This past spring, Anthony Malkin, president of Malkin Properties and an owner of the Empire State Building, started paying attention to an office tower planned by Vornado Realty Trust. The giant office landlord was seeking approvals to build a tower up to 1,216 feet high two blocks to his building's west, on what's now the site of the Hotel Pennsylvania, at 33rd Street and Seventh Avenue.

The tower's height, to Mr. Malkin, was worrisome, so he researched the issue and fired off a letter to the City Planning Commission, raising concerns about the effect it would have on views of the landmarked Empire State Building. The letter had no impact: The commission voted to approve Vornado's tower without major changes.

Now, with the skyscraper poised to clear a final hurdle before a key City Council committee next week, Mr. Malkin is rushing to round up critics of the tower—and supporters of the Empire State Building's unique place in the skyline—in an attempt to urge the Council or Vornado to scale back.

And while many civic groups and elected officials have generally been supportive of the new tower so far, Mr. Malkin has caught at least a bit of traction: On Tuesday, the New York Landmarks Conservancy decided to speak out about the tower on account of the effect on the Empire State Building; and other civic groups are considering similar actions.

"What this does to New York City, we think, is wrong," Mr. Malkin told The Observer Tuesday. "It just boggles the mind that people would allow this to be done to the skyline of New York City. Is this our persona: cold; impersonal?"

FOR EIGHT DECADES, the Empire State Building has dominated the public's perception of New York City's skyline. Not only is the Art Deco tower the city's tallest, but its aesthetic supremacy is compounded by its location: At 34th Street, it is south of the skyscraper fray of central midtown, making it a tree amid the plains of midtown south.

Two blocks west and one block south, Vornado—an office space titan headed by its forceful, Bronx-raised chairman, Steve Roth—has its own vision for the skyline, and it's somewhat different. For more than a decade, Mr. Roth has been scooping up property after property around Penn Station, guided by the hope that when New York grows and needs new sites for office towers, they will blossom around the country's largest rail hub.

Chief in this vision is a would-be office tower to rise in place of the cramped and dingy Hotel Pennsylvania—a Pelli Clarke Pelli-designed skyscraper that would, as currently envisioned, rise from a boxy base like a slightly tapering glass obelisk, soaring to 1,216 feet (or 1,190 feet, under a second design). Given that this would put it just 34 feet shy of the Empire State Building's peak (the antenna is not counted in the height), the tower, named 15 Penn Plaza, would be a formidable visual rival from afar and on postcards.

Hence Mr. Malkin's apprehension.

Mr. Malkin, the scion of a four-generation real estate empire, is not one to bite his tongue. He got into a public spat with City Council Speaker Christine Quinn in June when he refused to honor Mother Teresa by lighting the Empire State Building for what would be her 100th birthday. Earlier this week, The Wall Street Journal quoted him as calling green-design standards "bullshit" for being too lax. And, in 2007, with landlord Douglas Durst, he took out newspaper ads that publicly criticized the state for building the Freedom Tower at the World Trade Center, a move akin to a campaign his grandfather Lawrence Wein led with Mr. Durst's father when the original twin towers were planned (those towers bested the Empire State Building as the city's tallest).

He first came to be involved with 15 Penn Plaza when Vornado began shepherding the plans for the tower through the city's seven-month-long public-approval process, which concludes with the vote by the City Council this month. The size of the tower caught him off-guard, he said. He began to round up consultants and push for changes, including at the City Planning Commission, given that such a building so close by would significantly change the skyline.

"We're not talking about preventing tall buildings in New York," Mr. Malkin said. "The question here is this tall building here in New York, being approximately 800, 900 feet away from the Empire State Building, crowding the distinctive skyline of the city."

He is no fan of the design—he likened it to "an undersea ICBM"—and sees a decision on the tower as a historic one, saying it is "akin to the loss of Penn Station."

As for what's driving Mr. Malkin, it seems to be a transparent self-interest. He views himself as a guardian of his building's place in the skyline, and, as such, he is protective of anything that might encroach on that. If there are financial motivations-and Mr. Malkin says there are not-they are not obvious (although he has raised concerns that the new skyscraper would interfere with his building's radio tower). The Vornado tower and the Empire State Building would compete for two different types of tenants; namely, those willing to pay high rents for modern space at the Vornado tower (banks and the like), and those who can't. Tenants at the Empire State Building include the FDIC and nonprofits like Human Rights Watch, for instance.

CAMPAIGNS AGAINST MAJOR towers are ingrained in the history of New York, of course, but rarely are they led—or even participated in—by major landlords. Typically, it is the local residents who put landlords on the defensive, often using many of the same tactics as Mr. Malkin (appealing to civic groups; faulting the environmental review; making renderings to illustrate a proposed building's effects). But unlike the typical Upper West Side renter concerned about a new condo tower across the street, he has a bit more of a platform on which to stand.

Further, Mr. Malkin's argument is not without precedent, at least if one is to look at the model set by the Bloomberg administration last year, when the City Planning Commission chopped 200 feet off the height of the 1,250-foot-tall, Jean Nouvel-designed tower next to MoMA. The reasoning, from the Planning Commission, was that the design for the tower's top was not shown to merit "being in the zone of the Empire State Building's iconic spire."

"It's hard to understand how City Planning could say that 15 Penn Plaza would have no impact on the Empire State Building when they already lowered a proposed 53rd Street building for that very reason," said Peg Breen, president of the New York Landmarks Conservancy, who added that her group does not oppose development on the Hotel Pennsylvania. "We would urge the Council to look at the discretionary waivers and bonuses this proposal has received."

The local community board has been critical of the Vornado plan, and opposed it on a number of grounds. And the powerful hotel workers' union has been concerned with the plans for the tower, given that it would involve shuttering the giant Hotel Pennsylvania.

Of course, this is all coming quite late in the process, so much so that it's hard to see how it would have much of an effect, especially when the tower has received support from some civic groups and the borough president. The clock is ticking, with the City Council vote scheduled for next week, and strong opposition mo
vements take time, particularly when heated opposition did not form sooner in the process.

And Mr. Malkin's earlier tiff with Ms. Quinn, the Council speaker, over Mother Teresa's birthday can't help, as the tower sits in her district.

That said, the proposed tower may, in the end, simply prove to be theoretical. Vornado is by no means ready to demolish the Hotel Pennsylvania, a property that, despite its less-than-rave reviews, was minting cash for the company when room rates were high in 2007 and 2008.

Further, Vornado has said it is only moving ahead with the rezoning now to have the option for building the tower at some later date, if and when it finds an anchor tenant. The firm declined to comment on Mr. Malkin's criticism.

ebrown@observer.com

Major landlord Vornado Realty Trust was rebuffed by the local community board on Thursday night in its effort to clear the road for what would be the city's third-tallest tower to rise in place of the Hotel Pennsylvania across from Madison Square Garden.

Manhattan's Community Board 5 voted 36-1 against the plan, and did not even offer a list of conditions—typically community boards will give a road map for a compromise—as numerous board members told the developer to come back at some later time when the firm actually had a tenant in-hand. Vornado in 2007 had a short-lived handshake agreement with Merrill Lynch to build a new headquarters there as the first step in a remade office district. Now, it is seeking approval to allow for a faster construction process should it ever have a tenant.

The vote came after a parade of fellow landlords and business owners—many of which were enlisted by Vornado to come speak—testified in favor of the plan, given that it would involve more than $100 million in transit improvements, including opening an underground passageway between Sixth and Seventh avenues. The Durst Organization and Madison Square Garden were among those in favor of the project, and there was also support from the Regional Plan Association and the Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

Many community board members seemed almost offended that Vornado had requested both an air rights bonus for its transit improvements and an additional increase in the density beyond what they would normally be allowed (one called it "double dipping"). Still, community boards often vote against projects, and some board members did acknowledge that this was a good space for a tall building. 

The rezoning plan now goes to Borough President Scott Stringer for his non-binding recommendations. Ultimately, the City Council must approve or deny the plan, and the local  member is Council Speaker Christine Quinn. 

ebrown@observer.com

A Massachusetts woman has sued Vornado Realty Trust, claiming that her September 2009 stay at the Hotel Pennyslvania caused her to “to be bitten by bugs in the bed and/or premises provided by defendants."

The rather overwrought lawsuit reads:

“[P]laintiff was caused to sustain serious injuries and to have suffered pain, shock, mental anguish; that these injuries and its effects will be permanent; as a result of said injuries plaintiff was caused and will continue to be caused to incur expenses for medical care and attention; and plaintiff was and will continue to be rendered unable to perform plaintiff’s normal activities and duties and has sustained a resultant loss therefrom.”

While the litigant's allegations do seem a tad overblown, bed-bug-caused PTSD is not unheard of.

She does not specify how much in damages she is seeking.

Vornado did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This is not the first time the Hotel Pennsylvania, at Seventh Avenue and 33^rd Street, has gotten a bad rap for bed bug infestation. In 2005, a group of tourists sued the hotel after having been bitten by bed bugs there. They ultimately settled for $100,000.

That said, bed bug infestations are notoriously difficult to eliminate.

According to the University of California Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, "Managing a bed bug infestation is a difficult task that requires removal or treatment of all infested material and follow-up monitoring to ensure the infestation has been eliminated and does not return. Management will require employing several nonchemical methods such as vacuuming, washing bedding at a high temperature, using steam or heat treatment, and sealing up hiding places."

Vornado chairman Steve Roth is not the only New York landlord tarred by bed-bug infestations recently. In the past two years, the Penguin building at 375 Hudson was infested; as was, allegedly, the News Corp.-occupied 1211 Avenue of the Americas. Maybe Rupert Murdoch could offer him some pest-management advice. 

drubinstein@observer.com

More from Dana Rubinstein:

City Beats LeRoys for 'Tavern on the Green' Name

In the Shadow of the Boom

Ay Papi! Murdoch's Mexican Moment

Just as the markets were starting to unwind in October 2007, real estate titan Steve Roth thought he'd hooked a giant fish. Merrill Lynch had been through a tortuous, hard-fought search for a firm to build its new world headquarters, and after pitting Mr. Roth and his Vornado Realty Trust against developer Larry Silverstein and landlord Brookfield Properties, the investment bank's CEO, Stan O'Neal, gave Mr. Roth the nod. Merrill Lynch wanted a new, Vornado-built headquarters across from Penn Station, on the site of the Vornado-owned Hotel Pennsylvania.

But just days later, preoccupied with $7.9 billion in write-downs, Merrill's board held off on voting on the headquarters plan, instead ousting Mr. O'Neal. The proposed $3 billion tower plan followed him out the door.

Now Mr. Roth, the hard-charging billionaire chairman of Vornado, is doing what can best be described as readying himself for the next Merrill.

On Feb. 8, Vornado began the city's land-use review process, the seven-month cavalcade of criticisms, recommendations and demands from residents and officials, which is the most significant public approval needed to demolish the hotel and build a new tower in its place. The reason for the review's start, according to statements Vornado representatives have made to government officials and others, is not because demolition of the Hotel Pennsylvania is imminent. Rather, the firm wants to be ready to pull the trigger should it ever find another tenant, saving itself the uncertainty and time requirements that come with public approval.

The Pelli Clarke Pelli-designed tower Vornado is proposing to build would be a giant arched obelisk, one that, at 1,216 feet, would soar to a few hairs short of the Empire State Building's peak and would eclipse all but the under-construction 1 World Trade Center to become the city's third tallest building. Vornado has been mostly silent on the topic publicly, but based on plans filed with the Department of City Planning, the firm has two similar designs it is putting through public review: One is for a single office tenant with a podium of large trading floors; the other, a slightly smaller tower, allows for more retail.

To win this shot of added density on the site, Vornado is offering an inducement of transit improvements, including the reopening of the "Gimbels Passageway," an underground walkway linking Penn Station and Herald Square, which has been closed for nearly three decades.

"It's going to be a tough one," Kevin Finnegan, Community Board 5's land-use chairman, said of the tower proposal. "It's really big. It's humongous," he added. "At the same time, it is an ideal place for a large building because of its access to transit, and there are significant and important improvements to the transit infrastructure."

THE EFFORT TO PREPARE the Hotel Pennsylvania for an office tower is part of a far larger scheme of Mr. Roth's. In the mid-1990s, he bought up much of the neighborhood surrounding Penn Station in a bet that an expanding midtown Manhattan would next sprout office towers in the long-grungy, transit-rich district. At the same time, he pursued a redevelopment and expansion of Penn Station that stood to open up millions of square feet of new development.

But despite his anxious and bullish stance, Mr. Roth has earned a reputation for being one of the more patient developers in the city. For about a decade, he sat on the vacant site of Alexander's department store on 59th Street and Lexington Avenue before he ultimately signed the expanding Bloomberg LP and built its new headquarters.

He's now waited an entire real estate cycle with no major steps toward the transformative goals for the "Penn Plaza" area (though rents did rise), apparently content to keep sitting on his 7 million square feet of property until the time is right.

To that end, the 1919-built Hotel Pennsylvania holds little nostalgic value in Vornado's heart. Talking to Vornado investors in 2008, Mr. Roth referred to it as "a placeholder, sort of like a parking lot," until a tenant can once again be wooed to the area. Then again, the firm has vacillated at times, saying it might renovate the hotel to draw a higher-end clientele.

At the market's peak, the Pennsylvania, with its dimly lit lobby and dingy rooms, was a cash cow, as demand for hotel rooms skyrocketed while the supply stayed mostly constant. In 2007, Vornado reported $38 million in earnings on the hotel; in 2008 it grew to $42 million. (Vornado and other partners paid just $159 million for it in 1997.)

But this year, with tourism down and smaller, limited-service hotels opening their doors, its numbers have tanked. Through September, at the latest filing, Vornado reported $7.8 million in earnings from the hotel, down $21 million through the same period the year before.

As of yet, it's unclear just how high the hurdle will be for Vornado to win public approval of its tower. Local residents are sure to have concerns with the density—its proposed size is larger than the Empire State Building—and there is a set of preservationists who have been trying to landmark the McKim, Mead & White-designed Hotel Pennsylvania, to no avail thus far.

On the other hand, Vornado is permitted to build a rather tall building without any approvals at all, and it is entitled to a "transit bonus" of density, provided that the transit agencies and community are content with the improvements being offered.

And then there are the union workers in the hotel, who have not yet made much noise about the proposed tower (though they did join in a push to landmark the hotel in late 2007). A new office tower would, after all, mean the demolition of the 1,700-room hotel and the jobs inside, but given the economy and the dearth of would-be tenants lining up to occupy the tower, it's not as though a wrecking ball is imminent.

Whatever resistance there is will become clearer in the coming weeks. The plan goes before the community board, which may give a nonbinding recommendation on the tower. Ultimately, any changes would likely come as a result of pressure from the City Planning Commission or from Council Speaker Christine Quinn, the local representative for the tower. Both must vote in favor of the project if it is to proceed.

ebrown@observer.com

In paperwork filed with the Department of City Planning, Vornado indicates it wants to rezone the site on 33^rd Street and Seventh Avenue to allow for the development of a skyscraper of up to 1,198 feet, one that could hold one major tenant with a large set of trading floors, or a multi-tenant building with a large base of retail.

Mr. Roth, Vornado's chairman, has long billed the 1.4 million-square-foot hotel site as a prime development parcel, part of what he imagines as a completely remade office district surrounding Penn Station (Vornado owns about 7 million square feet of commercial space in the area and has the potential to develop millions more if the redevelopment of the station, known as Moynihan Station, ever happens). He previously called the hotel “a placeholder, sort of like a parking lot, but in this case with $22 million of earnings.”

In order to be permitted to build the 2.85 million square feet, Vornado would reopen the so-called Gimbels Passageway, a subterranean pedestrian tunnel that runs from Penn Station at Seventh Avenue to the subways at Sixth Avenue and Broadway. That move would give Vornado extra density through a transit bonus written into the zoning, though Vornado would also request additional density beyond what is allowed, according to the documents filed with the city.

Vornado has told officials and community members that they have not made any final decision to raze the hotel, and the firm is undergoing this process in order to keep its options open (executives previously said they were considering renovating the hotel). Still, the move represents a significant commitment of resources, time and consultants (to name a few on Vornado’s payroll for the project, according to city records: Patricia Lynch & Associates, Connelly McLaughlin, Stantec; Kramer Levin), and it will likely provoke at least some community resistance.

Some preservationists—though not the main preservation advocacy groups [Update: we should note that the Historic Districts Council was supportive of landmarking]—have been pushing for the designation of the McKim, Mead & White–designed Hotel Penn as a city landmark, a move that would likely bar its destruction. However, the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission in early 2008 issued a letter saying it would not take action on the building as it did not find it to meet the qualifications.

Ultimately the rezoning will need approval from the City Planning Commission and the City Council. On land-use decisions like this, the Council is influenced heavily by the local council member, currently Speaker Christine Quinn.

The filing with City Planning (a draft scoping document that precedes a seven-month approval process) comes a bit more than a year after the site very nearly became the intended home of Merrill Lynch. Mr. Roth has said he had a handshake agreement with then Merrill CEO Stan O’Neal to build the firm’s new headquarters on the site, though the bank’s board never took up the action in a late 2007 meeting, and Mr. O’Neal was forced out shortly thereafter.

On a slightly unrelated note, the paperwork sounds a hopeful note on Moynihan Station (where Vornado is one of two designated developers), saying “it is conservatively estimated” that by 2014, the following will be complete:

• "Redevelopment of the Farley Complex with approximately 235,000 gsf of office use, 125,000 gsf of hotel use, and approximately 553,000 gsf of destination retail space;

• Development of the Penn East site [between 33^rd and 34^th streets along Seventh Avenue] with approximately 1.9 million gsf of office use and approximately 71,000 gsf of destination retail space; and

• Development of the Penn West site [between 33^rd and 34^th streets along Eighth Avenue] with approximately 574,000 gsf of hotel use, approximately 37,000 gsf of retail space, and approximately 490 residential units."

Now, the paper is listing the old Glenn Miller hangout among its "10 Endangered Buildings Worth Saving" -- No. 2, in fact, just behind Harlem's Corn Exchange Bank.

That's about $5 million more than it made over the same timeframe in 2007, when the hotel ultimately netted $37.9 million.

At this rate, the old Glenn Miller hangout could surpass the $45 million mark in 2008, though declining demand might lessen the final tally.

Daily rates at Hotel Pennsylvania presently start at $219 -- that's $30 cheaper than in August. Rates are generally more expensive in November, which is traditionally peak travel season in New York City.

What, you were expecting the posh Hotel Carter?

Now, MTV wasn't around during the Swing Era, but has Kurt Loder and company bothered to peek inside the old Glenn Miller hangout recently?

(Read The Observer's extensive coverage here.)

"Save The Hotel" activist Gregory Jones once took issue with my use of the term "fleabag" to describe the dowdy would-be landmark on Seventh Avenue.

But, come on, luxurious?

Vornado recently applied for a Certification of No Harassment from the city, which, if granted, would by no means guarantee demolition but is apparently a prerequisite for tearing down the semi-grungy hotel across from Penn Station.

Vornado, which owns that site and many others in the area, hasn't made up its mind on what to do with the hotel (at least not publicly), and last word was that the company would do one of three things: put a giant office tower in its place, put a smaller office tower in its place with large retail, or simply spruce up the hotel.

Back last fall, the company was painfully close to landing Merrill Lynch as an anchor tenant in a planned giant skyscraper at the site. Chairman Steve Roth has bemoaned that he had a handshake deal with Merrill CEO Stan O'Neal, who was forced out shortly thereafter. Merrill then dropped those plans amid major fiscal woes.

The no-harrassment application was filed with the city's Department of Housing Preservation and Development on July 25, according to the agency's Web site.

"I hope we get to see the cat's pajamas," quipped one quick-witted attendee, as guests sipped $20 purr-tinis while cooing at the various costumed kitties in the hotel's famed Round Table Room.

But something was missing. "We can't find Matilda," an organizer confessed.

The resident blue-eyed Ragdoll -- who was rumored to have been hiding out in the hotel's Blue Bar -- will just have to get used to having other critters around.

The splashy celebration, which benefitted the North Shore Animal League, also marked the beginning of a new pet-friendly policy at the Algonquin, which had previously prohibited guests from checking in their own animals.

That rule seemed rather "hypocritical" to general manager Gary Budge, who noted that the hotel has featured its own four-legged mascot ever since a disheveld stray cat, named Hamlet by actor John Barrymore, crawled into the lobby back in the 1930s.

Other cats and dogs up to 60 pounds are now welcome, with litter boxes, latex gloves and waste bags available at the front desk, making the Algonquin perhaps Manhattan's most furry-friendly lodge outside of the Hotel Pennsylvania, unofficial host hotel of the annual Westminister Kennel Club Dog Show.

The so-called Algonquin [Heart]'s Pets Program is just one of several improvements at the renowned hotel, built in 1902, which has also undergone a $4.5 million renovation, including new furniture, lighting, carpet, bedding and frames for its collection of artwork.