Ban on New Fast-Food Restaurants Proposed for Los Angeles

The One Sentence Summary: A member of the Los Angeles City Council has proposed an ordinance prohibiting all building permits for up to two years for “fast food establishments” in South Central Los Angeles, where worries about an obesity epidemic and an alleged “overproliferation” of fast-food chain eateries are spurring what amounts to “health zoning”.

Summary of Draft Ordinance:

• Councilwoman Jan Perry has proposed a draft ordinance to impose a moratorium on the issuance of permits for building, grading, foundation work, and use permits, for one year (with the possibility of two 6-month extensions) while the City of Los Angeles works to adopt regulatory controls that regulate the establishment of fast food outlets within a specified area of south Los Angeles. The draft ordinance includes an urgency clause, allowing the measure to take immediate effect.
• Hearings have been held at the level of the Planning and Land Use Management Committee of the City Council, to be followed by a hearing on September 27, 2007, before the City Planning Commission. Staff has recommended adoption of the measure, Interim Control Ordinance CPC.2007.3827.
• Objections from the restaurant industry and comments from affected neighborhoods and local businesses may result in modifications to the proposed ordinance, particularly with regard to the definition of “fast food establishment”. The California Restaurant Association is on record in opposition to the action.
• The definition of “fast food establishment” in the draft ordinance does not refer to chain establishments, but sweeps in “any establishment which dispenses food for consumption on or off the premises, and which has the following characteristics: a limited menu, items prepared in advance or prepared or heated quickly, no table orders, and food in disposable wrapping or containers.”
• Exceptions to the building ban listed in the draft ordinance include construction requiring a building permit (1) to comply with a public safety order to repair, remove, or demolish an unsafe building, (2) to rebuild following a natural disaster, fire, or earthquake, and (3) tenant improvements which do not increase the floor area or involve a change in use. A hardship exemption would also be allowed.
• Alternative ways to achieve a greater variety of restaurants could emerge during the legislative process, including the adoption of a conditional use permit system which other cities employ to vary the mix of businesses competing in commercial districts.

Implications for Other Cities and States:

• Land Use Controls regulating property uses in many jurisdictions already affect the number and type of businesses that may operate in particular commercial districts and zones. Examples include ordinances aimed at protecting smaller businesses and limiting “big box” stores, and regulations imposing restrictions on signage and other aesthetic features. Using land use controls as a means for regulating consumer health and for “social engineering” remains rare, but some see in the fast-food restaurant ban a growing trend in this type of governmental activity.
• We will continue to monitor this proposed ordinance.