Jessup is headed to court after the borough refused to accept a developer’s application to build seven data centers on Breaker Street because of electric infrastructure proposed in a residential area.
Lackawanna County Judge Andy Jarbola scheduled virtual oral arguments Oct. 20 on Breaker Street Associates LLC’s attempt to compel Jessup to approve its submissions for a data center campus on the south side of Breaker Street off Hill Street, which the developer contends are deemed approved. Judge Terrence R. Nealon will listen to the arguments, according to Jarbola’s July 29 order.
The order requires Jessup to show why Breaker Street Associates shouldn’t be entitled to its requested relief.
Breaker Street Associates shares a West Conshohocken address with Catalyst Commercial Development LLC, which also proposes a data center on Sunnyside Road next to the Lackawanna Energy Center power plant.
Operating as Sunnyside Road Associates LLC, the developer is also appealing the Jessup Zoning Hearing Board’s denial of its request to exceed the borough’s height restrictions by 20 feet to build a 70-foot-tall data center. Despite that denial, Sunnyside Road moved forward with the land development process for a 50-foot-tall data center, receiving conditional approval from borough council June 3 for its preliminary land development plan.
The battle over the Breaker Street campus stems from the location of a switchyard/substation on the north side of Breaker Street.
The developer submitted a land development plan for the project in June 2025, prior to Jessup amending its zoning two months later to define and regulate data centers.
The ordinance restricted the data centers as conditional uses south of the Casey Highway in light industrial/business park and general industrial zones encompassing the Valley View Business Park and the land surrounding the Lackawanna Energy Center.
Jessup’s original zoning permitted data centers in multiple zones, including the mixed-use zoning district encompassing the south side of Breaker Street. Although Breaker Street Associates’ actual data centers would be in the district that allowed them at the time, the necessary electric infrastructure fell into more restrictive medium-density residential zone north of Breaker Street, requiring zoning relief. The zoning hearing board denied a zoning application for the project in December because of that infrastructure, which the developer also appealed to county court in January. That appeal is ongoing.
The contention behind the legal battle moving to court in October predates that denial, however.
In a June 18 lawsuit, attorneys for Breaker Street Associates argued that borough council should be compelled to approve their data center land development plans because the borough failed to issue a valid written decision within 90 days of the next regular planning commission meeting following their submission.
Attorneys Richard M. Williams and Kevin M. Walsh Jr. of Kingston-based Hourigan, Kluger & Quinn PC filed the lawsuit.
The developer initially submitted its plans and application June 11, 2025, to build data centers and associated infrastructure around Breaker and Hill streets.
Two weeks later, planning commission Chairwoman Brittani Hamer Barscheski sent the developer a letter notifying them the planning commission had reviewed the application but would not accept it due to a non-permitted use in a residential area — the switchyard/substation.
Breaker Street Associates’ lawyers argue the letter was improper because zoning determinations are the sole province of the zoning officer, zoning issues are properly addressed while the land development process proceeds, the correspondence did not originate from borough council which is responsible for denying or approving plans, the letter failed to cite specific provisions of the ordinance, and neither the commission nor council had voted on the application, among other contentions.
They also contend the borough failed to issue a decision within 90 days, causing them to be “damaged irreparably.”
The developer then submitted a revised plan July 23, 2025, in response to comments from the Lackawanna County Regional Planning Commission, according to the June filing.
Jessup had still not rendered a decision on the July 2025 resubmission as of June 18, missing the 90-day deadline, according to the lawsuit.
Jessup Solicitor Maura Armezzani Tunis disputed the contentions in a July 20 response.
She acknowledged the developer had filed another submission in July 2025 but argued there was no pending application with the borough. She cited the planning commission’s letter declining to accept the application because of the electric infrastructure in a residential zone.
“Therefore, no application could be revised without a new application,” she wrote.
Applicable time frames do not apply because the application was not accepted, Armezzani Tunis wrote.
The developer wants two court orders requiring borough council to approve its application and resubmitted plans — known as writs of mandamus. A third count, listed as a land-use appeal, alleges the borough abused its discretion, and the court should approve its application and resubmitted plans.
Monday Upate
THEN: A developer sued Jessup over plans for seven data centers on Breaker Street.
NOW: Oral arguments for the dispute will head to court in October.