Dickson City to hold second hearing on Bell Mountain data center proposal
Dickson City's Zoning Hearing Board is reconvening to defend its denial of four proposed data centers by Dickson City Development LLC on Bell Mountain. The developer is appealing the denial and has also challenged the borough's data center zoning ordinance in both the zoning board and county court. This comes after the zoning board unanimously denied the developer's challenge to overturn the new data center regulations.
The Dickson City Zoning Hearing Board is preparing for a second hearing on Wednesday to address an appeal filed by Dickson City Development LLC. The developer seeks to overturn the borough's decision to deny four proposed data centers on Bell Mountain. This upcoming hearing follows an initial session on April 29 where testimony was heard from the developer's attorney, Michael Mey, and witnesses David Stiles of Kriger Construction and Jennifer Leonard of KCI Technologies. The borough's solicitor, Bill Jones, will now present his case defending the denial.
Dickson City Development LLC, a firm linked to Kriger Construction Inc., filed four zoning permit applications for data centers in January. Additionally, other limited liability companies affiliated with Kriger Construction applied in March to build at least three power plants near the proposed data center sites to support the operations. The controversy stems from a new zoning amendment adopted by Dickson City Council on February 12, which regulates data centers as special exceptions in specific light manufacturing districts, effectively restricting development in the highway commercial zones where the developer planned its facilities. The borough argues that its previous zoning terminology, which permitted "data processing and record storage," did not encompass modern data centers.
Adding to the legal complexities, Dickson City Development appealed the new zoning ordinance to both the borough's zoning hearing board and the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas. Although the zoning hearing board recently denied the developer's substantive validity challenge against the ordinance, the appeal remains active in county court. The developer also retains the option to appeal the zoning board's recent denial to the Court of Common Pleas. The upcoming hearing will allow residents to provide testimony before the board makes a final decision on the denied applications.