In the US things are pretty extreme (1, 2). It doesn't seem like a stretch to suggest that some food-related regulations don't add value to justify their cost. This was part of the problem the owner felt was unjust.
You can also compare it to other countries. A number of affluent countries with high quality of living are comparatively lax, and it doesn't seem to be a problem.
With respect to food, Japan seems like an ideal country to learn from. I know for a fact it has great (and so simple) national zoning laws, and I believe it is much simpler and cheaper to open a restaurant (you still pay some fees, and you need to do some yearly training). And if it isn't smarter zoning laws and more supportive government, then it's something else worth emulating.
Not everything that poses a danger needs to be regulated. You need to look at the benefit in relation to the cost. Not just the economical cost, but also the social one.
“I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves ; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”
Regulations (or the lack thereof) becomes a tool to serve the few (1)
Regulations, zoning laws, and massive subsidies that mutate the consumers concept on how much food should cost.