POLICY DATABASE
San Francisco, Cal., Ordinance No. 297-10 (Dec. 3, 2010)
Brief Summary
This uncodified ordinance amends the city’s planning code to expand opportunities for mobile food vendors by clarifying that they do not have to operate only in enclosed facilities and to clarify that they are to be treated differently from bricks and mortar retail food outlets and not subject to the same regulatory requirements with respect to the Planning Code.
Legal Strategies
Requires something, sets standards.
Creates an exemption.
Reach
Community-wide
Food System Category: Distribute, Get
State: California
Jurisdiction Type: City, County
Jurisdiction Name: San Francisco
Does the law refer to priority populations in some way?
Unclear. Findings refer to Mobile Food Facilities as contributing " to the richness of San Francisco's culinary and cultural offerings and provide[ing] economic opportunities especially for small business-persons." (Section 1 (e).).
Does the law refer to or suggest a goal related to improving or protecting health?
No.
Does the law refer to or suggest a goal of fostering improved environmental conditions?
Yes. "The Planning Department has determined that the actions contemplated in this ordinance comply with the California Environmental Quality Act" Sec 1(a).
Does the law refer to or suggest a goal related to promoting or supporting the community's economy?
Yes. Mobile food facilities "add vitality to the street, contribute to the richness of San Francisco's culinary and cultural offerings, and provide economic opportunities especially for small business-persons." (Section 1 (e).).
Does the law include findings (including jurisdiction-specific findings), or are there findings in the larger section, title, article, or chapter which the law is part of?
Yes. The findings state that the ordinance complies with California's Environmental Quality Act and San Francisco's general plan; they note that mobile food facilities (or "street food" facilities) may be subject to burdensome permitting requirements in certain neighborhood commercial and mixed-use zones because they qualify as permanent uses, but yet are different from "bricks and mortar" retailers; and also that there is some confusion about whether they must operate within enclosed facilities due to their permanent (but also intermittent) operations. (Section 1.) Findings also note that "the wide range of fare provided by Mobile Food Facilities is typically offered at low or moderate prices and in many cases represents novel or innovative cuisine. When located and operated appropriately, Mobile Food Facilities add vitality to the street, contribute to the richness of San Francisco's culinary and cultural offerings, and provide economic opportunities especially for small business-persons." (Section 1 (e).).
Does the law have a stated intent or purpose, or is there an intent or purpose in the larger section, title, article, or chapter which the law is part of?
No.
Does the law include definitions, or are there definitions in the section, title, article, or chapter which the law is part of?
Yes. Sec 1(d).
Does the law address implementation in some way?
Yes. Provides guidance for "grandfathering" in of exeisting temporary uses. Section 3, referring to amending Sec. 205(c ) of the Planning Code.
Are there enforcement provisions that identify specific penalties or consequences for non-compliance?
No.
Does the law include an evaluation component, beyond reporting on activity?
No.
Does the law require an extra or atypical financial or resource investment?
No.
Code context and ordinance history
Uncodified ordinance amending the San Francisco Planning Code by adding Section 102.31; amending Section 205 and adding Section 205.4; and amending Sections 212, 790.91, 790.93 and 890.90. File No. 101351. We did not check the codified version for updating because multiple code provisions were involved.