![\"\u201cNo](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/STT-L-DATA-0422_3-1.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\nThe developer proposing the Project Scott campus of 18 data centers in Archbald took two legal steps Friday toward securing approval for the center on 400 acres bordering Staback Park.<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002Archbald I LLC issued a public notice\u00a0of a \u201cdeemed approval\u201d claiming that \u2014 under state law and the borough zoning code \u2014 the campus proposal automatically gained borough approval on March 31, because the Archbald Borough Council had missed a deadline to complete a required hearing on the conditional-use application.<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002The firm also filed in Lackawanna County Court a notice of appeal of a March 27 council vote rejecting the Project Scott application. This lawsuit names Archbald I LLC as the plaintiff and the Archbald Borough Council as the defendant.<\/p>\n
Archbald has become a hotbed in Lackawanna County for data center proposals and opposition. The two actions by Archbald I LLC are the latest developments regarding Project Scott, which is one of many data-center proposals that have arisen in Archbald and elsewhere in Lackawanna County and Northeast Pennsylvania.<\/p>\n
Regarding a deemed approval, Archbald I LLC published in The Times-Tribune a public notice titled \u201cDeemed Decision\u201d claiming an automatic approval took effect March 31. Any legal challenge to the company\u2019s claim of a deemed approval now must be filed within 30 days of the second publication of the public notice of the deemed decision, according to Friday\u2019s public notice. It does not state when the second notice would run in the newspaper.<\/p>\n
Under state law, a legal challenge of this deemed approval would be filed in Lackawanna County Court. Such challenges possibly could come from the borough itself or residents or other entities.<\/p>\n
Justin Healey, co-founder of the Stop Archbald Data Centers group on Facebook, said Friday in an interview with The Times-Tribune, \u201cWe are contemplating a legal challenge to the deemed approval.\u201d<\/p>\n
Efforts to reach the borough council president and solicitor were unsuccessful.<\/p>\n
Dispute develops<\/p>\n
According to archives of The Times-Tribune, the background of the deemed approval and notice of appeal includes:<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002On Dec. 16, Archbald I LLC submitted to the borough a conditional use application proposing a data center campus with up to 18 data centers, each up to 90 feet tall with a 154,850-square-foot footprint, across about 400 acres along Eynon Jermyn Road and Business Route 6, and bordering Staback Park.<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002On Feb. 11, the borough held its first public hearing on Project Scott, but the developer behind Archbald I, Provident Realty Advisors of Dallas, Texas, only presented two of its five planned witnesses. The developer planned to provide testimony at a subsequent hearing from a data center engineer, a traffic engineer and a sound and noise consultant. Public hearings also give residents the chance to testify before council votes.<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002At the conclusion of the Feb. 11 hearing, the borough solicitor announced the next hearing would be held March 19. The following morning, an attorney for the developer requested a rescheduling of the next meeting, because the project manager had a family vacation. The attorney also acknowledged, \u201cThis creates some procedural, due process and planning hurdles\u201d for the borough.<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002The borough agreed to reschedule and then intended to hold the follow-up hearing on March 23. The borough solicitor\u2019s law office submitted to The Times-Tribune on March 5 a public notice to run March 8 and 15 legally advertising a hearing to be held March 23. But that March 23 hearing, which would have been the required second hearing within 45 days, did not take place. The borough canceled it because the public notices advertising the hearing did not run in The Times-Tribune due to a newspaper clerical error.<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002On March 25, the borough solicitor explained the clerical error in an email to the developer\u2019s attorney and requested an extension for the next hearing. But the attorney refused, saying in an email, \u201cApplicant declines to be strong-armed into agreeing to an extension.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code requires any subsequent hearing to be held within 45 days of the first hearing, unless the applicant agrees to an extension.\n<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002Facing a March 28 deadline to approve or deny the Project Scott campus, the borough scheduled a special meeting to be held March 27, which was a Friday. The borough on March 25 posted on its website notice of the March 27 special meeting, and published a public notice in the March 26 edition of The Times-Tribune of the special meeting to be held on March 27.<\/p>\n
\u2022\u2002The borough attributed the March 27 denial to an incomplete record from the developer with insufficient testimony for council to render a decision. However, the decision also noted the rejection was not based on the merits of the application but rather to avoid an automatic approval that would have occurred if council did not vote by the March 28 deadline. Council had not heard evidence of the project\u2019s traffic, noise and utility usage, among other requirements, according to the decision.\n<\/p>\n
In its claim of a deemed approval, the developer cites the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, noting that if a municipality misses the deadline or fails to vote by the deadline, then the developer\u2019s application is automatically approved. The state planning code also says a governing body shall give public notice of a deemed approval within 10 days of the missed deadline, but if the governing body does not do that, then the applicant may issue a notice of the deemed approval.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Archbald I LLC faced and apparently now has met its own legal deadline of this coming Monday to file in court an appeal of the borough council\u2019s vote of 5-0 on March 27 rejecting Project Scott.<\/p>\n
Efforts were unsuccessful Friday to reach the developer\u2019s attorney.<\/p>\n
Frank Wilkes Lesnefsky, staff writer, contributed to this report.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\u201cNo Data Centers\u201d signs along North Main Street in Archbald on April 20, 2026. (JIM LOCKWOOD \/ STAFF PHOTO)\n<\/p>\n
![\"\u201cNo](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/STT-L-DATA-0422.jpg?w=620\")
<\/p>\n
\u201cNo Data Centers\u201d signs along Lawrence and Spring streets in Archbald on April 20, 2026. (JIM LOCKWOOD \/ STAFF PHOTO)\n<\/p>\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/STT-L-DATA-0422_2.jpg?w=620\")
<\/p>\n
A \u201cNo Data Centers\u201d sign along Kennedy and Altier drives in Archbald on April 20, 2026. (JIM LOCKWOOD \/ STAFF PHOTO)\n<\/p>\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/STT-L-DATA-0422_4.jpg?w=620\")
<\/p>\n
A \u201cNo Data Centers\u201d sign at the Dick and Nancy Eales Preserve at Moosic Mountain in Jessup on April 20, 2026. (JIM LOCKWOOD \/ STAFF PHOTO)\n<\/p>\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/STT-L-DATACENTER-0425.jpg?w=620\")
<\/p>\n
A public notice, highlighted in red box, from a data center claiming a deemed approval of a project in Archbald, published Friday, April 24, 2026 in The Times-Tribune. (IMAGE SCREEN COPY \/ TIMES-TRIBUNE E-EDITION)\n<\/p>\n
Show Caption<\/p>\n
1 of 5<\/p>\n
\u201cNo Data Centers\u201d signs along North Main Street in Archbald on April 20, 2026. (JIM LOCKWOOD \/ STAFF PHOTO)\n<\/p>\n