Hartford anti-business attitude on display

6 posts in this topic

One inspector suggests a couple of tables out front would be a good idea. The next inspector says, that will cost you. Owner gives up and shuts shop.



your title is not in line with the articles.

What happened based on the information in the article is that the city had an inspector that has been comfortable with his territory and therefore has maybe turned a blind eye, or been comfortable with a few small violations.

With that inspector unavailable, the new inspector came through and was much more critical, in fact seemingly working to the letter of the law.

I do not see this as a bad thing so much as long as there is a certain bit of reason brought to the table in the end. business owners must remain complient but not to the point of absurdity..

here is the scenerio.

you own a take out resturant like wither the Pizza joint or the bakery/steak shop.

customers find themselves waiting around for orders, so the owner gives them a couple chairs to sit on whilst waiting. No harm no foul right?

then they throw in a tiny table so that those waiting have something to lean on or whatever and all of a sudden people are eating inside... This is one of those semi violations that you can turn a blind eye on because the table was not put there to serve food on but rather and a means to make the people waiting more comfortable, so they can drink their beverege while they wait or whatecver...

well, once you upgrade that tabe and chairs making them a seating option you are in full violation. Same is said for the booths.

this did not at all sound like the city jerking anyone around but it does sound like one inspector getting lax while his replacement is being tough.

The city needs to level set and provide a more even playing field, thats all, and its a personelle and training issue.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but it happened exactly as I said.

Mendes asserts that the previous city health inspector was the one who suggested the tables to help the business.

Next door at New Park Pizza CT, co-owner Sener Sahin, 29, who moved from Long Island to open the New York-style pizza shop last June, said the same inspector also recommended that he install seating booths to replace a few tables and chairs. Sahin did, at a cost of $2,000, he said.

"I passed inspections twice with the booths," Sahin said Tuesday. Then "the new inspector came in: 'You have to take these out.'"

Sahin figures it would cost at least $10,000 to $15,000 to install a public restroom.

Make any excuse you want. It sure ain't PRO-BUSINESS! And it has to stop.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trust me. This is business as usual in the city of Hartford.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

And people wonder why it's so difficult to run a business in Hartford.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no doubt this is business as usual in Hartford.

I bet its more than that though, inconsistant inspectors is a problem nation wide and in other industries as well.

/Begin massive tangent my buddy is a builder and a small town inspector failed a plan for a small back deck he drew up because it didnt have an architects stamp. paying an architect 500 to put a stamp on a small deck is crazyness. This desk was more an sturdy enough with poured concrete footings and heavy timber construction. In fact it was nearly identical to one he had built 6 months earlier literally 2 doors down the street. The issue on this day was that the inspector was trying to send a msg to my friend that "he was the boss". It was small town politics doled out at a time when my buddies company is growing into one of the bigger outfits in town. so apparently he needed to get pushback from planning.

a different inspector would pass the same project and on any other day so would this one. the end result was that the homeowner (whom I also know) called the inspector and quickly realized it was small town politics. She told him it was BS, cited the deck 2 doors away and got her approval. my buddy reintroduced the plans with an additional support beam for good measure and was quickly passed.

the town code was respected at all times, but the inspector for whatever reason had an issue this one day. This makes my friend the builder none to happy about dealing with this inspector in the future and could have hurt his relationship with the client. This kind of thing is EVERYWHERE

If this example took place in a bigger town Id think the inspector should be retrained on the code and be more consistant without power plays or playing favorites.

/End massive tangent

I think both inspectors here in Hartford need to do some level setting. I think anytime the city gets press like this its important that someone publicly addresses the real problem... not the city perse, but the employees that were either too strict or too lax.

the resulting inconcistancy is what makes it tough to do business and makes business people feel like they are being screwed over.

Think about it.... If the strict one was there the whole time and never allowed a single table or chair in either location, no one would be complaining....

these are takeout locations and the owners know that... to dine in you need a bathroom, so if the business is looking for a dine in option they need to move locations or rennovate. that simple. They would be able to plan on a level playing field

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.