275 Kingsland Street (ON3)

Where this stands: No site-plan application has been filed with the township, so the Planning Board review that would carry public comment has not begun. The next Board of Commissioners meeting is August 18, 2026 at 7:00 PM, Parks & Recreation Room 201, 44 Park Avenue, and includes a public comment period.

275 Kingsland Street is an 11.5-acre piece of land in Nutley, at the southern edge of the former Hoffmann-La Roche headquarters campus, now called ON3. It has sat largely empty since Roche left, and what should be built on it has been contested for years. A warehouse and truck terminal was proposed in 2020 and withdrawn after residents organized against it.

In July 2025 the township adopted a redevelopment plan for the site. That plan makes a data center one of the uses permitted here, and it cannot be amended for 30 years without the property owner's consent. Since then no application to build anything has been filed, and there is no agreement on what will actually go up. A banner on the site's fence advertises the land for data-center use; township officials say no such application has reached them.

The parcel

A parcel is a single legally defined piece of land.

• Where: 275 Kingsland Street, south of the Kingsland Street and Cathedral Avenue intersection. The plan places it about 750 feet south of Nutley's border with Clifton, so the parcel itself sits within Nutley.
• Size: Approximately 11.5 acres, irregular in shape, with about 1,181 feet of frontage on Kingsland Street and a maximum depth of about 600 feet. It is part of the roughly 119-acre former Hoffmann-La Roche campus, now ON3.
• Owner: Prism Capital Partners, or a related entity such as Kingsland Street Urban Renewal LLC. See also Prism's own page for the ON3 campus.
• Neighbors: ON3 hosts a Hackensack Meridian medical school and life-sciences tenants. The parcel backs onto residential streets: Cathedral Avenue, Terrace Avenue and Hillside Avenue. Nichols Park and the Third River lie to its west.
• On the fence: a banner reading "On3. 65 Megawatts of Power. Zoning Approved with Pilot." A PILOT is a negotiated flat payment that replaces normal property taxes, explained in what a PILOT is. Source: TAPinto
• Existing power on the campus: the ON3 co-hybrid power plant is 10MW. Source: Patch
• Governing document: the Roche Southside Kingsland Street Redevelopment Plan (Block 2000 Lots 1, 4, 5 and Block 2101 Lot 1), prepared by FAR Planning and adopted July 1, 2025. It is the document that decides what can legally be built here. The township's full archive of Roche redevelopment documents is at nutleynj.org/roche.

Timeline

• 2020: Warehouse and truck terminal proposed. Prism applies to build a warehouse and truck terminal on the parcel. Residents organize against it, and the petition "Stop Warehouse Construction from Destroying Nutley" gathers more than 2,500 signatures. Source: TAPinto
• March 2025: Nutley appeals. After a NJ Superior Court ruling directs the township to consider the warehouse application, Nutley files an appeal. Source: The Jersey Bee
• June 17, 2025: Settlement, and new redevelopment plans introduced. The Board of Commissioners agrees to settle its disputes with Prism. Ordinances 3589 and 3590, adopting redevelopment plans for the Kingsland Street and Innovation Center sites, are introduced. Prism agrees to withdraw the truck depot application. Sources: the settlement announcement and the truck-depot withdrawal, both nutleynj.org
• July 1, 2025: Ordinance 3589 adopted. Public hearing and adoption of the Kingsland Street Redevelopment Plan, which permits data-center use on the parcel and makes it a permitted principal use. Sources: Ordinance 3589 (PDF), nutleynj.org/roche
• July 21, 2025: Data center reported. Patch reports the site can accommodate "a major data center and other permitted uses," and notes that Nutley has approved multiple PILOT agreements for ON3. Source: Patch
• June 11, 2026: Mayor says no application has been filed. In the State of the Township address, Mayor John V. Kelly III addresses the data-center rumors directly. Source: nutleynj.org
• July 16, 2026: Prism describes the project publicly. Principal Gene Diaz gives an interview setting out the size, power and water figures Prism has in mind. Source: BINJE
• July 21, 2026: Residents press the Board of Commissioners. Residents use public comment to ask officials about the banner and the rumored data center. Source: TAPinto

What the redevelopment plan allows

Everything in this section is quoted or summarized directly from the adopted Roche Southside Kingsland Street Redevelopment Plan, the governing public document.

Permitted principal uses. The plan permits, and states it "encourages," a mix of these on a single lot: data centers, offices, senior and assisted living, scientific laboratories, fabrication and assembly of technology and life-sciences products, research and product-development laboratories (excluding animal testing), pilot plants, clinical laboratories, self storage, infrastructure and utilities facilities, active and passive recreation and open space, structured and surface parking, and roadways. Anything not listed as permitted or accessory is prohibited.

A substation is a conditional use, and may occupy up to 40% of the redevelopment area, including setbacks and buffers.

Bulk standards. Maximum building height 75 feet. Maximum building coverage 40%. Maximum impervious coverage 75%. Minimum buffer 20 feet along Kingsland Street.

The zoning is locked for 30 years. "The provisions of this Redevelopment Plan and the restrictions with respect thereto shall not be amended for a period of not less than thirty (30) years from the date of approval by the Board of Commissioners without the express consent of the property owner."

"Should" does not mean required. The plan defines its own terms: "'Shall' means that a developer is required to comply with the specific regulation... 'Should' means that a developer is encouraged to comply but is not required to do so." That distinction decides how much of the environmental protection is binding:

• Encouraged, not required: air filtration systems; an air monitoring station near sensitive receptors with data published publicly in real time; non-diesel standby generators; a third-party acoustic study before and after construction; acoustic screening of ground-mounted equipment; cool pavement and a white roof; LEED compliance; truck-idling limits.
• Required: conformance with NJDEP noise standards under NJAC 7:29-1.2; submission of a sound study as part of any site-plan application; ultra-low diesel fuel if diesel generators are used; a noise-complaint liaison reachable 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. once operating; backup generators limited to 8:00 a.m.–10:00 p.m. Monday to Friday except during power outages.

So the sound study must be submitted, but the plan only encourages a third party to conduct it and only encourages the post-construction check.

A PILOT is anticipated, not granted. The plan says the township "anticipates that it would be eligible for a PILOT if the project commences within five (5) years of plan adoption," that any agreement is subject to governing-body approval, and that the developer would have to submit a preliminary fiscal impact analysis first. 🟡 Under New Jersey's PILOT structure the school district receives none of the payment, explained in what a PILOT is.

Still required before construction: a site-plan application and Planning Board review, which has not begun. And by Prism's own account, if the town breaches the 2025 settlement, Prism can revert to the industrial-warehouse proposal residents organized against in 2020.

What the township has said

• Mayor Kelly, State of the Township, June 11, 2026: "While there have been rumors of the redeveloper submitting an application to construct a data center, no such application has been filed. Further, any application for a data center will be carefully and thoroughly reviewed to ensure that the proposed development does not harm the health, safety or welfare of Nutley's residents or our environment." Source: nutleynj.org
• At the July 21, 2026 Board of Commissioners meeting, Township Attorney Bruno said he "cannot speak about this topic as much as he'd like" and described the plans as "back of a napkin." Mayor Kelly said Prism "has not come to us with an application," and called the fence banner "an advertisement to entice" tenants. Source: TAPinto

What the developer has said

Gene Diaz, a principal at Prism Capital Partners, the property owner, in a July 16, 2026 interview with BINJE. These are confirmed as his statements. The claims inside them have not been independently verified.

• The facility would be about 250,000 square feet across two stories, and not a hyperscale AI data center.
• DEP rules limit noise to 55 decibels, roughly a normal conversation at three feet.
• Water use would stay under 1 million gallons a day, against Roche's former 14 million gallon allocation.
• PSE&G has said it can handle the power demand.
• Target tenants are financial-services firms. He named NYSE, Bloomberg, Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan, with Digital Realty, Brookfield and Citibank named as potential operators, rather than AI hyperscalers.
• On how the use was chosen: "The town said, 'Why don't you build a data center?'"
• On the zoning: "The zoning is the zoning. They can't just keep saying I don't want this."
• He characterized community opposition as a "misinformation campaign."
• If the town breaches the settlement, Prism can revert to the industrial-warehouse proposal.

🟠 Unconfirmed

A concept plan circulating locally

A drawing headed "Exhibit D: Data Center Concept Plan" has been shared in the Nutley Parents Facebook group and other local groups. Its title block reads "PRISM DATA CENTER, OPTION 3," drawn at 1" = 100', credited to the architecture firm Corgan. It shows three data halls, each labeled "4MW" and 22,000 square feet at 181 watts per square foot; an office and loading dock; six blocks labeled "2MW", one of them marked "R"; a row of generators; an 8-foot ornamental security fence; and a "3rd Party Property, Future PSEG Sub Station" on the adjacent parcel. Its building stats give two stories and 260,000 square feet. It is stamped "Proprietary / Confidential information / For Settlement Purposes Only."

This document is not part of the adopted redevelopment plan. The full text of the plan contains no Exhibit D and no concept plan. Nothing has confirmed that the drawing is authentic, current, or a proposal Prism still intends. The "Option 3" label in the title block implies other options exist.

🟡 What the drawing does not settle is how much power the site would use. The three halls total 12MW, and 22,000 square feet at 181 watts per square foot works out to roughly 4MW each, so those labels are consistent with one another. The six 2MW blocks come to the same 12MW and sit between the halls and the generator row, which is where the electrical rooms serving those halls would go, so they most likely support the 12MW rather than add to it. But this is a single-level plan view of a building its own stats describe as two stories, the three halls account for only about 66,000 of the stated 260,000 square feet, and nothing on the drawing says what occupies the rest. It states no site-wide total, and it should not be read as establishing one.

The plan and the settlement are different documents

Locally the redevelopment plan is sometimes referred to as the settlement agreement. They are two documents: the redevelopment plan is public and linked above, while the settlement agreement itself has not been released.

Residents organizing

A residents' group has formed to organize around the proposal and, as of August 2026, said it planned to set up a Facebook page. Source: a post in the Nutley Parents Facebook group.

🔵 Open questions

About the parcel and the plan

• Will the township make the plan's optional protections binding? Air monitoring with public real-time data, non-diesel generators, and an independent post-construction acoustic study are all written as "should," which the plan defines as not required. The site-plan stage is where the township could attach them as conditions.
• When do residents get a formal say? No site-plan application has been filed, so the Planning Board review that would carry public comment has not begun. What the schedule looks like from here has not been laid out publicly.
• Why was the zoning locked for 30 years, and is there any route to revisiting it without the property owner's consent?
• What happened to the stormwater issue raised at the September 2025 Planning Board meeting, regarding ON3 runoff into St. Paul's Brook?

About the settlement and a PILOT

• What are the terms of the 2025 settlement agreement, and will it be released? It is the document that produced the current zoning, and the only version of events available so far comes from the parties to it.
• Would a PILOT be granted, and on what terms? The plan anticipates the site would be eligible if construction starts within five years of adoption, but sets no payment, duration, or formula. Under New Jersey's structure the school district receives none of it.

If a data center is built here

Nothing has been applied for, so these are conditional. They are the questions that would decide the impact if the permitted use is the one that gets built.

• How much power would it draw? The fence banner advertises 65MW. The three data halls drawn on the circulating concept plan total 12MW, and that drawing shows a single floor of a building its own stats call two stories. Nor is the load inside a building the same as the draw on the grid, which is higher once cooling and losses are counted. No official figure has been published, and nothing on the public record reconciles the two numbers.
• Who pays for the substation? The circulating concept plan shows a "Future PSEG Sub Station" on adjacent third-party property, while Prism says PSE&G can already handle the demand. If new infrastructure is needed, the question is whether Prism, PSE&G, or ratepayers fund it.
• Would the township have any say over who operates the facility? Prism has named potential tenants and operators, but whether the township can approve or refuse a specific one is unresolved.

Related law

Other New Jersey towns have restricted data centers, and one of them has been sued for it.

• Pemberton Township (Burlington County) amended its zoning code to prohibit data centers outright in named districts. 🟢 Ordinance 10-2026 was adopted after a public hearing on February 18, 2026 and approved by the mayor two days later. It writes "not including Data Centers, which shall be expressly prohibited" into the permitted uses of the GCLI, GCLI-1, GCLI-3 and OP/LI districts. 🟢 A second ordinance added the GCLI-2 district, which the New Jersey Pinelands Commission had found was left out of the first, and added a definition of a data center to the code. This is a ban in named zoning districts rather than a township-wide one, though it is often reported as the latter. Sources: Ordinance 10-2026, Ordinance 13-2026
• Monroe Township (Gloucester County) is the closer parallel, because what changed there was a redevelopment plan rather than a zone. 🟢 The Hexa Builders Redevelopment Plan was amended in 2025 to permit data centers, and two ordinances reversed it: one repealed that amendment and struck data centers from the plan's permitted uses, the other prohibited data centers throughout the township. 🟡 Both were certified for final passage on April 22, 2026 and were reported adopted that night. The copies the township posts are the introduced versions, so the adoption date is not confirmed from a signed document. Sources: Ordinance O:20-2026, Ordinance O:25-2026, CBS Philadelphia
• 🟢 Reversing course carries litigation risk. Hexa Builders sued Monroe for $300 million on June 5, 2026. The case moved to federal court in late July, and the township has moved to dismiss it. Source: The Philadelphia Inquirer
• Monroe also took a middle path. 🟡 A third ordinance, introduced May 27, 2026 and certified for final passage on June 24, sets a large-scale structure setback and buffering standards between intensive nonresidential uses and residential, institutional and recreational uses. It limits scale and siting rather than banning a use. Source: Ordinance O:27-2026

🔵 Neither route is directly available in Nutley. The Kingsland Street Redevelopment Plan already permits data-center use, and it carries a 30-year amendment lock. What a governing body can still do inside that lock is an open question.

• Data Center Fair Share Act (S731/A796). Signed July 7, 2026, it creates a separate utility rate class for data centers drawing at least 50MW, so that they cover their own grid costs. Whether it would apply here is unknown: no application has been filed and no official capacity figure exists, and the two figures in circulation fall on opposite sides of the 50MW threshold. Source: NJ Governor's Office
• Model municipal data-center ordinance (PDF), a template ordinance published by the Pinelands Alliance.
• NJ Board of Public Utilities, the state regulator for electric utility matters.