Launch Event Thursday for 20 Henry Street

The sales office of 20 Henry Street, located at 114 Henry Street, will host an  opening event this Thursday, November 20 from 6-9pm. Guests will be entertained with live jazz courtesy of Chris Washburn and the SYOTOS Band as well as a “winter whites” tasting from Michael Towne Liquors. The event is free and open to the public. To get a spot, RSVP to .

The spaces renovated at 20 Henry Street were officially launched on the market on November 10th.

Built in 1864, it derives its historic status as the old Peaks Mason Mints factory. The Peaks Mason Mint company was in business here between 1892 and 1949. According to “Mason Peaks was a coconut-chocolate combination (like Mounds) while Mason Mints was a chocolate-covered mint patty (like today’s Peppermint Pattie). Mason also made Dots, a fruit or cinnamon-flavored gumdrop, and Crows, a licorice-flavored gumdrop. Both are still distributed by Tootsie Roll, which acquired Mason in 1972.”

The building now houses 38 loft apartments ranging from $580k to $2.46 million, spread between the original Peaks Mason Mints factory and the new 4 story addition built in the space of the old garden.

The apartments themselves will retain the original wooden structural beams and columns from the Peaks Mason building, but will feature new Landmark approved energy efficient windows in the style of the old ones and white oak hardwood floors. Amenities will include a fitness center, bike room, Bosch appliances, a washer and dryer in each apartment and a full time doorman. The Middagh building, which is the original Peaks Mason Mints building, will have a green roof, while the Poplar building, which is the addition, will have roof access.

“The Poplar building takes its architectural style from the north wall of the historic building, interpreting 1960’s industrial motif into a modern classic. Modern elements include floor to ceiling glass windows, open kitchens and loft style living,” explains spokesperson Jill Feldman.

In between the two buildings will be a landscaped courtyard replete with trees, grass, benches and a very mod statue thing.

For floor plans, individual unit pricing and more information visit or you can call the Halstead Property, LLC at (866) 924-7120.

Share this Story:

, ,

  • revroth

    Nice… too bad this all came to pass via the eviction of all the longtime residents at the hands of the current owners, who bought the place and refused to renew any leases. Hopefully karmic revenge will come in the form of the current drought of renters in the area (I hear that a lot of the recently built luxury buildings are having much trouble filling units)…

  • nabeguy

    Funny how they take their inspiration from the north wall and then obscure it up with the new building. 60’s industrial motif..yeah, that’s a look I want to emulate.

  • AEB

    “Guests”? Who are these guests? I didn’t get no invite.

    I feel snubbed. I’ll show them: I won’t buy an apartment.

    So there!

  • WU

    current owners are not the ones that took building out of mitchell lama program. not sure if karma jumps a generation.
    current owner is the one that paid over $320 psf for existing bldg and new buildable FAR.
    going to be hard to turn a profit via ‘for sale’ condos or rentals at that entry price.

  • my2cents

    I LOVE that North wall :-)
    I love how unexpected it is, and it looks like a Robert Mallet Stevens building almost. I sure hope they keep it with the factory style windows. I love that whole building. I am glad it will finally be occupied. I don’t see any reason to complain about it going Condo. It is good for the north heights.

  • revroth

    WU, thanks for the correction. I had discovered this myself and was just typing a new comment on this to post.

    That acknowledged, I still have a hard time feeling good about affordable housing for artists evolving into yet more luxury spaces. I understand that the new owners had to maintain that change to make back their nut, but that doesn’t mean they’re not taking part in the transformation.

    John Varvatos defended his turning of the former CBGB’s into a luxury retail space with the claim that he doesn’t set the market rates for RE, but by taking the space and paying the rent, he IS supporting the marketplace and its trends, and he IS doing it in that particular and historic location.

    Similarly, I respect that a gig is a gig, but it didn’t compute for me to see a local musician I respect, who plays at a lot of community-based and/or underfunded arts spaces, performing at a celebration for a new luxury living establishment created through the de facto evictions of artists and their families. Again, I don’t want to sound like I’m coming down on Washburne personally–but it’s a weird transaction that big money in NYC is pricing out creative musicians from living and performing here, and then hiring them to play its events celebrating their evictions.

  • revroth

    My2cents, I’m genuinely curious, not trying to challenge you–how is the substitution of luxury condos for affordable housing good for the neighborhood, or NYC at large? I’m always willing to hear another perspective… Thanks for any elaboration you care to share, and if not, no hard feelings.

  • ABC

    I think the mitchell lama program was a great example of the city and private developers working together. But a deal is a deal. 20 years (25?) of affordable housing for tax credits and other perks. And then when those 20 years are up, they can cash in. But people are so outraged when they do cash in. That’s the deal! We will never have more mitchell lama-ish programs since developers all see the backlash that invariably crops up.

    And many many people in 20 Henry were not artists. Most were not. And why artists anyway? Why not teachers? Why not nurses? Why not disabled? Why not immigrants? Why not pretty people? I see how artists contribute to a vibrant society, but so do all sorts of groups of people. I’ve never understood this idea.

  • my2cents

    I agree that direct substitution of affordable housing for luxury housing is not a great thing (like if they turned Stuy town or Starret city to all market rent). But in this specific case, from where I stand I see a great building that was empty and rotting as long as I have lived here turning into a well maintained living place (without being torn down or disfigured to boot) which will bring more people to the north heights. That’s why I think it is win-win. There is no way to make those units affordable housing given the cost of buying the place and renovating. So lets at least make nice housing out of it. Gentrification is not always a dirty word, and I feel that most of the people who complain loudest about it are the very same people who are agents of said gentrification (see Williamsburg).

  • my2cents

    As a matter of fact that is one reason I chose to live here: It was gentrified way before I got here, so I have no reason to feel guilty. :-)
    We should make Bklyn Heights t-shirts : Gentrified since 1881 or something…haha

  • etc

    The building was empty only because all the prior tenants were evicted to flip the building to a developer. And the building was “rotting” because, according to court filings, the landlord stopped making repairs and let the building rot in order to get the prior tenants to leave. Further, it’s not true that there was no way to make the units affordable – any number of buildings that have come out of Mitchell-Lama have managed to let the prior tenants remain in their apartment and still make a profit, i.e., by offering the tenants the ability to buy in at a reduced rate or negotiating a reasonable lease.

    Gentrification is one thing; forcing people who have made their home in the building (and, of course, neighborhood) for two decades out into the streets to try to find a market-rate apartment they can afford so that the developer can sell more condos to millionaires is another. Just because the developer owes no further obligation to the state or city after the expiration of the Mitchell-Lama period does not mean they have no moral obligation to people who have made their home there.

    How about because teachers and nurses have steady sources of income while even successful artists only sell pieces occasionally? Also, plenty of middle-income housing was designated for people with steady, yet lower incomes including teachers, municipal workers, nurses, etc. Think Stuyvesant Town, Peter Cooper Village and dozens of other large developments around the city. Moreover, the developers who took advantage of the tax breaks and perks available under the Mitchell-Lama program did not do so out of the goodness of their hearts and take a vow of poverty for the duration – rents paid were adjusted periodically to ensure that landlords could make a profit, and tenants who made more than the maximum allowable income were subject to a surcharge.

  • ABC

    all the artists I know who only sell pieces occasionally work day jobs.

    and I know one of the lawyers who represented the tenants at 20 Henry LIVED in 20 Henry. wtf?

    it’s true that other buildings have come out of M-L and offered tenants reduced rates. or rather, have been sued, protested against, etc until they did so. and that’s why we’ll never have a program like this again. way to go people!

  • my2cents

    I want to say that I feel a little silly, because although I have lived here for a few years, I thought that 20 Henry was never a residential building until now, and that it had been previously zoned as industrial like much of the loft buildings in Dumbo. So forgive my ignorance. Having said that I still maintain that I am happy at how this particular building is being renovated. I think it is well established that landlords and developers in New York have no moral obligations to anyone whatsoever (ahem, ratner?)…it’s just the way things are; especially under a pro development mayor like Bloomberg.