Corscale Files Plans for a 300 MW Swatara Data Center Campus

A proposed data center campus in Swatara Township, Pennsylvania, has a concrete design footprint: two buildings totaling 300 megawatts of critical capacity, with a separate 435 MW gross power design basis. The US Highlands East filing puts civil engineering, a proposed utility switch station and campus infrastructure into view for contractors following central Pennsylvania construction.

WITF's September 16 reporting identifies Corscale as the developer and describes a $10.5 billion proposal. That reported investment figure remains separate from the quantities in the engineering sheets. LVN has not verified a primary cost breakdown, financing close or executed tenant agreement. The strongest construction evidence is the township-hosted permit submission, dated August 24, and its September planning agenda.

For low-voltage firms, this is an early opportunity to identify procurement responsibilities, prepare qualifications and understand the proposed site. The reviewed material does not establish an open bid package or an awarded installation contract. The project remains planned, with final approvals, construction dates and the general contractor unverified as of September 17, 2026.

What the filed campus actually contains

The C-301 overall site plan labels two one-story buildings at 372,131 square feet apiece. Each carries a 150 critical MW and 217.5 gross MW designation. Adding the two building labels gives 744,262 square feet, 300 MW critical and 435 MW gross. These are proposed design quantities; the drawing does not establish delivered power or operating computer load.

Measure	Filed quantity	Basis
Location	Highland Street, Swatara Township	Dauphin County, PA
Main buildings	Two; 744,262 SF total	372,131 SF each
Critical capacity	300 MW proposed	150 MW per building
Gross power	435 MW proposed	217.5 MW per building
Tract	157.21 acres	C-301 zoning table
Review status	Permit submission	Approval unverified

The site plan also shows a substation, a proposed PPL public utility switch station, a guardhouse, stormwater facilities, perimeter fencing and construction laydown space. Those features make site access and utility coordination useful starting points for specialty contractors. The 220-square-foot guardhouse is separate from the main-building area total. The cover sheet's 137.64-acre disturbance area uses another measurement boundary and should remain distinct from the proposed tract acreage.

Critical and gross power are different labels in the same design. Adding them together would misstate the proposal. Contractors also need the eventual electrical design and procurement documents before translating either figure into equipment counts, testing effort or labor. Tenant computing requirements, commissioning stages and phased energization remain undisclosed in the reviewed evidence.

The filing shows a review process still in motion

The September 8 Planning Commission agenda identifies US Highlands East Purchaser LLC under file 2026-08C. Its application title uses “Final Subdivision & Land Development Plan.” The wording identifies the submission category; it does not establish that the municipality has granted final approval.

The permit cover sheet has unfilled municipal approval blocks. The set also carries a notice limiting its use to agency review unless otherwise indicated. An approved decision, signed plan or issued construction permit would provide a firmer basis for describing the next construction milestone.

The agenda lists November 10 as “Last PC,” December 2 as “Last BOC” and December 7 as “End Date.” These are the application's stated review-calendar labels. They do not supply a bid deadline, a promised vote date or a construction start. Any future schedule should be checked against subsequent municipal decisions and developer releases.

The township's 2026 Planning Commission minutes index had no September decision minutes available in the reviewed material. Its active development index separately lists US Highlands West. Project names and geography therefore deserve close attention: East's drawings cannot establish West's scope, and nearby golf-course proposals should retain their own approvals and capacities.

The named team and the limits of each role

The public evidence establishes a developer, a filing entity, a civil engineering team, a referenced survey firm and a proposed utility interface. It leaves the construction delivery team largely open. The table below distinguishes those relationships so a firm can direct its next inquiry to the appropriate organization.

Organization	Supported role	Scope limit
Corscale	Developer in local reporting	Tenant unnamed
US Highlands East Purchaser LLC	Filed owner/developer	Corporate chain unverified
Bohler Engineering	Site/civil plan preparer	No GC award implied
Hyland Engineering	Referenced survey	Survey scope only
PPL Electric Utilities	Proposed switch station	Service terms unverified
Swatara Township	Local review authority	Dauphin County municipality

Bohler's cover identifies Kyle Slack, PE, and references a Hyland boundary and topographic survey dated May 14, 2025, job 220595. Those are useful design-team identifiers. They establish neither a general construction contract nor a mechanical, electrical or low-voltage appointment. The geotechnical reference is printed as ESC MID-ATLANTIC LLC; that corporate identity still needs clarification before attributing work to a similarly named firm.

Corscale's website describes its broader investment relationship with Affinius Capital. That corporate context provides background on the developer, while site-specific funding documents remain unverified. Images of Corscale's other facilities likewise provide portfolio context. They should not be presented as photographs or approved renderings of Highlands East.

No general contractor, construction manager, architect, electrical contractor, security integrator, fiber installer or commissioning contractor was verified for this campus. A prospective subcontractor should seek an identified package owner and a public prequalification route before assuming that the civil consultant controls construction procurement.

Power, water and the investment headline

WITF reports developer statements about funding, advanced tenant discussions and PPL power availability. The reviewed evidence does not include signed documents establishing those commitments. The report also attributes roughly 7,000 gallons of daily water use and about 12 backup generators to the developer's presentation. Those meeting figures need engineering reconciliation before use as final specifications.

The filed utility drawings and overall site plan give contractors a location-specific basis for questions about power and communications interfaces. Follow-up evidence should establish the utility service arrangement, equipment responsibility, energization sequence and campus communications routes. A proposed utility facility on a drawing cannot answer those questions alone.

LVN has not calculated a low-voltage contract value from the reported $10.5 billion figure. A defensible estimate would require a defined scope and a cost basis showing which buildings, utility works, tenant equipment and phases are included. Applying a generic percentage now would create a precision the evidence cannot support.

Where low voltage could enter the project

The following scopes are opportunity analysis based on the proposed campus and its interfaces. No listed system represents a confirmed bid package or subcontract award. Detailed building designs and tenant requirements will determine quantities, responsibility and acceptance criteria.

Prospective scope	Planning basis	Evidence to obtain
Fiber and outside plant	Campus and utility routes	Carrier paths; package owner
Structured cabling	Two building footprints	Tenant standards; quantities
Access control and CCTV	Guardhouse and perimeter	Security design; integrator
BMS and controls	Power and cooling interfaces	Points; protocols; scope split
Fire alarm	Future life-safety design	Approved plans; installer
Network commissioning	Future systems turnover	Test plans; acceptance owner

Fiber and outside-plant contractors can begin by identifying the eventual boundary between utility work, developer infrastructure and tenant networks. Useful questions concern ductbank responsibility, building entrances, route diversity and the timing of civil works. The public civil package does not establish a selected carrier, a fiber route award or the final communications topology.

Security firms have a tangible starting point in the proposed guardhouse and perimeter. Their next documents should explain access points, camera coverage, power and network handoffs, and responsibility for integrating building and gate systems. The drawing's presence of a guardhouse alone cannot establish device counts or a manufacturer's specification.

Controls and commissioning specialists should seek responsibility matrices early. Power monitoring, cooling controls, facility networks and alarm reporting can cross several contracts. For a prospective bidder, an explicit list of interfaces and acceptance deliverables would be more useful than a generic promise that one integrator will handle everything. Highlands East's detailed scope division remains unverified.

Jobs, trades and preparation

No project-specific construction or operating job count was verified. Parking capacity should not be converted into a workforce forecast, and a large development headline does not establish current hiring. Bohler's careers page provides a general employer recruiting route; this article does not identify an open Highlands East position.

The Fiber Optic Association's workforce resources offer a practical starting point for fiber training and certification. Relevant preparation includes installation, splicing and testing, with documented results that an employer can evaluate. Qualifications for this particular campus have not been released in the sources reviewed.

For contractors preparing a capability statement, useful evidence includes comparable project experience, named supervision, test-equipment availability, sample turnover records and the team's actual certifications. Crews may also need pathway coordination, grounding and bonding knowledge, labeling discipline, as-built records and safe site access. Confirm the eventual buyer's requirements before purchasing training or committing labor to this opportunity.

What would move this opportunity forward

The next decisive evidence is an approval outcome, a verified construction schedule and a named delivery team. Utility commitments, tenant execution and phase-specific procurement documents would then clarify how the proposed campus becomes buildable work. Each announcement should identify whether it covers Highlands East, the separate West filing, or another nearby project.

For a contractor, the immediate next step is a focused qualification review: identify the likely procurement role, assemble relevant experience and watch for an authorized bid or prequalification channel. Keep pricing and staffing decisions tied to actual drawings and dates. The public proposal provides a reason to investigate, while its unresolved details determine when to act.

Explore LVN Signal for construction intelligence and use the original sources linked here to evaluate the opportunity. Highlands East is tracked as a planned data center project. Its map marker is an approximate Swatara Township location; the filed plan remains the source for understanding the proposed site.

Reporting checked September 17, 2026. Featured and social images are AI-generated illustrations, not site photography or approved project renderings.