Developer challenges Dickson City’s ‘exclusionary’ data center regulations

Dickson City Development LLC, a company linked to local developer Jim Marzolino, has filed a land use appeal in the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas, seeking to void Dickson City Borough's recently adopted zoning ordinance concerning data centers. The appeal, filed on March 13 by attorney Michael Mey, names Dickson City Borough and its council as defendants, alleging the ordinance unlawfully excludes data centers, delegates authority improperly, lacks uniform standards, and is inconsistent and vague. The borough council had unanimously approved the ordinance on Feb. 12, defining and restricting data centers to specific areas as special exceptions requiring approval from the borough's zoning hearing board. This decision followed three public hearings where residents packed the Borough Building and Civic Center to voice their opposition to data centers. Dickson City Development contends that the new ordinance, which requires a minimum of five acres per data center and imposes 200-foot residential setbacks, creates "compounding barriers that render data center development practically unattainable." The developer argues that the borough previously permitted data centers under broader language allowing "data processing and record storage" in highway commercial zones, and that the new ordinance did not explicitly repeal this prior allowance. Mey also claims procedural noncompliance under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, asserting the ordinance was not prepared or submitted to planning commissions as required, and alleges violations of the state's Sunshine Act due to overcrowded meeting spaces. Marzolino, president of Kriger Construction Inc. and affiliated with Dickson City Development, has been involved in several data center proposals, including a 620,000-square-foot facility in Archbald and the Project Gravity campus, and previously withdrew plans for data centers in Blakely. The developer is asking the court to declare the ordinance void, annul its adoption, or remand it back to the borough for reconsideration.