Cognac in St. Petersburg
201 2 Ave N, St. Petersburg, FL 33701
Cognac in St. Petersburg has accumulated 321 violations across 34 inspections since 2017, averaging 9.4 per visit. The establishment operated under the name Dirty Shirley Bar & Kitchen in 2023 and was cited for storing a 15-pound propane tank under a prep table in the rear preparation room, a violation documented in both the initial and follow-up inspections that year. The facility received one disciplinary action resulting in a $400 fine. Top recurring violations include consumer advisories, outer opening protection failures, and food contact surface issues.
Summary generated from Florida DBPR public inspection records.
Last inspected DBPR: January 6, 2026
Cognac in St. Petersburg: Comparison to Pinellas County Averages
This Facility
9.4
violations / inspection
9.4 violations per inspection
Pinellas County Avg
6.15
violations / inspection
6.15 county average
This Facility
0
emergency closures
0 closures
Pinellas County Avg
0.35
closures / facility
0.35 county average
Cognac in St. Petersburg: Fines & Disciplinary Actions (1)
Total fines on record: $400.00
| Action Date | Case Number | Fine | Violation Date | Enforcement Office |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3--2019024972 | $400.00 | Apr 11, 2019 | Fort Lauderdale |
Cognac in St. Petersburg: Fire Safety & Life Safety Violations (2)
— 2 fire violations
— Complaint Full · 48-04-4 · Call Back - Extension given, pending
Inspector Observation: - From initial inspection : Propane tank (larger than 2.7 lb. water capacity/1 lb. gas capacity) located inside of the building. For reporting purposes only.
15 pound proper tank stored under prep table in rear preparation room. - From follow-up inspection 2023-11-17: **Time Extended**
Legal Basis: Reporting: (d) The division, or its agent, shall notify the local firesafety authority or the State Fire Marshal of any readily observable violation of a rule adopted under chapter 633 which relates to public lodging establishments or public food establishments, and the identification of such violation does not require any firesafety inspection certification. For reporting purposes only.
— Complaint Full · 48-04-4 · Warning Issued
Inspector Observation: Propane tank (larger than 2.7 lb. water capacity/1 lb. gas capacity) located inside of the building. For reporting purposes only.
15 pound proper tank stored under prep table in rear preparation room.
Legal Basis: Reporting: (d) The division, or its agent, shall notify the local firesafety authority or the State Fire Marshal of any readily observable violation of a rule adopted under chapter 633 which relates to public lodging establishments or public food establishments, and the identification of such violation does not require any firesafety inspection certification. For reporting purposes only.
Cognac in St. Petersburg: Full Inspection History — DBPR (34)
— 1 inspection7 violations · 5 high priority
— Routine - Food· 7 violations (5 high priority)· Inspection Completed - No Further Action
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
— 4 inspections17 violations · 8 high priority
— Complaint Full· 12 violations (6 high priority)· Inspection Completed - No Further Action
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Complaint Full· 3 violations (2 high priority)· Inspection Completed - No Further Action
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
— Food-Licensing Inspection· 0 violations · Call Back - Complied
No violations recorded for this inspection.
— Food-Licensing Inspection· 2 violations · Warning Issued
— 7 inspections83 violations · 43 high priority
— Complaint Full· 8 violations (2 high priority)· Call Back - Extension given, pending
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Complaint Full· 21 violations (11 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Routine - Food· 9 violations (3 high priority)· Call Back - Admin. complaint recommended
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Routine - Food· 11 violations (5 high priority)· Call Back - Extension given, pending
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Routine - Food· 22 violations (13 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Routine - Food· 2 violations (2 high priority)· Call Back - Complied
— Routine - Food· 10 violations (7 high priority)· Administrative complaint recommended
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— 4 inspections43 violations · 23 high priority
— Routine - Food· 2 violations · Call Back - Complied
— Routine - Food· 16 violations (8 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Routine - Food· 4 violations (2 high priority)· Call Back - Complied
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Routine - Food· 21 violations (13 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— 2 inspections15 violations · 13 high priority
— Routine - Food· 7 violations (6 high priority)· Inspection Completed - No Further Action
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
— Routine - Food· 8 violations (7 high priority)· Inspection Completed - No Further Action
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
— 4 inspections14 violations · 8 high priority
— Routine - Food· 0 violations · Call Back - Complied
No violations recorded for this inspection.
— Routine - Food· 8 violations (5 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
— Routine - Food· 0 violations · Call Back - Complied
No violations recorded for this inspection.
— Routine - Food· 6 violations (3 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— 5 inspections26 violations · 18 high priority
— Routine - Food· 2 violations (1 high priority)· Call Back - Complied
— Routine - Food· 10 violations (8 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— Routine - Food· 0 violations · Admin. Complaint Callback Complied
No violations recorded for this inspection.
— Routine - Food· 2 violations · Call Back - Complied
— Routine - Food· 12 violations (9 high priority)· Administrative complaint recommended
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— 6 inspections35 violations · 24 high priority
— Routine - Food· 2 violations (2 high priority)· Call Back - Complied
— Routine - Food· 11 violations (9 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
— Routine - Food· 1 violations (1 high priority)· Call Back - Complied
High Priority Violations
— Routine - Food· 2 violations (1 high priority)· Call Back - Extension given, pending
— Routine - Food· 3 violations (1 high priority)· Call Back - Extension given, pending
High Priority Violations
Basic Violations
— Routine - Food· 16 violations (10 high priority)· Warning Issued
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Basic Violations
— 1 inspection6 violations · 4 high priority
— Food-Licensing Inspection· 6 violations (4 high priority)· Inspection Completed - No Further Action
High Priority Violations
Intermediate Violations
Cognac in St. Petersburg: Frequently Asked Questions
- When was Cognac in St. Petersburg last inspected?
- Cognac in St. Petersburg was last inspected by Florida DBPR on January 6, 2026. The result was: Inspection Completed - No Further Action.
- What are the most common violations at Cognac in St. Petersburg?
- The most frequently cited violations at Cognac in St. Petersburg are: Consumer advisory, Clean multi-use utensils, Employee health reporting.
- How many health inspections has Cognac in St. Petersburg had?
- Cognac in St. Petersburg has had 34 inspections on record with Florida DBPR, averaging 9.4 violations per inspection, above the statewide average of 5.2.
- What did the most recent inspection of Cognac in St. Petersburg find?
- Cognac in St. Petersburg was most recently inspected on January 6, 2026 with 8 violation(s), including 1 high-priority violation(s). Disposition: Inspection Completed - No Further Action.
- Has Cognac in St. Petersburg ever been shut down?
- No, Cognac in St. Petersburg has no emergency closures on record with Florida DBPR.
- What does Florida violation V01 (Management awareness) mean?
- Violation 01 (Management awareness) is classified as a high priority violation under Florida DBPR food safety regulations. See the full explanation at floridafoodsafety.org/violation/01.
- What does Florida violation V02 (Employee health policy) mean?
- Violation 02 (Employee health policy) is classified as a high priority violation under Florida DBPR food safety regulations. See the full explanation at floridafoodsafety.org/violation/02.
- What does Florida violation V03 (Employee health reporting) mean?
- Violation 03 (Employee health reporting) is classified as a high priority violation under Florida DBPR food safety regulations. See the full explanation at floridafoodsafety.org/violation/03.
- Has Cognac in St. Petersburg had any fire safety violations?
- Yes, Cognac in St. Petersburg has 2 fire safety violation(s) on record from Florida state fire inspections.
- Has Cognac in St. Petersburg faced any disciplinary actions?
- Yes, Cognac in St. Petersburg has 1 disciplinary action(s) on record with Florida DBPR totaling $400.00 in fines.
- How much has Cognac in St. Petersburg been fined?
- Cognac in St. Petersburg has been fined a total of $400.00 across 1 disciplinary action(s) on record with Florida DBPR.
- Has Cognac in St. Petersburg operated under other names?
- Yes, this location previously operated as: Dirty Shirley Bar & Kitchen (2023-2023).
Nearby Establishments to Cognac
Editorial Standards & Data Oversight
Data Source: This report is based on official public inspection records from the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS).
Editorial Process: Content generated using AI to synthesize complex regulatory data, then reviewed and verified for accuracy by our editorial team.
Disclaimer: All data reflects official state records at time of publication. Facilities may have since corrected cited violations, resolved enforcement actions, or changed ownership.
Editor: All content reviewed and verified by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., Nationally Registered EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
This page is maintained by FloridaFoodSafety.org and is not affiliated with Cognac. How we collect and verify this data.