Knapp's Landing received a 58 out of 100 on a June 19 .
The restaurant that abuts the Housatonic River was penalized for the following 4-point violations: soap cartridge stored with food; moldy tray of beets in walk-in cooler (the beets were reportedly intended for personal use); employee not washing hands before putting on gloves; missing consumer advisory on menu.
The main reason for the low score, however, was a 30-point deduction for structural issues, says restaurant manager Peter Massey.
Massey, also the son of the owner, emailed the following message to Stratford Patch:
"My name is Peter Massey and am the manager and son of the owner of Knapp's Landing restaurant. I understand the public's right to have access to public records. However, the way we were portrayed in your recent article does not show who we are. We are a family owned business for 30 years. I am the third generation to run this business in the same location.
"The health inspection that you happened to receive was our worst in all of our years as Knapps Landing. I have dealt with Dawn and Andrew, the health inspectors, for years. They respect our restaurant, and often hold their town dinners here.
"The main reason we received such a low score this time was the fact that we had 30 points deducted for structural issues; issues that in no way affect the quality of our food. Since that inspection, we have actually spent upwards of $10,000.00 to address the structural issues highlighted in the inspection.
"I would love to have the oppurtunity to show you our facility and tell you a little bit about our family and our restaurant's history. That is a story worth telling to the town of Stratford. Please email if this something you would be interested in. Thank You, Sincerely, Peter Massey"
Expect a profile on Knapp's Landing in the coming weeks.
As I stated/asked previously... "what sort of "structural issues" are we talking here???"
Emily O'Connor Karolyi
It is said ignorance of the law is no excuse but in this case I think it's fair. I think it would be proactive for the town to issue bulletins to the businesses they are responsible for about code changes that can affect their inspections. At the very least, if it wasn't considered a violation at the last inspection and the remainder of the inspection did not cause the business to fail the inspection it should not be recorded to public record until the business was given a set amount of time to rectify it. When it comes time for a homeowner to replace their underground oil tank it has to be relocated in the basement but the homeowner isn't penalized for having it in the ground in the first place.