Requiem for Chelsea's Giant Rotating Cupcake

Monday, March 5, 2007, by Lockhart

For months, we've secretly admired BlogChelsea's obsession with the giant rotating cupcake atop the street signage for West 23rd's Burgers and Cupcakes. Through rain, sleet, and snow, the cupcake has kept spinning. Yet soon, it will spin no more. Reports James Wagner:

The giant, spinning, flood-lit pink cupcake perched above the curb on the top of an advertising canopy on West 23 Street has to be removed within 30 days. The city's Department of Transportation [DOT], which has the authority in these things as the safety guardian of our streets and sidewalks, has found that the owners' original permit for a conventional framed canopy expired in 2003 and that the mechanical structure appended to the awning the restaurant had built after 2003, is itself in violation of city statute.

Wagner seems to see the impending cupcake removal as some sort of victory, but we're inclined to disagree. Left alone, the GRC had the potential to develop into a kitschy visual as iconic to the neighborhood as El Teddy's fabled crown was to Tribeca. Sad, really. And now we're hungry again.
· Pink Cupcake Comes Down This Month [James Wagner via BlogChelsea]
· El Teddy's Crown Comes Down [Curbed]

Filed under Manhattan: Chelsea, Restaurants,

Email this post to a friend

Comments feed for this post

Comments (6 extant)

(No big loss).

By RatherBeBiking at March 5, 2007 7:08 PM

Once again, the City powers that be, keep us safe.
Well.... I guess, once again, they waste our tax money.

By City Resident at March 6, 2007 8:37 AM

What's next? The city is turning into some boooooooooooring ass place.

I can't wait to get to this place and eat some dead animals and cupcakes.

By J at March 6, 2007 10:31 AM

Heaven forbid anyone shows a little character and personality in this town. What we need is more banks!

By JRudy at March 6, 2007 11:28 AM

Commenters 2-4: the city's concern here is that the illegal mechanism not detach from the flimsy canopy - this is NOT an awning - in, say, high winds, fall toward the sidewalk and hurt or possibly kill pedestrians. #2, you say that is how they "waste our tax money." I don't think upholding safety standards is a perfect use of our tax money.

Before you go complaining about how the city enforces building codes, DOT codes, etc., why not stop to consider that the city really does have the best interests of its citizens at heart? Guaranteed, if you are walking beneath that thing when it falls and you get hurt, you WILL sue the city.

Back to the topic: if Burgers and Cupcakes really wants to keep the GRC, then why not apply for a proper sign, say attached to the facade? There are other ways to do this.

By "James Frey" at March 6, 2007 3:13 PM

Correction to my comment above - i DO think upholding safety standards is a perfect use of our tax money. :-)

By "James Frey" at March 6, 2007 3:17 PM