Whatever happens with the fiscal cliff, no one expects the gift tax exemption to be as generous next year.

They say nothing is certain except death and taxes, but—as estate planners know—there’s nothing particularly certain about those either, especially this year. In the month and a half since Barack Obama won re-election, the only thing wealthy New Yorkers have been sure of is that if you want to give a gift, the time to do it is before January 1. And if you want to give the gift of your co-op apartment, well, you’d better hope for a holiday miracle.

If (or more likely when) America hurtles over the fiscal cliff, one of the casualties will be the $5.1 million gift tax exemption. When the ball drops in Times Square, it will revert back to $1 million. The inheritance tax, meanwhile, will leap from 35 to 55 percent.

Attorneys and property managers say that they, and countless boards around the city, are being bombarded with requests—many of them late-breaking—to transfer apartments to trusts before the window closes. Of course, at this point it’s practically impossible to get a meeting with a co-op board, let alone secure the necessary approvals. (Assuming your board even allows such transfers—and more than a handful do not.) During the first nine months of the year, the financially prudent rushed in, now only the fools remain.

“We represent several hundred co-op or condo buildings, and we’ve never seen this many transfers taking place that must be by year end,” Eva Talel, a real estate lawyer at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, told the Transom. “For people who want to transfer, there’s a very big financial consequence if it happens, and there’s a lot of pressure on managing agents to make it happen.”

“This impacts New Yorkers in particular, because in New York a lot of people have a big portion of their wealth tied up in their apartments,” she added. And in New York, older residents planning their estates have often lived in their apartments for decades, watching values climb from well under a million to well over it. Unfortunately, it is difficult in a uniquely New York way as well, since only in New York do people own multimillion-dollar homes over which they have limited control.

While many boards are more familiar with trust transfers than they once were—a number of residents prefer to buy with them—they’re neither quick nor easy, noted Mary Ann Rothman, the executive director of the Council of New York Cooperatives and Condominiums. Ms. Rothman told the Transom that her office has spent the last few months fielding calls from perplexed co-op dwellers, calls that continue to come despite the all-but-impossible deadline.

“For decades it’s been an estate-planning device, but it doesn’t happen at the snap of fingers,” said Ms. Rothman. “The board wants to make sure it doesn’t lose one iota of control. And of course, there are still some co-ops who won’t allow it. The kind of white-glove co-ops who want all-cash purchases, which most of the world finds rather difficult in the 21st century.”

But things might not be as dire as they seem. Whether we as a country run over the fiscal cliff or not, it’s likely that the gift tax will be higher than $1 million. Mr. Obama, who was actually responsible for raising the gift tax in the first place when he signed a piece of temporary legislation in 2010, has proposed setting it at $3.5 million, which would likely be retroactive.

This is good news, given that, even for people who live in buildings with the most accommodating co-op boards on earth, there’s another, more daunting problem with gifting an asset in late December.

“Right now you can’t get an appraisal for love or money, and that’s the case across the country,” said Steven Schanker, an estate lawyer with Schanker and Hochberg. “We’re still getting phone calls from people who want to gift, and I tell them it had better be cash.”

kvelsey@observer.com

We're sure the Beinarts can make this room feel more UWS.

There's something to be said for embracing stereotypes. At least as far as political pundit, intellectual and Open Zion editor Peter Beinart is concerned.

Sure, Mr. Beinart and his wife Diana might have found the perfect co-op in the Village or a trendy loft in Tribeca. If they wanted to follow the herd, or at least scions of The New York Times, they would have snapped up a place in Brooklyn.

But the Beinarts—who just purchased a classic six complete with great light and river views at 755 West End Avenue—are apparently in love with the Upper West Side.

And why not? It's a beautiful (and classic!) neighborhood for an intellectual wunderkind and his brood. The couple appear to be keeping things local, as city records notes they are moving just around the corner, haveing calledthe Rutherford at 360 Riverside Drive home. So there won't be any unpleasant surprises when they find that all the bookstores and independent coffee shops have been replaced by bank branches and Starbucks in the past 30 years.

The Bienarts dropped $1.9 million on the two-bedroom, two-bath co-op listed with Brown Harris Stevens brokers Gail Gros and David Everson. One of those is a sybaritic bath with stone tiled shower and Italian fittings—whatever that means. The apartment was most recently asking $2 million, a little under what sellers Marietta and Patrizio Tognozzi seem to have paid for the 15th-floor co-op in 2007.

The Beinarts will enjoy beamed ceilings, an eat-in chef's kitchen "enhanced by lacquered cabinets," river views from five of the six rooms and a maid's room that has been "seamlessly converted into an efficient office complete with built-in cabinetry and washer dryer," according to the listing. Beamed ceilings and hardwood floors are de rigeur, as much as the Persian carpets, artfully-arranged bookshelves and slightly-mussed sofa cushions.

kvelsey@observer.com

Wellington Tower Condo Board Says, "Play By the Rules: No Payment, No Pool."

Gracious living is the hallmark of life at Wellington Tower Condominium. Luxuries like a round-the-clock doorman, concierge and parking valet, a skylit swimming pool, on-site maid services, dry cleaning and spa facilities provide residents “with the very essence of living well.”

Unless, that is, a resident falls from grace.

A few years ago it became obvious to the board of the East 82nd Street building that not everyone was contributing to Wellington Tower’s luxurious lifestyle. A few occupants—not many, but a few—were more than a little bit behind on their common charges. And although they weren’t paying for the kinds of comforts that smooth out life’s rough edges, they were still enjoying them. This didn’t seem right to the board. So they cut the delinquents off.

“We decided it really wasn’t fair to allow them to use the same amenities,” said board president Rebecca Sheinberg. “Other people in the building don’t want to be subsidizing people who aren’t paying.”

So now, the doormen won’t accept packages for residents who are more than a few months’ behind, and their key fobs no longer open the doors to the pool, the gym or the playroom.
“We haven’t gone to the extent as some other people, like cutting off the elevator,” noted Ms. Sheinberg, pausing for a moment of reflection. “Besides, the elevator is situated far from the front desk, so it would be too hard to enforce. And going to the extreme like that, it wouldn’t be beneficial to the other unit owners.”

Such tactics may make genteel Gold Coasters draw a disapproving breath, but they are being adopted by a growing number of buildings in New York. And for buildings that embrace medieval life in more than their “baronial living rooms,” there is even public shaming.
“Some buildings will put notices of who’s delinquent in the halls, the elevator, at the front desk,” co-op and condo board attorney Jeffrey Reich told The Observer. “What you might call Scarlet Letter techniques.”

Depriving guests of luxuries is increasingly popular with boards, Mr. Reich said, especially at condos. Co-ops are in a “first lien” position, meaning that they collect before the mortgage-holder. Not only do they get paid first, but banks will often pay a delinquent resident’s maintenance charges. Condo boards, on the other hand, get paid last and must either collect the scraps following foreclosure proceedings or win a money judgment against a delinquent tenant.

Moreover co-ops, unlike condos, did not engage in the amenities arms race of the early ’aughts that brought swimming pools and golf simulators, acres of shared terraces and media rooms rivaling movie theaters—felicities that can easily push maintenance costs above $1,000 a month, even for modest units (and unlike co-op charges, theirs don’t include the property tax bill). Also, resentment builds much faster when you see your deadbeat neighbors sunning themselves by the pool.

“If one or more shareholders aren’t paying, the cash requirements still have to be met,” said Eva Talel, an attorney at the law firm Strook, Strook & Lavan, which advises hundreds of building boards and is the in-house counsel to REBNY. “It’s not just a matter of frustration—it can really become a matter of economic hardship, especially in smaller buildings.”
Restriction measures, Ms. Talel added, are not intended to be punitive—it’s just another means of getting the maintenance paid—but she admitted that they might feel that way.

“I haven’t heard of any fisticuffs on account of people having to go down to pick up their Chinese food,” Ms. Talel said. “But I expect that people are not happy when it happens. And that’s the idea.”

Fisticuffs no, but temper tantrums? Definitely.

“They create scenes,” sighed Midboro Management president Michael Wolfe. Midboro is careful to notify residents before they’re cut off, to eliminate surprises, Mr. Wolfe said, and publicizes the policy so that those with deactivated keycards will be less likely to rap at the doors with sob stories of mysterious demagnetizations. But still, there are scenes.
One of the on-site managers related to The Observer how one man last week became “very upset and screamed at the people in the pool to let him in: ‘I’m an owner here, how can you not let me in?’

“Usually, they’ll try to bluff their way out of it, but if it’s hot enough, they’ll come back with a check,” Mr. Wolfe quipped. “It is an effective tool. When the amenities are gone, certainly, life isn’t as pleasing as it might be. Also, it’s embarrassing.”

And what are the most “effective” amenities to cut-off?
“I think parking is the most painful, although I hate to use the word painful,” Mr. Wolfe struggled to find a softer word choice, finally settling on “the most motivating.”

Other management companies said that they have seen similarly promising results.

“People are angry, but sometimes things get resolved, or at least resolved quicker, when they don’t have access to the amenities,” explained David Wurtzel, the president of Cooper Square Realty.

And even the loss of small luxuries can be nettlesome. A resident of Chelsea condo Chadwin House who hadn’t paid his common charges for years and had a unit in foreclosure, pleaded with the judge to restore his doorman services if he started paying his monthly fees again, according to Robert Holland, a lawyer who represents the Chadwin House board.

“He was complaining that the doorman wouldn’t open the door for him or accept his food deliveries,” Mr. Holland said. The judge was sympathetic. The man started paying around $500 a month common charges, although, given that he still owes more than $40,000 to the board—a debt that remains unresolved—it’s hardly a fairy-tale ending.

Paul Brensilber, president of Jordan Cooper & Associates, the management company that oversees not only Wellington Tower, but a handful of other buildings that have taken a hard line on amenities, has mixed feelings about the practice.

“It’s never a good thing to have owners fighting against owners. It adds a lot of tension to the relationship between neighbors,” he said. “And while, from a sporting perspective, it’s interesting to watch, it puts the building staff in a bad position.

“If the goal is to get paid, I haven’t seen that yet,” Mr. Brensilber added. “But foreclosures take forever and a few shareholders can dramatically impact a condo’s budget. Other owners have to increase their common charges to make up for lost revenue. It’s ugly.”

Ugly is putting it mildly. At 95 Greene Street, a SoHo building that Mr. Brensilber also manages, celebrity photographer Kenneth Nahoum and his Victoria’s Secret model girlfriend, Basia Milewicz, stopped paying the common charges for the four penthouses they had amassed, units that accounted for some 20 percent of the building’s square footage and a good deal of its operating budget.

After phone calls, letters and liens failed to elicit any response from the couple, the building cut off elevator service to the penthouses (legal, since the building is only six stories) and removed their names from the door buzzer. At some point, Mr. Nahoum’s courtside seats at a Knicks game further fanned the flames. The board ultimately hung posters in the building with a photo of the couple at a Halloween party captioned “Why aren’t these ‘caped crusaders’ paying their common charges?”

“We didn’t have a lot of recourse. The legal system is extremely slow,” said board president Jesse Newhouse. “We knocked around a number of ideas and this was pretty much the only thing we could think of that was in any way enforceable and legal.”

The couple fired back with a $2.1 million harassment suit; the judge asked the board to remove the posters. One of the units has since sold, but the couple still owes the board more than $100,000, according to board attorney Robert Braverman, and everyone else in the building is paying 25 percent more every month to make up for the difference. Deprivation has worked in other buildings that he advises, Mr. Braverman said, but 95 Greene is “a very unusual, crazy situation.”

“It’s unfortunate that it came down to something as silly as that,” Mr. Newhouse reflected. “But we had someone who was gaming the system and there was nothing we could do about it. He had multiple units. He certainly had the opportunity to sell some.”
Had he lost faith in the method?

Mr. Newhouse sighed. “No. I mean we have to do something. I think it’s a war of attrition at this point, but we would be negligent if we did nothing.”

Mr. Nahoum was not available for comment. Like many of the other residents in arrears The Observer tried to contact, his listed number was no longer in service (phone companies, unlike condos, do not view cutting services as a novelty). The Observer did, however, reach Solomon J. Jaskiel, the lawyer who had represented the couple in the countersuit.

“Legally, I thought the poster was breaching the board’s fiduciary duty,” said Mr. Jaskiel. “Personally, I thought it was outrageous. Can you imagine if anyone who you owed money to could hang up signs in front of your house? I mean, the fact that they were living with these people—it’s even more outrageous!”

Still, the methods are not something that boards, brokers or management agents are all that eager to discuss. The practice seems a little indelicate, in the words of one source, or tacky even, as another whispered with gleeful reluctance. Prudential Douglas Elliman and Halsted property management declined to comment, and while Brown Harris Stevens admitted to using the practice, none of the buildings they manage wanted to talk about it.

They were even more reluctant to discuss public shaming, aka, posting arrears lists, although a few expressed shock and horror on even hearing that such a thing existed.

“I don’t think that’s appropriate. We don’t shun people!” cried Roberta Axelrod, who sits on the board of 10 buildings as a sponsor representative of Time Equities residential, where she is director of the sales and rentals division.

Certainly, some residents want to know who is in arrears, she admitted, but in her opinion, it’s none of their business.

Distasteful as the tactics may be—and even if they don’t persuade delinquents to pay up—they do serve some purpose. At Wellington Towers, the results of the austerity measures have been financially negligible, Ms. Sheinberg admitted, but they were certainly worthwhile.

“Has it caused people to pay their arrears?” she pondered. “I don’t know. But it has given the other unit owners …” she paused to find le mot juste. “I wouldn’t say satisfaction, that’s not the word. It’s almost like the punishment fits the crime.”

kvelsey@observer.com

Spring sales: there's just something in the air (orchidgalore/Flickr)

Ah, spring! The season of warm breezes, blossoming trees and brisk home sales is upon us. And last week saw a flurry of activity, with 22 contracts signed for homes $4 million and above, according to the Olshan Luxury Market report.

The number was a luxury market record for 2012, with the biggest contract signed for the $22 million duplex co-op at 88 Central Park West (12 room duplex co-op, park views, 6,000-square feet). However, most of the action was happening downtown and most of it involved condos (10 of the 22 contracts signed were for downtown condos).

"One thing I can say absolutely is that condos are outselling co-ops two to one and downtown is as popular as uptown," said Donna Olshan, author of the eponymous report and a brokerage firm bearing her name.

And it's not only new developments. Downtown townhouses are also selling well, with 17 sales in 2012 (compared with 9 on the townhouse obsessed Upper East Side).

And what makes downtown condos and townhouses so popular? Well, no one is particularly fond of the co-op approval process, and it's even less popular among one of the largest pied-a-terre seeking crowds—foreigner buyers. Ms. Olshan noted that Jonathan Miller had recently estimated that foreign sales were responsible for as many as a third of condo and townhouse sales, up from roughly one-in-five.

The average asking price for condos $4 million and above was $2,530 per square foot, Ms. Olshan said, with the average size being 2,991-square-feet. Ms. Olshan said that the second week of February also saw a lot of action—with 21 contracts signed, but "this is the spring market," (20 contracts were signed last week).

During the same week last year, there were 16 homes in contract in the $4 million and above price range.

"Last summer we hit that terrible August with the meltdown in Greece and Congress not being able to pass the budget. The theory is that a lot of people who were interested in buying hit the pause button," said Ms. Olshan. "Now, the spring is playing catch-up and we're seeing demand from tons of people."

kvelsey@observer.com

Get out the bleach? (carlpenergy, flickr)

Many a New York basement and unventilated bathroom is thick with the stuff; the city's courts may be next.

A few weeks ago, Manhattan's appellate court overturned an earlier decision blocking damage claims for health problems resulting from living in moldy buildings, The Journal reports—a decision that could result in a wave of personal injury lawsuits.

The court decided that scientific evidence now indicates a causal relationship between mold and health problems, opening a legal door that has been closed since 2008, when a judge found insufficient evidence that mold or a damp indoor environment causes illness.

The change has left building owners, co-op and condo lawyers worrying about the musty recesses of their buildings, and whether a damp basement could be grounds for a lawsuit, according to the Journal.

And worry they should. Last year, housing inspectors issued 15,942 violations for mold-related conditions, which could equal an awful lot of lawsuits.

Dwellers of dank apartments experiencing headaches, nausea and respiratory distress can thank Hell's Kitchen tenant Brenda Cornell for bringing mold back to the court's attention.

Cornell, who lived above a Hell's Kitchen basement that was "damp, musty, and harboring bugs and mice," is seeking $11.8 million in damages, according to the lawsuit.

Cornell said she experienced dizziness, chest tightness, congestion, shortness of breath, a rash, swollen eyes and a metallic taste in her mouth after workers started construction on a basement. The problems abated after Cornell fled the apartment, the lawsuit claims.

"It is going to result in a heck of a lot more lawsuits being filed by people who have mold- and moisture-related conditions and suffer from health effects," Bill Sothern, a certified industrial hygienist told the The Journal.

He may be right. In Texas, where mold-afflicted residents have been long been able to sue, the number of mold-related claims shot up sharply in the early 2000s, costing Texas insurance companies approximately $4 billion.

kvelsey@observer.com

740 Park

By now, word has traveled around New York's society circles that video game magnate Gregory Fischbach and his wife Linda have put their home at 740 Park Avenue on the market.

In this market, however, it can take a while for these palatial grandaddy apartments to sell. Neighboring unit 4/5C, for example, has been on the market since August 2008. Initially priced at $35 million that unit has embarrassingly been chopped a full twelve million, remaining unsold at $23 million.

Apparently the Fischbach's residence, on the 17th floor, will not suffer the same fate. It quietly came on the market earlier this year, and a source with close ties to the godly building has told The Observer that a prospective buyer has just passed the notoriously severe co-op board. A sale at 740, it would seem, is on the horizon.

The apartment was once owned by Thelma Chrysler Foy, the colorful socialite whose father was the auto-making legend Walter Chrysler. The Fischbachs bought the place back in 1994 for an unknown amount, though the apartment was listed at $6.3 million, according to Michael Gross' tome on the building. It seems times have changed, however, as the Fischbachs are reportedly asking $29 million for the place.

The Observer placed a call into the apartment and briefly spoke to Mrs. Fischbach. "You know what, we're just in transition right now so were not sure," she said warily of the sale. When we asked about a prospective buyer passing the co-op board gauntlet, the conversation went colder than relations between Kent Swig and Liz Macklowe, the divorced residents of the limestone wonder. "You know I actually don't want to speak with you," she said politely before hanging up.

eknutsen@observer.com

You, under this.

Co-ops are the dominant form of for-sale housing on our fair isle, more difficult to get into (persnickety boards that have recently gotten that much more uppity) and generally more expensive to buy (bigger down payments and more stringent financial requirements). They account for roughly two-thirds of the Manhattan housing stock, with condos comprising much of the rest.

But, for a while there during the last decade, condos overtook co-ops as the preferred housing choice, maybe due to looser mortgages or just the simple ubiquity of all those gleaming, new towers. This reporter recalls offhand a study done by The Real Deal magazine that showed more than 9,000 condos proposed for Manhattan in 2005 alone—and most of them subsequently got built.

It appears, though, that the dowager has risen. Co-ops now firmly account for a majority of the apartments sold in Manhattan. According to the latest quarterly report from appraisal firm Miller Samuel and brokerage Douglas Elliman, co-ops accounted for 51.5 percent of Manhattan apartment sales in the three months ending June 30. In the three months of this year, they accounted for 59.7 percent. In the quarter before that, at the tail of 2010, they accounted for 51.6 percent... three straight quarters now of majority rule by co-ops. It's like the Republicans back in control of the House: more money and more exclusivity in the ranks!

For a time, though, the co-op share of sales had sunk well into the minority, falling as far as to 34.6 percent in the first quarter of 2009. For entire years during the boom there, while financing flowed like imitation Champagne and condo marketing ascended to Olympic levels of silliness, condos consumed the lion's share. Not anymore. Carry on.

The nicest newsroom in town. (Property Shark)

Rancher Tom Brokaw and his wife Miss South Dakota Meredith Auld Brokaw recently downsized their New York spread, buying a two-bedroom co-op at 33 East 79th Street. Their 10-room duplex at 941 Park Avenue went into contract back in April, but this being a New York City co-op, these things take time. The purchase just closed for $10 million, according to city records.

The buyers are David Shapiro, a founder of private equity firm KPS Capital Partners, and Abigail Pogrebin. No trophy wife she, Ms. Pogrebin is the daughter of Ms. magazine founder Letty Cottin Pogrebin and her twin sister, Times scribe (and Observer alum) Robin Pogrebin. In addition to publishing a book two years ago about being an identical twin, One in the Same, Ms. Pogrebin worked for Charlie Rose, as one of his eponymous show's original producers, and later Bill Moyers and 60 Minutes. Her first book, published in 2005, is Stars of David: Prominent Jews Talk About Being Jewish, and she also regularly corresponds for the nation's top magazines.

Keeping the journalist quotient going, the building is also home to Kathy Black, as well as TKTK. The home came on the market a little over 11 months before it closed on May 25, asking 12 million. That price was reduced to $10.75 million at the end of September.

"Located in one of Park Avenue's premier white glove co-operatives, this high floor palatial and sun-drenched prewar twelve into ten room duplex apartment features some of the most spectacular formal entertainment space in New York with fabulous sweeping city views," write Cathy Franklin and Alexis Bodenheimer in their Brown Harris Stevens listing. Because we all know Mr. Brokaw is the consumate entertainer.

The three-bedroom spread is an off-set duplex, with a large living room, library and dining room on the first floor connected by a grand 28-foot gallery. The maid's quarters have been converted into a office with built in, perfect for writing about the greatest generation or the greatest Jews. Upstairs, the master suite features a walk-in closet for him and a dressing room for her with six closets. That is unless Mr. Brokaw was the clothes horse--you've got to look good under those klieg lights.

Read past Manhattan Transfers here. >>

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

Home sweet tax loophole. (Getty)

Graduation season just commenced, which means gifts for grads. In most of the country, that’ll be a new MacBook, maybe a car. Here in Manhattan, it means another Times trend piece about parents buying a $1.15 million condo—complete with rock climbing wall and spa—just for the kids.

Why would they do such a thing? Let’s let mom and dad explain:

• A mother who is listed with her son on the proprietary lease for a studio that closed for less than $265,000: “With the interest rate and the price that we found, we couldn’t not do it.”
• A dad who purchased a $250,000 studio in a co-op building with a doorman, for which his daughter will pay just the maintenance fee: “The whole process was long and painful, but I believe it was worth it, because we know she is living in a safe and good place.”
• The dad behind that $1.15 million climbing-and-cleansing condo: “We didn’t buy this place for Olivia. We bought it as a family place.”
• A dad who “took advantage of the gift exclusion,” buying his twins an $800,000 two-bedroom apartment to sneak under the $1 million cap: “It was a great price and it was a way for us financially to give them money without having to die.”

efoxhall@observer.com

Forty-two rooms, 15,000 square feet total on two floors, all of it inside the lustrous limestone  prewar co-op at 907 Fifth Avenue. It could be the listing of the young century, the most sought-after apartment in the entire city, and all the more so because of its seller.

Huguette Clark, who died last week at 104, was a reclusive copper heiress whose father's wealth once ran second only to John D. Rockefeller's. She sealed herself off for decades in 907 Fifth, surrounded by old masters, antique dolls and loyal attendants. When she finally left her home 22 years ago for a succession of hospitals, Clark was almost forgotten--except for the whispers about the phantom spread on Fifth, which tantalized brokers and buyers alike.

Now, with Clark's death, the scramble begins. "Every broker in the city will be lining up for this," a veteran of their ranks told The Observer last week. "It could get crazy rather quickly."

It could also take quite a while. Clark's attorney and accountant are under investigation for possibly tampering with the will of their client, though they counter that her estranged relatives are simply making a bid for her estimated $500 million fortune.

Not only did Clark die in seclusion, she died without any direct descendants. Her older sister succumbed to meningitis in 1919, and Clark herself was married for only two years in the late 1920's. The resulting divorce was what sent her back home to 907 Fifth and toward assembling one of the biggest apartments in the city's history.

Huguette and her mother, Anna, had moved to the 12th floor after the death of William Clark in 1925, leaving behind an even gaudier 121-room mansion at 960 Fifth Avenue built just for the robber baron in 1903. The 28-room penthouse mother and daughter took at 907 Fifth seems modest by comparison--even if it had set a rental record when it was first leased to a Standard Oil executive for $30,000 in 1915.

When Huguette moved out in 1928, Anna moved downstairs to take half of the eighth floor, believes architectural historian Andrew Alpern, who studied the Clark homes for a book she was working on--since nixed in the face of opposition from the attorneys. When Huguette moved back, she wanted the other half of the eighth floor but it was unavailable, so she was given half of the 12th, which by then had been subdivided. Eventually, the other half of the eighth became available and Huguette moved in while keeping the penthouse. Thus was born the monster spread.

"That's a whole lot of square footage, but that's the great thing about this apartment--it was originally intended to be this big," Corcoran's Leighton Candler said. "The scale of the apartment is built for the size of the apartment--at that big an apartment, that's incredible scale."

No such space can be found in the city's other top buildings, because it either never existed or, like the rest of 907 Fifth, was broken up amid the Great Depression and postwar white flight. Probably nowhere else could one find a 30-foot library followed by a 40-foot drawing room followed by a 40-foot living room. "If you stood with your back to the fireplace in the library, you could see out to Central Park through the living room window that is almost 110 feet away!" Mr. Alpern wrote in an email.

By comparison, the city's last two record-setting co-ops are Rupert Murdoch's $44 million, 15-room triplex at 834 Fifth and the 17-room duplex at 1060 Fifth that traded for $48.9 million at the height of the market in 2008. Probably the only thing bigger is Steve Schwarzman's 37-room triplex at 740 Park, which is estimated at 20,000 square feet.

The media have valued Clark's home at $100 million, but the provenance of that sum is unclear and seems at least a little bit absurd. Consider that the State Suites at the Plaza, which are about the same size as Clark's eighth-floor spread alone, sold for $39 million last year. Still, a price tag of $60 million to $75 million seems possible, assuming someone wants that much space.

"Even in this world of New York real estate, I don't know who wants 42 rooms, especially split over two floors," said Michelle Kleier, head of Gumley Heft Kleier. "They're all dead or bankrupt." There is also the issue of one person controlling so many shares within the co-op.

Corcoran's Wendy Sarasohn, who has sold a number of units in the building, believes a buyer for that kind of space does exist, given the pedigree and rarity. "I think in the same way everybody was eager to look at Brooke Astor's apartment, and possibly buy it, to claim a bit of old New York, it's the same thing," Ms. Sarasohn said. "This woman was from one of the wealthiest families. I think there is more intrigue and more mystique. And that brings more interest. Maybe she's the Greta Garbo of Fifth Avenue."

The fact that the home has not been subdivided and reconstituted, and that neighbors say Clark maintained it to the highest standards, with near-daily cleanings even after she moved out, could help inflate the price.

Which broker might be so lucky to land the listing is another matter. At least one joked that because her daughter attended Spence, Clark's alma mater, it would give her a leg up. Mr. Kaiser said, with the prospect of a massive commission check looming, any advantage possible would be used. "Somebody in the dollhouse business who will auction off the dollhouses or somebody who's a shareholder in Kennecott Copper, which, gee, her father founded, or 'My last name is Clark, and we're the Clark Bar family.'

"But at the end of the day it will come down to the same few brokers with the same handful of clients who have the money and could afford this kind of apartment."

mchaban [at] observer.com | @mc_nyo