IIRC, you can't ban based on whether a business is independent or a franchise that's part of a national chain; it has to be for other reasons. The 'no drive through' rule for 30-A effectively kept a lot of fast food chains out because it's a necessary part of their business model. But they couldn't explicitly say 'no fast food chain restaurants' in the land plan ( or whatever it's called) and eventually a Subway that didn't need a drive-through did open up rather uneventfully along the road and there was briefly a Lee's Chicken franchise in IIRC, Gulf Place.
That pretty much shoots down the argument that chain hotels don't fit doesn't it? I never believed that was a viable objection since a lot of independently owned businesses sell out to chains.