Palm Beach County commissioners deny Project Tango data‑center application without prejudice after contested hearing

The Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners voted 5–1 to deny the Project Tango data‑center application without prejudice following a daylong hearing that focused on operational noise, wastewater disposal, heat‑island concerns and fire safety. Commissioner Johnny Flores moved to deny; Commissioner Weiss seconded. The denial means the applicant may reapply after county regulatory changes or when conditions change.

The hearing included rebuttal from the applicant's attorney, Brian Seymour, who said expert reports filed with the county in April support the project and that the applicant would accept conditions including an 850‑foot setback for data‑processing uses, a final noise study tied to selected equipment and post‑construction proof‑up monitoring. Seymour said the project team would reimburse the county for outside verification if needed.

Commissioners and technical witnesses spent hours debating noise modeling, metrics and monitoring. Acoustical witness Mark Bastach described octave‑band modeling and defended use of DBA/DBC weightings; he and other consultants said modeled levels at the property line met the county's night standard under worst‑case assumptions. Palm Beach County staff confirmed a condition requiring recorded measurements along the property line at intervals no greater than 400 feet over a 24‑hour period, and an annual noise and vibration study from the date of first certificate of occupancy.

Opponents and several commissioners raised unresolved concerns about low‑frequency noise, long‑distance propagation and potential impacts on nearby residences, a school and equestrian properties. Public‑health witness Robert McCunney, M.D., said he reviewed peer‑reviewed literature and gray literature and found no definitive peer‑reviewed studies specific to data‑center noise; he concluded the modeled levels did not, in his view, predict chronic vascular disease but recommended occupational monitoring for workers.

Environmental questions about coolant disposal and PFAS were addressed by Ali Bayard, Palm Beach County Water Utility Director, who said the county will not accept data‑center cooling wastewater into its sanitary sewer system; the applicant must identify off‑site industrial wastewater facilities and provide permits and hauler information as a condition of approval.

Commissioners also discussed the 'data heat‑island' literature. A public witness cited an unpublished preprint linked to the University of Cambridge that reported land‑surface temperature increases after commissioning of large centers; county and applicant experts questioned the methodology and noted that the paper had not undergone peer review.

Assistant Fire Chief David Woodside and staff told the board that existing NFPA standards (NFPA 75 and 76) and UL testing remain the basis for fire safety; no new national fire standard specific to data centers has been adopted yet. Commissioners raised questions about battery fire risks for on‑site backup systems but were told preaction and sprinkler systems and current testing are the state of practice.

In debate before the vote, commissioners emphasized that the project’s scale — potentially converting previously approved warehouse square footage to more than 1,000,000 square feet of data and information processing in revised plans — raised compatibility issues with the adjacent Arden community. Commissioner Flores said expert testimony and technical evidence left unresolved concerns about off‑site noise and water demand and that the applicant had not demonstrated compatibility. Commissioner Marino dissented.

Board direction: staff will consider the board's findings in upcoming administrative reviews of pending site applications. The board also discussed a zoning‑in‑progress moratorium and regulatory updates that could apply to hyperscale data‑center applications in Palm Beach County.

The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. and the board asked staff to return with the ramifications for pending administrative applications and any follow‑up documentation requested during the hearing.