Mayor details West Windsor plan for fourth‑round affordable housing after court settlement, ties growth to taxes

Mayor Hemat Marathi told the West Windsor Township Council on June 16 that the state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) initially assigned West Windsor a fourth‑round affordable housing obligation of 661 units, that the township contested that figure, and that a court settlement with the Fair Share Housing Center set a requirement of 480 units.

The mayor said the township’s housing element and fair‑share plan, which he said will be presented to the planning board and posted on the township website, will seek to build 241 actual affordable units and claim 51 additional units in credits — a total of 300 units — while the township’s own land analysis would support a requirement of 236 units. “We immediately realized that the DCA had used faulty data and had included the land that had an approval for warehouse on the large 600 plus acre Atlantic Realty site,” Marathi said during his state of the township remarks.

Why it matters: Marathi framed the housing numbers as central to controlling growth, school enrollment and the municipal tax burden. He said uncontrolled new housing can “lead to higher taxes, thereby putting a squeeze on seniors with fixed income and middle class residents,” and argued that the township is balancing competing goals of protecting existing residents, supporting economic development and meeting court obligations.

Key details discussed at the meeting: - DCA allocation and challenge: Mayor Marathi said the DCA used three criteria (including available land) to calculate 661 units; West Windsor challenged that figure and passed a resolution saying it believed the requirement was 392 units. The township and Fair Share Housing Center later reached a settlement the mayor said fixed the obligation at 480 units. - Township plan and credits: The mayor said the township’s plan “goes well beyond” its own land analysis and hopes to rely on a mix of 241 new affordable units plus 51 credits (conversion/credits) to reach 300 units. He also said the plan will be voted on by the planning board and then endorsed by the council on June 25. - Growth, warehouses and tax tradeoffs: Marathi said West Windsor has approved only one roughly 300,000‑square‑foot warehouse on Route 571 near the East Windsor border and contrasted that with about 2.5 million square feet of warehouses either built or under construction in neighboring East Windsor. He said that occupying certain parcels with approved commercial uses reduced the town’s potential fourth‑round housing requirement by “almost 425 affordable units.” - Revenues and fees: The mayor said the single West Windsor warehouse has paid $1,027,555.48 in an affordable‑housing fee (and that 50% of that fee has been collected) and that, when completed later this year, that project was expected to contribute “approximately $1,000,000 in taxes of which roughly $600,000 will be school taxes.” He also later stated that, if fully built, the project could contribute about $14,000,000 in taxes; both figures were presented by the mayor in his remarks. - Assessed values and taxes: Marathi said total assessed value in town rose from $5,973,000,000 to $6,153,000,000 during his time in office (a roughly 3% increase) and described municipal tax changes as largely flat over the past eight years while county and school levies rose more substantially. He said municipal taxes on an average home increased about $61.42 cumulatively over eight years (about $7.67 per year), while county and school tax increases were larger (figures discussed in the speech).

What’s next: The mayor said the township will file its fair‑share housing plan with the court before the end of the month and expects the planning board to hold a public meeting on June 25 where the housing element and fair‑share plan will be considered. The mayor emphasized that the plan is intended to balance the needs of existing residents with new development.

The account above is based on the mayor’s state‑of‑the‑township remarks and related council discussion during the June 16 meeting; no final court judgment or completed development was reported at the meeting.