New York Chateau, Estate of the Day
Yesterday's estate was a modern version of a French chateau. Today's version is the real deal, a 17th century Chateau which was shipped to the United States in the 1920's. It now sits on 6.7 acres in Upper Brookville, NY. The listing says that the seven-bedroom chateau which measures 6,800 square feet has been renovated for today's living, but we'll have to take their word for it since there aren't any interior pics. The outside is pretty fantastic though with all sorts of antique stone details.
The NY Times did a story on this home when it was listed at $6.995 million last year. it turns out that the home is from the village of Les Petits Thons in the Vosges area of France, about 120 miles from Dijon. Ashbel H. Barney, part of an old New York family, shipped an entire wing of the Château des Thons, to New York. Rumor has it that this is where Voltaire carried out his affair with Madame de Chatelet but that turns out to be a myth. If the home looks familiar you might have seen it in the background of ads advertising various products. It is now listed at $5.995 million.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
eric bonwit Dec 12th 2007 1:32PM
Seems kind of a waste to have an "estate of the day" without interior photos.
boulderhorn Dec 12th 2007 2:07PM
I like the home. The article mentioned that it has been used in some ads. I have a friend who's newly built modern home in atlanta (worth about 1.5 million) brought in $15,000 this year in photoshoots. His home has its own 'agent' and everything. They charge $2500 a day just to take picture in it. What is this world comming to when homes have their own agents. :)
Spectacular Bid Dec 13th 2007 8:12AM
It's been a while since 'Estate of the Day' has featured a mansion of taste, proper proportions, yet restrained presentation. Just compare this to the junk being pitched endlessly above $10M.
The well known and exceptionally lovely estate has, as the NYTs article cites, been used in a lot of premium ads and other print shoots. In fact one could say that is its stock and trade with bookings likely defraying a great deal of the upkeep costs and insurance. I'm sure since it’s been featured in Chubb Insurance ads they provide coverage ;>
Although claims of a renovated interior? Well only if it was done this year. As you can see from the link below (for the mgmt co. that books photo shoots at the Chateau) the interior as of Sep 2006 is not renovated IMHO. It is however very much in keeping with what you'd expect for an old Gold Coast manor house.
At a price under $6M you couldn't buy more charm on the North Shore for less. Taxes are likely rather high (at least ~ $60k/year) but few homes could boast of a unique history, mixed with great architecture and wonderful landscaping like this.
http://www.thelocationcompanyny.com/mansions/9000-zb.htm
C.K. Dexter-Haven Dec 13th 2007 1:27PM
Hey Spec,
Thanks! That was a great link you provided...as always...
Dutch Dec 13th 2007 10:17AM
The real deal??? "a 17th century Chateau which was shipped to the United States in the 1920's", Hahaha! the american version of the Real deal!!!
armchairarchitect Dec 13th 2007 2:19PM
That's about as nice as it gets in the New World. The roof is a work of art. Methinks I could do it (just need to check the piggybank first).
Perhaps doesn't qualify as a "Great Estate," now that a neighbor is visible from the pool area -- and vv, of course (see Spectacular Bid's link above). Invite the neighbors over to skinny dip with you?
beanspants Dec 13th 2007 5:32PM
Sorry folks, but this is not a nice house from an architectural standpoint. It's old, it's an original, but it's design is as mish-mashed as everyone claims mcmansions to be.
look at pic 3. The windows and doors don't match up, and have multiple designs and multiple levels. that's crap.
Spectacular Bid Dec 14th 2007 10:33AM
Beanspants, tour the countryside of England, France, Italy and you'll see plenty of farmhouses and country estates which have grown over time with those quirks.
Gilded Age architects worth their salt took that into consideration with their creations of the ‘teens and 1920s for clients wanting to capture that feel.
Rambling visual effects with rooflines and alternating stone work were used intentionally to make a house look like it was an ancestral center. I have no qualms with the final product – it likely has thicker walls, a sturdier roof, a more sound foundation, and overall vastly better construction materials then found today – and it would always give a first time viewer a wow impact upon seeing it.
The fact that one wing of the building *intentionally* has a lower roofline and with it dormer windows is found in plenty of designs by the best American architects of that era building new homes.
beanspants Dec 14th 2007 4:05PM
shut up. it's ok because they built it over time, therefore they didn't need to follow a master plan but could bulid whatever? that's an incredibly poor justification. it's authentic, they had their reasons, i get that. but it is bad. it's not good architecture, unless the definition of good architecture = old. it's not.