Final Survey: Our analysis

Final Survey Results

In late 2024, we conducted a final survey to gather resident feedback on special event regulations. This survey, designed to inform our policy recommendations for committee and Council, revisited themes from previous consultations and explored potential new regulations. Results are analyzed below using a chaptered, survey-by-survey approach for ease of reference and to demonstrate how recommended new regulations and amendments consider information gathered through public consultations.

Survey 1:

This review's first survey focused on the current special events regulations in Ottawa. This survey aimed to capture what about the existing processes, such as permit applications and processing, worked well and where City staff could improve. Feedback from this survey was largely positive, with residents indicating their general satisfaction with special event regulations in Ottawa. Potential areas of improvement included protecting staff and attendees from harassment at special events, supporting local artists and musicians, and mitigating the environmental impact of special events. This survey also included some preliminary questions about demonstrations.  

The final survey of this review confirmed findings from the initial survey, where staff took the opportunity to consult further on the specifics of the application process. Regarding applications for special events permits, survey respondents were asked about potential application fees and timeline requirements in conjunction with event size. Fifty-eight per cent of respondents advocated for applications to remain free of charge, feedback which was also received during consultation sessions with event organizers. Similarly, survey responses related to event applications suggested residents would appreciate a more efficient process that removes any unnecessary administrative work for event organizers. Consequently, staff will be working on simplifying the application portal and supporting materials so that applicants have an easier time submitting special event applications.

See Survey 1 Analysis and data

Survey 2:

The second survey focused on exploring safety and inclusivity for attendees, staff, and volunteers at special events. The majority of respondents indicated that existing accessibility accommodations are working well and that the City should refuse to permit events with inadequate accessibility plans. Areas of concern for respondents included witnessing harassment or discrimination at special events and not having effective reporting mechanisms or responses from event staff. Nearly half of respondents were in favour of City staff implementing a code of conduct to address these instances.

In the final survey, respondents were again asked about their attitudes towards event organizers being required to have a code of conduct before being asked to about certain potential areas of regulation to help prevent offensive or unwanted behaviours from event attendees. Results from this survey showed that 56 per cent of respondents voted in favour of implementing a code of conduct, while 28 per cent voted against it, and sixteen per cent were either uncertain or had no opinion. Behaviours that had the most support for being regulated included 'fighting or encouraging fighting' and 'harassing or making threats'. As a result, staff are recommending a requirement that event organizers implement a code of conduct for participants that is specific to the nature of their event and make it available to patrons before they enter a special event.

See Survey 2 analysis and data

Survey 3:

Survey three asked residents about the relationship between special events and the environment, and what can be improved in this area. Respondents expressed strong interest and commitment to greener special events through mandatory recycling, and composting and single-use plastic elimination. The majority of respondents also highlighted a willingness to use public transit to get to special events. Staff have explored which existing programs and services within the City could support the public’s interest in greening special events, such as the use of the yellow bag program, and preliminary findings are set out in the staff report. Overall, results from this survey demonstrated a notably strong interest from the public in making Ottawa's special events more sustainable and more environmentally-friendly.  

See Survey 3 analysis and data

Survey 4:

Staff asked residents about special events occurring on City streets in the review's fourth survey, including questions on traffic and parking, food trucks and other mobile vendors, and the City's permitting process. Responses indicated that while residents attend and enjoy special events on city streets, there are associated traffic disruptions that could be better communicated by City staff. Support for food trucks at block parties was overwhelmingly positive, indicating a desire for more dynamic and convenient street events.

Given the interest in food trucks and other mobile vendors, staff sought to gain a more thorough understanding of how best to integrate them into the regulatory framework. When asked in the final survey, 85 per cent of respondents indicated their support to have licensed vendors at block parties. Despite this support, some concerns remained among respondents about the number of mobile vendors per event and the frequency of events per year due to the potential impacts on traffic and mobility. Consequently, the final report for this review recommends amendments to allow food trucks and mobile vendors at special events while also recommending a limit of one food truck or mobile vendor at block parties specifically. This way, event attendees can enjoy the benefit of these vendors with minimal disruption to local traffic at block parties, which are smaller community events.

See Survey 4 analysis and data

Survey 5:

Survey five focused on the demonstrations that Ottawa sees as Canada's capital. Topics in this survey included the permit application process, safety, and how information about demonstrations is communicated out to residents. Seventy-nine percent of respondents were in favour of requiring demonstration organizers to notify the City in advance of a demonstration. Respondents also relayed examples of negative impacts associated with demonstrations, including experiencing harassment and discrimination, violence or threats of violence, adverse effects on mental and physical well-being, and traffic and noise concerns. Demonstration organizers reported that the application process was generally straightforward.

The final survey asked more specific, process-oriented questions on demonstrations in the city. This data informed a recommendation in this review’s final report that a notification process be implemented for demonstrations in the city that is separate from special events. This notification process would be voluntary and request demonstration organizers to provide key information about their demonstration to an intake portal, administered by the Public Works Department. Demonstration information would then be shared with affected City departments and partners, as needed, including the Ottawa Police Service as the lead agency for managing the response to demonstrations. City staff would also provide public notification of traffic and mobility impacts resulting from a demonstration, thereby mitigating community impacts where possible for residents and affected areas.

See Survey 5 analysis and data

Survey 6:

This review's sixth survey focused on how special events impact the economy, with questions focusing specifically towards local business owners. Survey results indicated a high level of satisfaction with the City's processing of Special Events Permits, with some feedback identifying possible areas for improvement such as ensuring members of the City’s Special Events Advisory Team are aligned in what they require from applicants. Respondents also highlighted insufficient parking at special events as an area of concern. Data from this survey supports the recommendation in the final report that volunteers who help manage traffic and parking be at least 16 years of age with a G1 driver’s license or 18 years of age. Those surveyed indicated their support for City-sanctioned sidewalk sales and advocated for businesses not represented by a Business Improvement Area (BIA) to also be able to host them. When asked, respondents advised that special events in Ottawa have a largely positive impact on their business, especially among businesses who host or sponsor special events. The survey responses consistently indicated that popular, well-attended special events in Ottawa significantly contribute to the city’s economic growth. The business community’s involvement in special events in the city is reflected in the final report’s discussion of opportunities for economic development in the special events landscape.

See Survey 6 analysis and data

Background

The final survey ran on EngageOttawa from November 14, 2024 until December 17, 2024 and was promoted through social media posts and paid ads from Monday, November 25, 2024 until Friday, December 13, 2024. In total, 757 residents completed this survey.

Specific survey results are reported below. The total number of responses for each question is reported beside the question itself. Individual responses are also reported as both a total and a percentage, where applicable.

Responses to open-ended questions have been reported using a summary format. Individual responses have been cataloged and made anonymous for sharing with the project team and other City departments where appropriate.

Next Steps

This feedback has been reviewed and considered by staff to inform policy changes that are being recommended as a result of this review. The report containing results of the review and recommendations is scheduled to be presented to a Joint meeting of the Emergency Preparedness and Protective Services and the Public Works and Infrastructure Committees on May 15, 2025. This report will then be considered by Council on May 28, 2025.

Inquiries

If you have questions or comments about the survey results or this review’s final report, please contact the Public Policy Development Branch at bylawreviews@ottawa.ca(External link) or at 613-580-2424 ext. 29529.

Survey Results

Q1: Is a single permit application system for both large outdoor special events and special

events on streets a good idea? (746 responses)

• Yes: 447 respondents or 59.9 per cent
• No: 183 respondents or 24.5 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 116 / 15.5 per cent

Q2: Should applications for special event permits continue to be free of charge? (747 responses)

• Yes: 434 respondents or 58.1 per cent
• No: 256 respondents or 34.3 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 57 respondents or 7.6 per cent

Q3: What do you think is a reasonable fee to charge the event organizer for a special event permit? (253 responses)

• Less than $50: 31 respondents or 12.3 per cent
• $50 to $100: 78 respondents or 30.8 per cent
• Applicants should pay the full cost of processing and approval: 94 respondents or 37.2 per cent
• Other: 50 respondents or 19.8 per cent

Q4: Should the City consider implementing a fee on each admission ticket as an option to recover the City’s costs for special events that are not free to the public? (746 responses)

• Yes: 321 respondents or 43.0 per cent
• No: 353 respondents or 47.3 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 72 respondents or 9.7 per cent

Q5: Should the City consider fines for event organizers who do not follow the conditions of their permit? (747 responses)

• Yes: 588 respondents or 78.7 per cent
• No: 91 respondents or 12.2 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 68 respondents or 9.1 per cent

Q6: How would you prefer to receive information pertaining to traffic and parking impacts for major special events? (745 responses)

• City’s Interactive Traffic Map: 87 respondents or 11.7 per cent
• City of Ottawa website (PSA & General Road Impacts Page): 129 respondents or 17.3 per cent
• Social Media: 229 respondents or 30.7 per cent
• Councillor newsletter: 144 respondents or 19.3 per cent
• Traditional Media (Radio, TV, etc.): 156 respondents or 20.9 per cent

Q7: How would you like event organizers to notify nearby residents about an upcoming event and traffic impacts? (Check all that apply) (745 responses)

• Flyers: 437 respondents
• Email newsletter from event organizer: 309 respondents
• Event’s Social Media page: 340 respondents
• Event’s website: 323 respondents
• Other: 145 respondents

Q8: Should the City consider allowing road closures for special events to occur before 6pm, Monday to Friday? (746 responses)

• Yes: 154 respondents or 20.6 per cent
• No: 158 respondents or 21.2 per cent
• Depends on type of street/mobility impacts: 421 respondents or 56.4 per cent
• Uncertain/No Opinion: 13 respondents or 1.7 per cent

Q9: Should the City consider charging event organizers for traffic control that the City installs (e.g. regulatory signs, detour signs, portable variable message signs) if the event charges an admission fee? (746 responses)

• Yes: 494 respondents or 66.2 per cent
• No: 174 respondents or 23.3 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 78 respondents or 10.5 per cent

Q10: Is 30 days a reasonable period of time to apply for a block party permit or a special event permit for smaller events that do not require complex services or cause significant community impacts? (746 responses)

• Yes: 582 respondents or 78.0 per cent
• No: 115 respondents or 15.4 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 49 respondents or 6.6 per cent

Q11: Is 60 days a reasonable period of time to apply for special events that require noise exemptions, building permits and more complex approvals or are more likely to impact mobility through a specific community? (744 responses)

• Yes: 520 respondents or 69.9 per cent
• No: 155 respondents or 20.8 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 69 respondents or 9.3 per cent

Q12: Is 90 days a reasonable period of time to apply for special events occurring on major holidays like Canada Day and New Year’s, or when they risk significant impacts on community nuisance, access to services, or mobility? (745 responses)

• Yes: 523 respondents or 70.2 per cent
• No: 149 respondents or 20.0 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 73 respondents or 9.8 per cent

Q13: Is 180 days, or 6 months, a reasonable period of time to apply for major events that are likely to have city-wide mobility impacts or cause major disruption in a specific community? (744 responses)

• Yes: 494 respondents or 66.4 per cent
• No: 159 respondents or 21.4 per cent
• Uncertain/No opinion: 91 respondents or 12.2 per cent

Q14: Do you support allowing outdoor special events to operate until midnight on weekdays (Monday to Thursday)? (749 responses)

• Yes: 290 respondents or 38.7 per cent
• No: 412 respondents or 55.0 per cent
• Undecided: 47 respondents or 6.3 per cent

Q15: Should the City exempt licensed bars and restaurants from “All Night Dance Event” licensing during hours authorized by their provincial liquor permit? (746 responses)

• Yes: 445 respondents or 59.7 per cent
• No: 176 respondents or 23.6 per cent
• Undecided: 125 respondents or 16.8 per cent

Q16: Should the City expand block party permits to include sports activities like street hockey and basketball tournaments? (745 responses)

• Yes: 504 respondents or 67.7 per cent
• No: 178 respondents or 23.9 per cent
• Undecided: 63 respondents or 8.5 per cent

Q17: If the City were to expand the block party permit to other activities, would you be more likely or less likely to apply for a permit? (735 responses)

• Yes, very likely: 107 respondents or 14.6 per cent
• Probably, somewhat likely: 227 respondents or 30.9 per cent
• Probably not: 152 respondents or 20.7 per cent
• No, not likely: 249 respondents or 33.9 per cent

Q18: Should the City limit the number of times a specific block can be closed for activities in a given year? (742 responses)

• No limit: 277 respondents or 37.3 per cent
• 1: 61 respondents or 8.2 per cent
• 2: 133 respondents or 17.9 per cent
• 3: 92 respondents or 12.4 per cent
• 4: 70 respondents or 9.4 per cent
• 5: 44 respondents or 5.9 per cent
• Other: 65 respondents or 8.8 per cent

Q19: Is a 30-day period reasonable for notifying residents of the street about a block party? (740 responses)

• Yes: 478 respondents or 64.6 per cent
• No, more time is required: 116 respondents or 15.7 per cent
• No, less time should be required: 121 respondents or 16.4 per cent
• Uncertain / No opinion: 25 respondents or 3.4 per cent

Q20: Should block party applications always require a signed petition showing support from the majority of residents of the street? (743 responses)

• Yes: 290 respondents or 39.0 per cent
• No: 329 respondents or 44.3 per cent
• Uncertain / No opinion: 124 respondents or 16.7 per cent

Q21: Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements. [HC1]

• The City should allow licensed food trucks or other mobile vendors to participate in block parties. (744 responses)
• Definitely disagree: 26 respondents or 3.5 per cent
• Somewhat disagree: 39 respondents or 5.2 per cent
• Neither agree nor disagree: 49 respondents or 6.6 per cent
• Somewhat agree: 163 respondents or 21.2 per cent
• Definitely agree: 467 respondents or 62.8 per cent
• The number of food trucks or mobile vendors should be limited to minimize impact on the surrounding community. (741 responses)
• Definitely disagree: 73 respondents or 9.9 per cent
• Somewhat disagree: 71 respondents or 9.6 per cent
• Neither agree nor disagree: 82 respondents or 11.1 per cent
• Somewhat agree: 203 respondents or 27.4 per cent
• Definitely agree: 312 respondents or 42.1 per cent
• Bouncy castles and high-risk activities should not be allowed. (738 responses)
• Definitely disagree: 162 respondents or 21.2 per cent
• Somewhat disagree: 153 respondents or 20.1 per cent
• Neither agree nor disagree: 153 respondents or 20.1 per cent
• Somewhat agree: 109 respondents or 14.8 per cent
• Definitely agree: 161 respondents or 21.2 per cent
• Bouncy castles and high-risk activities should be allowed with proper insurance. (738 responses)
• Definitely disagree: 92 respondents or 12.5 per cent
• Somewhat disagree: 58 respondents or 7.9 per cent
• Neither agree nor disagree: 87 respondents or 11.8 per cent
• Somewhat agree: 217 respondents or 29.4 per cent
• Definitely agree: 284 respondents or 38.5 per cent

Q22: Should the City allow mobile vendors to operate past 11 pm when they are part of a permitted special event? (743 responses)

• Yes: 595 respondents or 80.1 per cent
• No: 118 respondents or 15.9 per cent
• Uncertain / No opinion: 30 respondents or 4.0 per cent

Q23: As part of the permit process, should the City include a requirement for special event organizers to have their own code of conduct for event participants? (744 responses)

• Yes: 417 respondents or 56.0 per cent
• No: 205 respondents or 27.6 per cent
• Uncertain / No opinion: 122 respondents or 16.4 per cent

Q24: Which approach for codes of conduct for event participants do you think is better for special events? (741 responses)

• Rules-based: 318 respondents or 42.9 per cent
• Value-based: 200 respondents or 27.0 per cent
• Uncertain / No opinion: 158 respondents or 21.3 per cent
• Other: 65 respondents or 8.8 per cent

Q25: Who should determine what code of conduct should apply for a particular event? (736 responses)

• The event organizer: 269 respondents or 36.5 per cent
• The City: 370 respondents or 50.3 per cent
• Other: 97 respondents or 13.2 per cent

Q26: Please indicate your level of agreement with the City including regulations or prohibitions for the following behaviours in a Code of Conduct for event participants[HC2] .

• Spitting (735 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 50 respondents or 6.8 per cent
• Disagree: 29 respondents or 3.9 per cent
• Neutral: 110 respondents or 15 per cent
• Agree: 125 respondents or 17 per cent
• Strongly agree: 421 respondents or 57.3 per cent
• Fighting or encouraging fighting (734 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 29 respondents or 3.9 per cent
• Disagree: 8 respondents or 1.1 per cent
• Neutral: 27 respondents or 3.7 per cent
• Agree: 59 respondents or 8 per cent
• Strongly agree: 611 respondents or 83.2 per cent
• Littering or improper waste disposal (734 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 25 respondents or 3.4 per cent
• Disagree: 8 respondents or 1.1 per cent
• Neutral: 25 respondents or 3.4 per cent
• Agree: 113 respondents or 15.4 per cent
• Strongly agree: 563 respondents or 76.7 per cent
• Vandalism (733 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 27 respondents or 3.7 per cent
• Disagree: 6 respondents or 0.9 per cent
• Neutral: 22 respondents or 3 per cent
• Agree: 57 respondents or 7.8 per cent
• Strongly agree: 621 respondents or 84.7 per cent
• Harassing or making threats (732 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 27 respondents or 3.7 per cent
• Disagree: 6 respondents or 0.8 per cent
• Neutral: 24 respondents or 3.3 per cent
• Agree: 56 respondents or 7.7 per cent
• Strongly agree: 619 respondents or 84.6 per cent
• Discrimination (729 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 35 respondents or 4.8 per cent
• Disagree: 12 respondents or 1.7 per cent
• Neutral: 40 respondents or 5.5 per cent
• Agree: 70 respondents or 9.6 per cent
• Strongly agree: 572 respondents or 78.5 per cent
• Failing to leave as directed (728 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 32 respondents or 4.4 per cent
• Disagree: 13 respondents or 1.8 per cent
• Neutral: 61 respondents or 8.4 per cent
• Agree: 137 respondents or 18.8 per cent
• Strongly agree: 485 respondents or 66.6 per cent
• Obstructing pedestrian traffic (730 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 36 respondents or 4.9 per cent
• Disagree: 20 respondents or 2.7 per cent
• Neutral: 79 respondents or 10.8 per cent
• Agree: 150 respondents or 20.5 per cent
• Strongly agree: 445 respondents or 60.9 per cent
• Obstructing vehicular traffic (733 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 51 respondents or 6.9 per cent
• Disagree: 30 respondents or 4.1 per cent
• Neutral: 109 respondents or 14.8 per cent
• Agree: 155 respondents or 21 per cent
• Strongly agree: 388 respondents or 52.9 per cent
• Outdoor public urination, defecation, or vomiting (732 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 32 respondents or 4.3 per cent
• Disagree: 8 respondents or 1.1 per cent
• Neutral: 27 respondents or 3.7 per cent
• Agree: 70 respondents or 9.6 per cent
• Strongly agree: 595 respondents or 81.2 per cent
• Loitering in any changeroom or washroom (730 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 31 respondents or 4.2 per cent
• Disagree: 29 respondents or 4 per cent
• Neutral: 100 respondents or 13.7 per cent
• Agree: 149 respondents or 20.4 per cent
• Strongly agree: 421 respondents or 57.7 per cent
• Drug or alcohol use (737 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 47 respondents or 6.4 per cent
• Disagree: 44 respondents or 6 per cent
• Neutral: 124 respondents or 16.8 per cent
• Agree: 124 respondents or 16.8 per cent
• Strongly agree: 398 respondents or 54 per cent

Q27: Should there be a requirement to post signage at a special event to inform the public of an event code of conduct? (740 responses)

• Yes: 555 respondents or 75.0 per cent
• No: 120 respondents or 16.2 per cent
• Undecided: 65 respondents or 8.8 per cent

Q28: Do you think event organizers should be required to address behaviours and conduct that are prohibited in their code of conduct? (740 responses)

• Yes: 536 respondents or 72.4 per cent
• No: 106 respondents or 14.3 per cent
• Undecided: 98 respondents or 13.2 per cent

Q29: Should the City establish minimum age requirements for volunteers at special events? (739 responses)

• Yes: 404 respondents or 54.7 per cent
• No: 256 respondents or 34.6 per cent
• Undecided: 79 respondents or 10.7 per cent

Q30: Which of the following age restrictions make sense to you? (Check all that apply) (730 responses)

• All volunteers for special events should be 18 or older: 135 respondents
• All volunteers for special events should be 16 or older: 286 respondents
• Volunteers for events where liquor is served should be 18 or older: 176 respondents
• Volunteers for events where liquor is served should be 19 or older: 331 respondents
• Volunteers staffing road barricades should be 18 or older: 334 respondents
• Volunteers staffing road barricades should be 16 or older: 146 respondents
• Volunteers staffing beach events should be 18 or older: 238 respondents
• Volunteers staffing beach events should be 16 or older: 179 respondents
• There should be no age restrictions. It should be left up to the event organizers: 160 respondents
• Other: 59 respondents
• Other included concerns about kids reaching their necessary volunteer hours if age is restricted, suggestions to have children below the age requirements to be permitted to attend with a guardian, and concerns that the City could be veering into overregulation

Q32: Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements[HC3] .

• Demonstration organizers should be required to notify the city in advance (744 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 61 respondents or 8.2 per cent
• Disagree: 43 respondents or 5.8 per cent
• Neutral: 51 respondents or 6.9 per cent
• Agree: 122 respondents or 16.4 per cent
• Strongly agree: 467 respondents or 62.8 per cent
• Demonstration organizers should be required to provide contact information (743 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 54 respondents or 7.3 per cent
• Disagree: 45 respondents or 6.1 per cent
• Neutral: 34 respondents or 4.6 per cent
• Agree: 126 respondents or 16.7 per cent
• Strongly agree: 484 respondents or 65.1 per cent

Q33: How would you prefer to receive notifications about traffic impacts associated with a demonstration? (Check all that apply) (742 responses)

• City’s Interactive Traffic Map: 309 respondents or 41.6 per cent
• City of Ottawa website: 387 respondents or 52.2 per cent
• Social Media: 469 respondents or 63.2 per cent
• Navigation Maps (Google Maps/ Waze etc.): 344 respondents or 46.4 per cent
• Traditional Media (Radio, TV, etc.): 415 respondents or 56 per cent
• Other: 80 respondents or 10.8 per cent

Q34: Do you agree that the City should recover costs for City services from organizers of outdoor special events conducted without the required permit? (742 responses)

• Yes: 536 respondents or 72.2 per cent
• No: 115 respondents or 15.5 per cent
• Undecided: 91 respondents or 12.3 per cent

Q35: Would you attend a workshop on how to plan and host a special event (large or small) in the City of Ottawa? (740 responses)

• Yes: 303 respondents or 40.9 per cent
• No: 269 respondents or 36.4 per cent
• Undecided: 168 respondents or 22.7 per cent

Q36: Staff are considering making this course a requirement for those working at permitted special events. Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements. [HC4]

• Staff working at permitted special events should complete this training (736 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 63 respondents or 8.6 per cent
• Disagree: 44 respondents or 6 per cent
• Neutral: 116 respondents or 15.8 per cent
• Agree: 204 respondents or 27.7 per cent
• Strongly agree: 309 respondents or 43 per cent
• Both staff and volunteers working at permitted special events should be required to complete this training (734 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 75 respondents or 10.2 per cent
• Disagree: 88 respondents or 12 per cent
• Neutral: 163 respondents or 22.2 per cent
• Agree: 174 respondents or 23.7 per cent
• Strongly agree: 234 respondents or 31.9 per cent
• Anyone working or volunteering at a permitted special event who serves alcohol should be required to complete this training (734 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 54 respondents or 7.4 per cent
• Disagree: 60 respondents or 8.2 per cent
• Neutral: 92 respondents or 12.5 per cent
• Agree: 170 respondents or 23.2 per cent
• Strongly agree: 358 respondents or 48.8 per cent
• Anyone providing security or access control at a permitted special event should be required to complete this training (736 responses)
• Strongly disagree: 46 respondents or 6.3 per cent
• Disagree: 36 respondents or 4.9 per cent
• Neutral: 81 respondents or 11 per cent
• Agree: 176 respondents or 23.9 per cent
• Strongly agree: 397 respondents or 53.9 per cent

Q37: Currently, under the Special Events by-law, only Business Improvement Areas (BIAs) are permitted to apply and host sidewalk sales. Would you support amendments to allow individual businesses outside of a business improvement area to apply and host sidewalk sales? (735 responses)

• Yes: 569 respondents or 77.4 per cent
• No: 93 respondents or 12.7 per cent
• Undecided: 73 respondents or 9.9 per cent