Accelerated restaurant building plan approval: California Retail Food Code: tenant improvements.

With leadership from Assembly Members Wicks and Gabriel, the measure would establish a streamlined, ministerial pathway for restaurant tenant‑improvement approvals that relies on licensed architects or professional engineers to certify compliance with building, health, and safety codes, and it would place this framework within a new statewide government code chapter while remaining cognizant of existing health‑code authorities.

At the core, the measure creates a qualified professional certifier—defined as an architect or engineer who has at least five years of relevant commercial building design or plan‑review experience and carries at least $2 million in professional liability insurance—who may certify that a restaurant tenant improvement complies with applicable codes. The local building department must act on a complete application within 20 business days; if no action occurs, the plan is deemed approved for permitting purposes. If initial denial occurs, the applicant may resubmit corrected plans limited to the identified deficiencies, with each resubmission reviewed within 10 business days. The act also requires affidavits under penalty of perjury from the certifier or applicant attesting to code compliance and restaurant eligibility. In addition, local departments must conduct random audits covering at least 20 percent of certified tenant improvements weekly, with post‑issuance review initiated within five business days and a plan‑check correction notice within 10 days if material noncompliance is found. Certification does not supersede other required inspections, and the framework explicitly preserves cooperation with the California Retail Food Code.

The proposal extends accountability and risk management through new disciplinary authorities and liability rules. False statements in certification submissions by licensees acting as qualified professional certifiers would be grounds for disciplinary action by licensing boards, with engineers facing an added ground for discipline and architects similarly covered. Qualified professional certifiers would be liable for damages arising from negligent plan review, and applicants must indemnify local agencies against property damage or personal injury attributable to construction under this pathway. Public entities or employees would enjoy immunity for discretionary or ministerial permit decisions under the new framework, while local jurisdictions may augment qualifications or penalties through ordinance and may charge fees to cover the new track. The relationship with existing health and safety regimes is preserved, as the bill clarifies that the new track does not replace plan review under the California Retail Food Code and acknowledges related oversight by other agencies.

In broader context, the measure treats the restaurant sector as a statewide concern, extending the accelerated review to all cities, including charter cities, and coupling ministerial processing with CEQA exemptions where discretionary approvals would otherwise apply. By design, the approach seeks clearer, time‑bound certainty for permitting while maintaining essential health and safety oversight through other regulatory channels. The package would shift certain plan‑review responsibilities to certified professionals, create a new post‑approval audit regime, and reshape cost and liability considerations for owners, certifiers, and local agencies, with implementation contingent on local adoption of implementing ordinances and the interpretation of the new procedures by permitting authorities.