Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Higgins Redevelopment Recommendation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board recommends Higgins Avenue study area as non‑condemnation redevelopment area; Council to consider next steps
Summary
The Board recommended that a 14‑acre Higgins Avenue study area (36 parcels) be designated a non‑condemnation redevelopment area, finding 14 parcels met statutory criteria and several additional parcels necessary for effective redevelopment; the Board excluded two parcels (a pocket park and the Brielle Sports Club). The recommendation now goes to Council for consideration.
The Brielle Planning/Zoning Board voted on March 11, 2026, to recommend to Borough Council that the Higgins Avenue study area be designated a non‑condemnation redevelopment area under the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law (LRHL). The Board’s preliminary investigation covered about 14 acres and 36 parcels and concluded that 14 parcels meet criteria in N.J.S.A. 40A:12A‑5(d) and (h) and that other parcels are needed for effective redevelopment; two parcels (a pocket park at Higgins/Union and the Brielle Sports Club) were excluded from the recommended area.
Borough Planner Kendra Lelie presented the Preliminary Investigation Report (dated Feb. 25, 2026), described the statutory eight criteria used for the analysis, and explained that the study is a first step: it does not create new zoning or a redevelopment plan. Lelie said the study area includes Higgins Avenue between Sandy Court/Riverview Drive and the Route 35 ramp, parts of Union and Euclid Avenues, and several small commercial and residential lots. She estimated that a redevelopment plan, if pursued, could support on the order of 40–50 units in the study area but cautioned that such a build‑out is unlikely without site‑specific negotiations; the study’s purpose is to identify parcels that meet the statutory tests for redevelopment and to set the stage for a future plan.
Public commenters voiced concerns about potential density, building height, parking and traffic, stormwater and infrastructure capacity. Several residents questioned whether the town’s streets, water/sewer system and emergency services could absorb large redevelopment projects; Planner Lelie and Board counsel responded that the preliminary study assesses existing conditions only and that infrastructure and design standards would be addressed in the subsequent redevelopment plan if the Council accepts the Board’s recommendation.
Board members praised the thoroughness of the consultant’s work and moved to adopt a resolution recommending designation of the study area as a non‑condemnation redevelopment area (excluding Block 65.01 Lot 8 and Block 66.01 Lot 6). The motion passed unanimously. The recommendation is advisory to Council; any redevelopment plan, design standards or rezoning would be developed later and subject to further public hearings and Council action.
