August 2026 Planning Commission Recap: Sutter EIR Scoping Session, Boot Barn Signage & Data Center Concerns

The Emeryville Planning Commission convened August 27 with a compact but intensive agenda, with the bulk of the meeting devoted to a scoping session for Sutter Health’s proposed Medical Center and what should be examined in its environmental impact report.

Commissioners also held a public hearing on outdoor signage for Boot Barn at the East Bay Bridge Shopping Center and briefly discussed the city’s approach to potential future data centers, which have become a source of contention in other communities.

Commissioner Maia Small was absent for the meeting.

Wax & Henmi Reelected Chair/Vice Chair [5:09]

Citing the importance for “continuity” during the Sutter approval process, the commission re-elected Jordan Wax as chair and Rod Henmi as vice chair. Wax thanked commissioners for their continued trust.

Among the revisions to the original plan that Sutter is pitching is an expanded park at the base of the South Bayfront Bridge.

SCOPING SESSION: Sutter Health Medical Center Environmental Impact Report [13:20]

The centerpiece of the meeting was a scoping session for Sutter Health’s proposed medical center at the former Chiron site.

The city has contracted land-use planning firm Urban Planning Partners to prepare the EIR under a contract of up to $2.42 million, paid by the project applicant. UPP has previously been hired by the city for several major projects, including the 5801 Christie Avenue Mixed Use Project.

The EIR will examine potential impacts involving transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise and vibration, hazardous materials, geology, hydrology, cultural resources, aesthetics, wind, shadows, public services and utilities.

The Notice of Preparation, or “NOP,” was officially posted August 14, beginning the 30-day public scoping period during which residents and other interested parties can provide input on what should be studied in the EIR. The comment period runs through 5 p.m. September 15, with a Draft EIR currently anticipated in spring 2027.

UPP founder Lynette Dias (right) provided an overview of the EIR Process.

EIR Process Overview [13:50]

UPP founder Lynette Dias provided an overview of the process, emphasizing that the scoping session is intended to identify what the EIR needs to study, rather than determine whether the project should be approved.

“It’s really to inform the decision-makers and the public and the community, to facilitate an informed dialogue about the project. It’s not to advocate for or against the project.”

Among the areas UPP will facilitate studying are:

Transportation: Vehicle miles traveled (VMT), intersection operations, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, transit, roadway hazards, emergency access, parking, shuttle operations, the helipad, and loading and deliveries.
Air quality: Potential impacts from both construction and operation of the medical center.
Noise and vibration: Including construction and operational noise.
Hazardous materials and geology: Including potential impacts associated with existing site conditions and construction.
Hydrology and water: Potential effects on drainage and water resources.
Cultural resources: Potential impacts to archaeological and other cultural resources.
Aesthetics: Including the visual effects, wind and shadows associated with the proposed 330-foot hospital tower.
Public services and utilities: Potential effects on infrastructure and services needed to support the project.

The EIR will also examine cumulative impacts from the Sutter project combined with other reasonably foreseeable development and infrastructure projects, as well as alternatives intended to reduce significant impacts identified through the analysis.

Dias stressed that the alternatives analysis is not intended simply to present projects that might be preferable to Sutter’s proposal. Rather, alternatives must be evaluated based on their ability to reduce identified environmental impacts.

Sam Tabibnia of Fehr & Peers answered questions on Traffic Analysis.

Transportation Analysis [39:30]

Sam Tabibnia of Fehr & Peers, the project’s transportation consultant, outlined the traffic analysis that will accompany the EIR. The study will examine 53rd Street between San Pablo Avenue and Horton Street, including all intersections along the corridor.

One transportation “variant” under consideration would involve the 53rd Street diverter, with the analysis comparing traffic conditions with and without it. The other would lease approximately 585 parking spaces at the Bay Street garage; the two variants are mutually exclusive and will be analyzed separately.

The existing Horton Street diverter is not currently included as a variant, although consultants said it could potentially be considered as part of a broader CEQA alternative if the analysis identifies significant impacts associated with its removal.

Commissioners asked how the broader CEQA alternatives would be developed. Consultants said the city and its consultants will determine the alternatives, but encouraged commissioners and the public to submit suggestions during the scoping period. The EIR will also include “no project” scenarios based on both existing conditions and what could reasonably be developed under existing zoning.

The transportation analysis will account for shuttles, ambulances and service vehicles, with individual circulation patterns evaluated qualitatively and all vehicle traffic incorporated into the quantitative analysis of delays, queues and congestion. It will provide both near-term projections and estimates 15 to 20 years into the future.

Commissioners also asked about the potential for economic impacts and whether mitigation could involve actions outside Sutter’s control. Consultants said the city has commissioned a separate fiscal impact study for economic effects, while the EIR can identify mitigation involving the city or other agencies. Where a necessary improvement is outside the control of the city or applicant, however, an impact could ultimately be deemed significant and unavoidable.

Finally, consultants emphasized that CEQA requires the project to consider feasible measures to reduce significant impacts to the maximum extent practicable, though those measures do not necessarily have to eliminate an impact entirely.

Several community members turned out to express their concerns with the proposed project.

Community Weighs In [1:00:35]

Several impassioned speakers expressed concern about the proposed project, pointing to what they viewed as inadequacies in the scope of the EIR thus far.

Transportation was a major concern, with residents calling for analysis of 55th Street, Doyle Street, Stanford Avenue and a broader stretch of San Pablo Avenue into Oakland and Berkeley. Others urged the city to study retaining the existing Horton Street diverter and account for planned transportation projects.

Residents living near the project emphasized the concentration of schools, child-care facilities and recreational uses along 53rd Street. Patty Lincoln, a 53rd Street resident, described the area as a “high-intensity outdoor recreation space” and said the EIR should account for the large number of children who spend time there.

Connie Zheng of Emery Bay Village said “safe passage for school children should be the foundational baseline” for evaluating the project, calling for construction trucks, ambulances and shuttle buses to be kept off 53rd Street.

Other speakers called for more detailed analysis of helipad and ambulance noise, lighting, contamination, archaeological resources and construction impacts. Michael Coulom urged the city to distinguish between existing conditions, the proposed project and previously approved development when evaluating transportation impacts, while also examining combinations of the proposed traffic variants.

Several speakers also raised concerns about Temescal Creek, community benefits and Sutter’s engagement with the surrounding community, with some arguing that the EIR should consider a broader range of alternatives and impacts beyond the immediate project site.

The seven member Planning Commission (Small absent) offered extensive feedback on the scope of the EIR.

Commissioner Comments [1:26:12]

Following Public Comment, Commissioner Martinez led off the commissioner comments acknowledging that residents’ concerns were “really in line with what we heard at our study session.” She called for a broad transportation analysis, including the potential impacts of retaining the existing Horton Street diverter, and also recommended studying the project’s effects on mature street trees and Temescal Creek.

Vice Chair Henmi said he had the “definite impression” that Sutter was listening to community concerns and trying to address them, citing the 53rd Street traffic variant as an example. He encouraged residents to remain engaged as the project moves forward. Henmi also clarified that siren noise would be among the noise issues that would be studied.

Commissioner Gould emphasized that the commission was “not endorsing or opposing the project” at this stage, but rather examining its potential impacts. He supported studying the Horton diverter and combinations of the proposed transportation variants, and called for pedestrian and bicycle improvements on Stanford Avenue as well as greening to mitigate tree removal. Gould provided his support for studying moving the shuttle depot to the Hollis Green park since Hollis was a designated transit corridor.

Chair Wax pushed back on the suggestion that commissioners’ lack of residence on 53rd Street meant they would be less affected by the project. “I just wanna remind everybody that everybody up here is a member of this community, and none of us can possibly live that far from this hospital, right?” he said. “We can’t be up here for this hearing if we live too close to it. Those are the rules. But none of us are that far. This affects all of us.”

Wax also focused on Temescal Creek and 45th Street, recommending that the EIR consider future creek restoration and potential improvements to 45th Street if traffic is diverted there from 53rd, including additional trees and pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.

Commissioner Chafe called for the EIR to incorporate NACTO bike-boulevard guidelines and vehicle-trip thresholds, and to examine impacts on the city’s bicycle and pedestrian network, sensitive populations around nearby schools, future transportation projects, wind impacts from the tower and emissions from backup generators.

Following recommendations from the Planning Commission at the **June Study Session**, Sutter has proposed increasing the number of units in its B1 housing component to reduce vehicle trips associated with employee commutes.

The commission also discussed the project’s revised workforce-housing component, which increases the proposed number of units from 57 to 133. Commissioners suggested exploring whether a larger portion of the site could be used for workforce housing, arguing that additional housing could help offset the impacts of the thousands of jobs the hospital would bring. Henmi supported the concept, saying there is “no amount of workforce housing that Sutter could reasonably build” that would meet Emeryville’s broader housing needs, but that more housing would provide more opportunities to address the project’s impacts.

Commissioner Rivera expressed confidence in the consultants and encouraged continued public participation, noting that residents had already “pushed meaningful change onto the project.” He also suggested examining battery storage as a potential alternative to conventional backup generators and for managing peak electricity demand.

The updated slide deck presented by Sutter can be **downloaded here**.

PUBLIC HEARING: Boot Barn Outdoor Signage [2:15:30]

Following the lengthy discussion on the Sutter project EIR, the commission considered a less contentious item: A major sign permit for the recently opened Boot Barn adjacent to Total Wine at the East Bay Bridge Shopping center.

The retailer, which has opened in the former Decathlon space at the East Bay Bridge Shopping Center, proposed a 126-square-foot illuminated wall sign and three tower signs totaling 223 square feet. The total 349 square feet of signage falls within the site’s allowable signage.

Ryan Drury of Pacific Neon said the design was intended to complement the adjacent Total Wine & More signage.

“We really based it around balance with Total Wine & More.”

With no public opposition, the commission unanimously approved the permit.

Commissioners Discuss Data Centers [2:24:44]

During commissioner comments, Commissioner Chafe asked how data centers would be treated under Emeryville’s zoning code and whether the city should develop a policy addressing their potential environmental impacts. Staff said a new data center could potentially fall within the city’s Office/Technology or Mixed Use Residential zones and, depending on its size, would likely require a major use permit. Chafe suggested the city consider whether data centers are compatible with Emeryville’s planning goals.

At least two data centers already operate in Emeryville, although both predate recent concerns over the growing energy and land demands of AI-related facilities. Staff noted that Emeryville’s high land costs make it an unlikely location for a large data center, while Commissioner Henmi said he didn’t believe the city has a site large enough to accommodate one. He also noted that a future proposal that doesn’t fit an existing zoning classification might not be permitted under the city’s current code.

The commission then adjourned at approximately 9 p.m.

The full agenda for the meeting can be viewed on Emeryville.org.