The proposal, submitted by homeowner Mike Jenkins, involves installing a basketball hoop and accompanying lights, which raised questions about compliance with zoning regulations. The council deliberated on the significant variance being requested, as the court is positioned approximately 22 feet from the property line, falling short of the 100-foot front yard and 25-foot side setback requirements for accessory structures in the R40 zoning area.

Lighting was a point of contention. Concerns were raised over the brightness of the lights, which are designed to comply with ordinance restrictions by being 15 feet high and producing less than 20-foot candles of illumination. However, residents and some council members worried about potential light spillage into neighboring properties, with suggestions made to adjust the setup to mitigate this impact. Jenkins argued that the lights would not operate past 11 PM and highlighted surrounding trees as a natural buffer, although the transient nature of foliage was noted, which might not permanently resolve light trespass issues.

The council entertained the idea of conducting a site visit, scheduled for October 20th, to assess the lighting impact firsthand and gather feedback from nearby residents. This visit aims to clarify whether the lighting meets ordinance requirements and determine any necessary adjustments.

The basketball court’s placement also led to discussions about the practicality and safety of the proposed location. Some council members and residents suggested alternative arrangements, such as a portable hoop, to alleviate concerns about basketballs straying into neighboring yards. Jenkins maintained that the current setup was optimal given the property’s topographical constraints, including a four-foot retaining wall that limits relocation options.

Public opinions were mixed. While some residents, like Michael Cork and Joe Romano, supported the proposal, citing safety and enhanced property values, others voiced reservations about the lighting. A resident suggested using cutoff devices to prevent light from spilling over onto their property, emphasizing the need for a peaceful living environment.

The meeting also addressed broader zoning implications, with discussions centering on whether the presence of a basketball hoop alone classifies the area as a sports court. This classification affects setback requirements and potential future disputes over property use. The council noted the need for clear, consistent application of regulations to avoid setting a precedent for similar projects.

In addition to the basketball court, the council reviewed several other resolutions. Resolution 2025-09 for a property on Hawthorne Avenue, involving an addition and pool installation, was approved after confirming compliance with setback requirements. Resolution 2025-08 granted a final extension for New Horizon Properties LLC to develop a convenience store and fuel service facility, emphasizing no further extensions would be allowed.

The council also discussed a minor subdivision amendment for 664 Canon Hill, which included ADA parking spots and curb modifications. This resolution passed with reaffirmed conditions from the Monmouth County Planning Board.