After months of being shrouded in secrecy, more and more details are coming to light about a proposed multi-unit housing development in Maplewood Village — as the township and the developers have taken their disagreement public during the town’s public effort to adopt its amended Fourth Round affordable housing plan.
Over the weekend, 161 Maplewood Investors LLC released a “note to the public,” a press release, FAQs, and numerous legal documents about their proposed 65-unit multifamily housing development on 161 Maplewood Avenue (the former Bank of America building) and Inwood Place — as well as the lawsuit they have filed seeking a builders remedy. The developers wrote that their efforts are not “driven by self interest” but that they believe in “affordable housing [as] a constitutional responsibility and a reflection of community values,” and that they “have a strong, experienced development team that understands the town, its history, and its needs. This is not a speculative venture assembled from afar; it is a team committed to responsible development and long-term partnership with the community.” Read more here.
At a special meeting of the Maplewood Township Committee on March 11 to adopt the township’s Fourth Round Housing Element and Fair Share Plan (all related ordinances were passed), Mayor Vic De Luca read a statement presenting the Township’s side of the story.
In the statement, De Luca revealed that the township first met with the developers in May 2024 and that the original proposal included the Maplewood Theater and all parcels in the redevelopment area. De Luca said that the developers “ignored our guidance” and presented one proposal that included as many as 158 units of housing (32 of which would be affordable) across the entire redevelopment area, despite the township’s directive not to exceed 100 units, or 60 per acre. Ultimately, the Loffredo family opted not to sell the Maplewood Theater and the developers came up with alternative plans at 161 Maplewood Avenue (the Bank of America Building) and 11 Inwood Place.
Read De Luca’s full statement below.
Village Green asked De Luca why the negotiations regarding the proposed development were not made public before. De Luca responded, “It was negotiated in private because 161 Maplewood LLC file an objection and it was assigned to a judge for mediation. In a normal zoning negotiation, we would discuss items publicly. In this case public discussion was not possible due to the legal constraints.”
Despite the passage of the affordable housing plan, the lawsuit by the developers continues. Should the judge grant the developers relief, the township would lose immunity and the developers would be allowed to bypass local zoning, including density and height restrictions, to build a project with “significant” affordable housing. The developers are proposing that 13 of the 65 units will be affordable.
However, after the Planning Board ruled on Feb. 19 against including 11 Inwood Place in the Movie Theater Redevelopment Area (losing 3 affordable units), the Township adjusted its Fourth Round housing plan on Feb. 26 to meet its obligation and has expressed confidence that it will satisfy a suit by the Fair Share Housing Center.
Read more Village Green coverage of the proposed 161 Maplewood Investors LLC Bank of America/Inwood Place development:
- Facing Backlash, Inwood Place Developers Say They ‘Care Deeply’ About Maplewood
- Inwood Place Developers Say They Are Seeking Legal Remedy to Build 65 Units
- Maplewood Seeks to Avoid ‘Unnecessary Litigation’ In Affordable Housing Share Plan & Inwood Pl Development
- Maplewood Planning Board Recommends Against Adding 11 Inwood Pl to Redevelopment Area
Statement by Mayor Vic De Luca
March 11, 2026
Maplewood Township Committee Meeting
On March 8th, the developers, 161 Maplewood Investors LLC, issued a press statement and a set of frequently asked questions. These developers, Reed Kean and Octavio Mendes, are entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.
The truth of the matter that these developers have tried to maximize the number of units from the very first meeting the Township had with them on May 24, 2024. At that time, they proposed an apartment building that included the bank property, movie theater, municipal parking lot and the property at 11 Inwood Place.
At that initial meeting, the developers asked us “to partner with [them] by providing as much guidance as to what [the Township] envision[s].” We gave them guidance that day, saying the building was too high and the massing too dense. We told them our ceiling was 60 units an acre or about 100 total units for the entire redevelopment area.
It appears the developers ignored our guidance when on January 14, 2025 they came back with a proposal for 140 housing units for the entire site. Again, we told them the project was too much and too dense for the Village.
So, what did these developers do? Their lawyer wrote a letter to the Township on May 15, 2025 proposing a development of 158 residential units on four properties in the redevelopment area. This included 32 affordable units.
And as to our vision, the Township Committee made it very clear in its approval of the initial Housing Element and Fair Share Plan on June 17, 2025. “The Movie Theater Redevelopment Study consists … [of] the former Maplewood Theater, former bank of America property, commercial properties and parking areas. The Township envisions a density of up to 100 residential units to be constructed within the redevelopment area. The redevelopment of these properties will allow multi-family residential development with an inclusionary 20% set aside, or up to 20 affordable housing units, to contribute towards the Fourth Round unmet need.”
Once the sale of the movie theater was off the table, these developers came back to us with a proposal for 85 total units just on two properties, the bank building and the property at 11 Inwood Place. The building proposed was six stories high.
The Township rejected that density and agreed to a total of 65 apartments with 20% affordable. This included the property at 11 Inwood Place so that the height of the building could be within the 55 feet limitation set forth in the draft redevelopment plan and the building’s massing could be reduced. The Township Committee kept its word and asked the Planning Board to include 11 Inwood Place in the redevelopment area. The Planning Board rejected the inclusion of 11 Inwood Place.
Faced with that reality, the Township Committee had to act to protect its immunity from other developers seeking remedies, meaning they can go beyond regulations in our building code. The Committee went back to the initial Housing Element number of 100 total units with 20 affordables.
Fifty total units were to be built on the bank site in the short term, and 50 total units would be built in the future on other properties in the redevelopment area. Of the 100 units, 20 would be affordable units.
And what did the developers do. They threatened lawsuits. They continue to hide behind an easement between the two properties they own, an easement that the property owners can get rid of. They have not come to the table to discuss alternatives.
These developers talk about the constitutional mandate for affordable housing. We agree. These developers should include more than 20% affordable units. They can build 100% affordable units if they want. The Township will work with them to get that done.
As to any claim that Maplewood is not taking its affordable housing obligation seriously, let me share what the Fair Share Housing Center wrote in their filing with the court on August 30, 2025. “Maplewood has made tremendous progress on its affordable housing obligations over the past decade, the [Fair Share Housing Center] hopes to work with Maplewood to continue that progress.”
In conclusion, the Township’s Housing Element and Fair Share Plan is solid and will produce affordable units over the next ten years. These developers – Reed Kean and Octavio Mendes – should sit down with us and come up with a plan to get these affordable housing units built.
