## Facts

- Parrillo’s, Inc. operated a restaurant and catering business in Belleville before 1955.
- In 1955, Belleville adopted a zoning ordinance placing the property in a “B” residence zone where restaurants were not a permitted use, making Parrillo’s a lawful preexisting nonconforming use.
- In 1978, Parrillo’s renovated and reopened as a discotheque/nightclub featuring dancing to recorded music and related entertainment effects.
- The new operation differed materially from the prior use in character and impacts, including later-night activity, amplified music, dancing, and increased neighborhood disruption.
- Parrillo’s did not obtain board of adjustment approval before changing operations.
- Belleville prosecuted Parrillo’s for violating the zoning ordinance by extending/changing a nonconforming use; the municipal court convicted.
- The Appellate Division reversed, concluding there was no prohibited extension or enlargement under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-68.
- The Supreme Court of New Jersey granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether converting a preexisting nonconforming restaurant/catering use into a discotheque/nightclub constituted an impermissible change or extension of the nonconforming use under the zoning ordinance and N.J.S.A. 40:55D-68.
2. Whether the municipality proved the zoning violation beyond a reasonable doubt in this quasi-criminal prosecution.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the Appellate Division and reinstated the municipal court conviction.
- The Court held that the conversion from restaurant/catering to discotheque was a prohibited change in the nonconforming use and therefore an unlawful extension without required approval.
- The Court found the violation proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Legal Principles

- A nonconforming use is a use that lawfully existed before a zoning ordinance and continues afterward despite not complying with current use restrictions.
- Nonconforming uses are disfavored because they conflict with the goal of uniform zoning; they are subject to strict limitation.
- The policy of zoning law is to restrict, not expand, nonconforming uses, including preventing increases or changes in the nonconformity.
- A nonconforming use may continue only if it remains substantially the same kind of use as existed when the ordinance was adopted.
- A change is permissible without zoning intervention only if it is so negligible or insubstantial that it does not materially alter the nonconforming use.
- In quasi-criminal zoning enforcement, the municipality must prove the violation beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Belleville’s zoning enforcement by treating the restaurant-to-discotheque conversion as a substantial change in kind and intensity that exceeded the protected scope of a preexisting nonconforming use, and it reinstated the conviction based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.


Town of Belleville v. Parrillo's, Inc., 83 N.J. 309, 416 A.2d 388 (N.J. 1980)