The proposed flood wall, which is part of a larger $148 million flood mitigation effort, has raised concerns among residents about its design, effectiveness, and implications for property values. The wall, set to rise to an elevation of 14 feet, is intended to protect against future storm surges and sea level rise. However, community members questioned whether it adequately addresses the anticipated flood levels projected for the coming decades. The design is meant to allow for future adaptability, with possible height adjustments if necessary, but this flexibility did not quell residents’ fears about the wall’s sufficiency in the long term.

Economic concerns were a central theme, with residents worried about the project’s financial burden. Though federal funding covers a portion of the costs, the remaining $13 million would be borne by the borough, raising fears of increased taxes in an area already burdened with high rates. Questions were raised about whether an economic analysis had been conducted to evaluate the project’s impact on local businesses and property values. Apprehensions about property value depreciation and the potential for rising insurance rates added to the community’s unease.

Beyond financial implications, the flood wall’s potential to alter the town’s character weighed heavily on the community. Residents expressed fears that the wall would obstruct scenic views and limit beach access, fundamentally changing Highlands’ relationship with its waterfront. Concerns about the flood wall’s effect on daily life and local aesthetics, with potential loss of recreational spaces, were prominent. The need for visual representations of the wall’s design was emphasized, as residents sought to understand its real-life implications on community aesthetics and lifestyle.

Throughout the discussions, transparency and community involvement were repeatedly stressed. Residents sought clarity on the decision-making process, expressing skepticism over the non-binding nature of a forthcoming referendum on the project. The concern was that a “yes” vote might bind the community to construction, despite assurances that it would only move the project into further design phases.

The conversation underscored a broader anxiety about the town’s future, with some residents questioning whether Highlands was being unfairly targeted as a test case for flood protection measures. As the meeting progressed, the need for a coordinated approach to address the town’s flood risks became apparent. The integration of the flood wall with other drainage improvements and ongoing projects, like the FEMA-funded stormwater initiative, was highlighted as essential to effectively manage the area’s flooding challenges.