - Motion to recommend council approve amendments to the licensing bylaw (Bylaw 2002-189), including new definitions and regulations relating to food premises (Schedule 7, Document 1) and updated regulations relating to amusement places (Schedule 5, Document 2). The motion will proceed to full council vote on April 8th.
Notice of Motion (Deferred to April 16th): - Noise bylaw review motion introduced by Councilor Divine on behalf of Councilor Manard, directing staff to review the noise bylaw including disparities with NPC 300 guidelines as part of the bylaw review plan to be approved by the next term of council.