Palm Beach County hearing focuses on Project Tango allocation of 280,000 sq ft for data processing as mayor recuses

Vice Mayor Woodward presided over a Palm Beach County hearing on Project Tango after Mayor Baxter recused herself, saying she had made public statements that would make her participation appear biased. The applicant sought county approval to allocate permitted uses on Phase 2 of a master plan, specifically 280,000 square feet of "data and information processing," along with 148,000 square feet of minor utility and about 1.15 million square feet of warehouse space.

Brian Seymour, attorney for the applicant, told commissioners the item is an allocation under the county's Unified Land Development Code rather than a request for a new use. "There's been a lot of misinformation," Seymour said, adding the team had submitted expert reports and proposed conditions that would limit potential impacts. Project manager Ernie Cox described the site, buffers between industrial parcels and the Arden community and Saddleview Elementary, and the history of approvals dating to 2016 and a 2021 site plan.

The applicant said the overall master plan already authorizes Economic Development Center uses and that today's request does not add new trip‑generating square footage beyond what the comprehensive plan allows but would allocate portions of the approved total to specific parcels within Phase 2. Commissioners repeatedly pressed staff and the applicant to clarify which square footage was already approved and which would be allocated now; the applicant repeatedly returned the discussion to the single figure at issue: 280,000 square feet of data and information processing for the phase before the board.

Commissioners and staff also flagged a separate application element proposing added master‑plan square footage in earlier submittals; staff and the applicant said the current hearing is narrowly focused on allocation for Phase 2 and that other master‑plan additions (where proposed) have been pared and discussed in the packet. The county planner reviewing the file told the board she found the requested allocation consistent with the ULDC and the comp plan, and that conditions addressing lighting, buffering and noise were proposed to maintain compatibility with neighboring uses.

The meeting did not include a final decision on the development order amendment during the morning session; the applicant presented technical witnesses and the board paused for lunch after extended questioning. Commissioners signaled they expected additional staff analysis and public comment before any final action.

The mayor’s recusal was recorded at the start of the hearing; the record shows the clerk and two commissioners had earlier moved and adopted routine procedural items, including a motion to receive and file the publication of notice.