Zoning hearing on 'Project Tango' exposes community split over proposed large‑scale data center near Arden neighborhood

The Palm Beach County Zoning Commission spent several hours on Project Tango, an applicant request from PBA Holdings to amend a master plan and add roughly 1.5 million square feet of economic‑development uses — including warehouses and expanded "data and information processing" — on property near the Arden residential community and an elementary school.

Ernie Cox, project manager for PBA Holdings, told the commission the application has been revised since December: the applicant reduced the data‑center square footage, shifted data processing uses farther from Arden and the school, consolidated more cooling equipment inside buildings to reduce noise, and added landscaping buffers. "We have moved cooling equipment inside the buildings and redesigned the site to reduce sound," Cox said, adding the project would generate construction jobs and long‑term tax revenue if approved.

Staff presented the regulatory history of the site and told commissioners the master plan was originally changed in 2016 to an Economic Development Center/MUPD designation. The current request would increase the MUPD allocation from the 2,020,000 square feet already approved to 3,594,564 square feet in total, and would allow site‑level decisions later by the development review officer (DRO). Staff noted proposed conditions addressing noise, landscaping, lighting and wildlife‑corridor protections and framed the commission’s role as deciding whether the evidence before it supports treating the proposed data uses as "light industrial" under existing code and the Comprehensive Plan (Future Land Use Element Policy 2.2.4 C/D).

The hearing turned contentious when Tara Dewey, representing WPB Logistics and the Central Park of Commerce master association, told the commission her client no longer consents to the application. "We have not consented — our consent has been withdrawn," Dewey said, asking the commission to table the matter until ownership and consent issues are resolved. County counsel and staff responded that the ULDC does not require consent from all owners within a MUPD for an owner to apply to amend the MUPD, and commissioners debated whether that legal dispute could be resolved later in court.

Neighborhood representatives and dozens of residents strongly opposed the proposal. John Eubanks, representing the Arden homeowners, said the record lacks "competent, substantial evidence" — in particular, full noise modeling data and calculations — to support staff’s recommendation. "We keep asking: show your work," Eubanks said, urging denial.

Christina Reichert of the Western Palm Beach Community Alliance warned of environmental risks if industry‑scale cooling approaches are used. "Closed‑loop cooling systems still require treated water and, in hot months, some systems rely on massive evaporative cooling — millions of gallons per day in similar projects — and that can have regional impacts," Reichert said. Multiple residents cited concerns about low‑frequency noise, heat‑island effects, groundwater and Everglades impacts, and proximity to Settled Hill Elementary School.

The commission did not vote on Project Tango during the portion of the hearing in the transcript; commissioners questioned the adequacy of the record, debated procedural limits on continuances and scheduled further public comment and applicant rebuttal after a planned recess. Several speakers urged the commission to delay or deny the application until independent technical studies are available and ownership/consent questions are settled.

What happens next: the zoning commission is acting in an advisory/recommendation capacity for master‑plan amendments; the record in this hearing will be part of a recommendation that could proceed to the Board of County Commissioners. No final county‑level decision was recorded in the transcript segment provided.

Authorities and context: planning staff repeatedly cited Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.2.4 (Economic Development Center) and ULDC provisions distinguishing light and heavy industrial uses; those policies are the metrics commissioners said they must apply when assessing whether the evidence shows the proposed use fits the "light industrial" category in the county code.

The commission recessed after extended public testimony; further consideration and any recommendation will be taken up when the hearing resumes.