Back in July we posted about this newly built 25,000 square foot 24-room stone mansion located at 105 Chestnut Ridge Road in Saddle River, NJ. Well we just found out that the CORE Group in NYC now has the listing and has put up high quality pictures along with floor plans. The mega mansion is situated on 4.5 flat acres and features a 2-story foyer with wraparound balcony, banquet sized reception rooms, 5 bedrooms, 7 full and 2 half bathrooms, indoor swimming pool with two 24 foot water features, 5 fireplaces, porte-cochere with courtyard parking, 4-car garage, massive terraces, lighted tennis court and more. It is listed at $19,000,000.

CLICK HERE FOR THE LISTING

  • Tony

    This is Joe Gorga quality with a little bit more sophistication lol




    0



    0
  • Daniel

    How convenient! I can just copy and paste my thoughts from the last post!

    One of the coldest, most unwelcoming homes I’ve seen in a while. The owners must be allergic to landscaping. The living room with the swimming pool is convenient…I could drown myself in it without going outside.




    0



    0
    • Tony

      Is that swimming area actually the living room or are you joking? I knew it was an indoor swimming area but I thought it was somewhere to the side of the house or something. There’s not actually a pool in the living room?




      0



      0
  • Marie

    Only 5 bedrooms for a house that big? crazy truly unimpressed with other aspects of it as well.




    0



    0
  • NOVA Ben

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…I’m well aware that there are tasteful, well-done homes located within the boundaries of New Jersey, but it’s SO rare that we see them on this site. I’ll let you guess which group this falls into.

    The actual physical house aside, I’m also not a fan of the floor plan. What the hell were they on when they decided to have the only entrance from the left-side garage be through the LIBRARY and the entrance for the right-side one through the SITTING ROOM? The “Great Hall” is one of the biggest wastes of 1,620 square feet I’ve EVER seen, and the whole indoor pool being integrated into the rest of the house remains a stupid idea to me. The only thing I like about the floor plan is the loft areas for each of the secondary bedrooms. They seem like great fun for the kids, and when they grow out of having a pretend treehouse, they can set up their video game room up there. That’s about it. The rest makes me want to vomit.




    0



    0
    • ted

      i completely agree.




      0



      0
  • george

    I usually think we are overly critical about the postings, this time I think we are being too kind. The person who drew up the plans has to be from outer space. The builder stands a better chance of getting money back from Bernie Madoff than making a profit on that P.O.S.




    0



    0
    • george

      Remember, Richard Simmons much larger, much nicer house sold for 10 mil. and they want 19 mil for this P.O.S.




      0



      0
      • Kenny Forder

        Richard? You mean RUSSELL lolol




        0



        0
        • george

          you are right sir




          0



          0
  • Grrrowler

    I know I’m pretty harsh on most houses here, but I always try to find something redeeming, even if it might take a skilled decorator to create that thing. However, there are no redeemable qualities in this house. The best thing for this place would be to recycle the building materials for Habitat For Humanity. Out of this 25,000 square feet of hideousness could be made a couple of dozen small but much more tasteful houses.




    0



    0
  • Harry

    I could see someone with an intense interest in swimming (Michael Phelps?) building a house like this, but they would never get their money back out of it. The indoor pool is nice, but not nice enough to maintain a position as the centerpiece of the entire home.

    Altogether the house just feels unbalanced…the foyer is too big in comparison to the rooms, the pool is too small to be a focal point, etc.




    0



    0
    • Kenny Forder

      I agree with the last part. The formal rooms seem too small in comparison to the foyer and also I would have preferred a grander staircase. I mean, if you’re going to have a grand, cavernous foyer, you better have a grand staircase to fill it!




      0



      0
  • Chicago

    I wish it was more symmetrical. Why is there a bidet in his bath? And why do you have to walk through her closet to get to that balcony?




    0



    0
  • Chicago

    And where’s the laundry room?




    0



    0
  • george

    This is more like a shopping mall than a house. The large center hall and the small stores -rooms- . This is the dream house of any teen age girl.




    0



    0
    • James

      Haha thats a good thought george maby i should buy it for my daughter so she can fill it with clothes haha it does look more like a doll house floor plan than a house floor plan anyway haha




      0



      0
  • DR.VEGAS

    Big.Ugly.
    This is what you come up with for a spec. home?
    Aimed at a “new money” Chinese or Russian customer?




    0



    0
  • James

    There is soemthing about this house that i dislike but i cant quite put my finger on it…. Hmmmm oh yeah now i know what it is…. Its the pool in the place where a great room should be haha this is a dumb floor layout 🙂




    0



    0
  • ZigZagBoom

    This is horrifying on so many levels, most everything has already been covered by the beloved peanut gallery of usual suspects ;-). HOWEVER, I will comment on two “oddities” for this type of construction that make me think the “architect” was at least aiming for one notch above complete buffoonery, although he still miserably failed. The overall “shape” of the floorplan is a tiny improvement over the typical American mega-McMansion, which has a bone-headed preoccupation with widely distending the facade as if to show “look at how much house I can own, bitches”, to anybody who sees it from the street. The grand estates of Europe, broadly speaking (no pun intended) do not commit this faux pas. Take, for example, the floor plan of Highclere Castle (http://janeaustensworld.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/highclere-castle-floor-plan-the-real-downton-abbey/) or Balmoral (http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p33/LeRoiSoleil_2006/Queen%20Victoria/bc-ground-floor.gif) On the continent things get a bit wider (http://www.vaux-le-vicomte.com/img/img_rdc/plan_rdc.jpg), sometimes ridiculously so with certain royal residences: (http://goo.gl/maps/oi52x), but, obviously the scale of something like that vastly exceeds anything built in North America with private rather than feudal wealth, including even Biltmore. (which rather masterfully handles a broad facade) BUT, in spite of this somewhat better shape of the residence, it’s still a totally hideous house. ALSO, as for the lack of “landscaping”. I challenge ANYONE to find a non-urban palace in Europe with the mish mash of 20 different types of shrubs and trees plopped in front of the house as “foundation shrubs” so favored by American parvenus. If the architecture is beautiful enough, no “foundation” is needed. Almost all stately homes there look like this: http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/211/4/b/Castle_Howard_Stock_3_by_Queenselphie.jpg I don’t see any need for “foundation plantings” do you? If there are planting, they are limited to one or two types of evergreens who shape is very controlled. On this building, the architect was apparently trying to have a European “forecourt”, but the cheesiness of the facade just makes it look silly.




    0



    0
    • george

      ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????




      0



      0
  • marc22

    I know what he was trying to say. Foundation planting really is a 20th century landscaping thing most often blamed on the U.S. Build a house and plant 10 spindly evergreens and bushes against the foundation and maybe a tree in the center of the lawn and call it a day. Most historical landscaped featured plantings in formal settings away from the perimeter walls of the house itself, including most early American homes. A formal classical facade should and can stand on its own and doesnt need foundation plantings. Just note Biltmore, The Breakers, the Elms, Rosecliff, etc. in Newport.

    That being said, this house is just damn ugly. No landscaping could help that.




    0



    0
    • george

      Thank you for the translation.




      0



      0
    • ZigZagBoom

      Thanks, I guess! Not sure why I was so hard to comprehend.




      0



      0
  • lambskin

    The mosaic in the foyer looks like a band-aid. How would you keep the chlorine smell from wafting throughout the house? Plus it has to be chilly since you could not keep the room temp higher. It does have a big dining room-albiet ugly.




    0



    0