Safe Space Chico zoning clearance appeal denied

Estimated read time 6 min read

CHICO — A Dec. 29 appeal for zoning clearance, which would allow Safe Space Winter Shelter to shuttle guests to its overnight shelters from downtown Chico, was denied Wednesday in a letter to the nonprofit’s leadership from City Manager Mark Sorensen.

The nonprofit continued shuttling guests Wednesday to its partnered church, but board President Rick Narad said a decision will be made Thursday on whether or not to keep operating its intake center at the 101 Main St. building.

“If we do not find an alternative site — an intake center that works — there’s a possibility that we have to shut down the shelter either for the entire season or until we can find a usable building,” Narad said. “That means that the 60 people who will be sleeping inside tonight; those people will be sleeping in the downtown area.”

Narad said he understands Chico is working to look for other areas the intake center can move to, but has not yet received any suggestions.

“This doesn’t have to be a fight with us in the city. I think we’re all on the same side of — we don’t want people dying on the street. We’re willing to work with them if they’ve got a building they think will work that fits our needs,” Narad said.

Safe Space Winter Shelter has been operating its warming centers with partnered churches in Chico since Dec. 17. About 60 guests are shuttled daily from its intake center in order to reduce neighborhood foot traffic around those churches.

Since then, the nonprofit received a notice of code violation Dec. 19 and responded by asking for zoning clearance Dec. 20 — which was then met with a denial by Chico on Dec. 21.

Safe Space Winter Shelter appealed Chico’s decision on Dec. 29, stating it believes its intended use of the intake center building — as a central area to shuttle people to shelter — is authorized as a temporary use and does not require a permit under Chico Municipal Code 19.22.020.

Sorensen’s letter of denial Wednesday of Safe Space Winter Shelter’s appeal said the city’s land use regulations do not align with the nonprofit’s listed uses of the downtown property.

“Chico city staff cannot simply ignore the city of Chico’s land use regulations. Particularly when we have business owners, property owners and other citizens demanding that we follow the city of Chico land use regulations,” wrote Sorensen.

The main disagreement between Chico and Safe Space Winter Shelter is about the interpretation of city code allowing some temporary uses outright — and in this case, the building’s use as an emergency facility.

Safe Space Winter Shelter argued that its intake center is in alignment with city code describing “emergency public health and safety needs” because it operates with similarity to an emergency shelter — and would be allowed use without a permit.

Sorensen’s letter argued that emergency public health and safety needs “would be expected to involve a temporary emergency response by police, fire, and/or medical responders to a local disaster or sudden calamity.”

Sorensen further argued that Safe Space Winter Shelter activities are annual and regular — in contrast to sudden disaster or calamity.

“I do not believe that an ordinary reasonable person would find that the legislative intent included a planned and regularly occurring use such as that proposed by SSWS intake center, and I cannot otherwise stretch this code section to include SSWS planned activities,” Sorensen wrote.

Sorensen said Safe Space Winter Shelter also did not check with the city zoning administrator to confirm the intake center’s use is similar to that of an emergency shelter.

Other elements of Sorensen’s letter say that 101 Main St. location is close to nearby schools, including Chico State, to which he attributed “these kinds of activities” are “given some significant credit” for enrollment decline.

Further, Sorensen said “the incompatibility with the fragile economy of the downtown business district could not be more clear.”

Sorensen’s four-page response Wednesday also made points to list a timeline of events that occurred “due to widespread misinformation,” and Sorensen said it was Safe Space Chico’s own choices that led to its subsequent Dec. 19 notice of violation.

Related Articles


Despite billions spent, new data shows almost a third of the nation’s homeless now live in California


Chico reports end-of-year status on its declared shelter crisis


Safe Space Chico will continue to use vacant store, board president says


Chicoans memorialize 27 without shelter who died in 2023


Future of warming center intake facility uncertain

Narad said he disagrees with Sorensen’s notion that the code violation was a choice by Safe Space Winter Shelter — adding the nonprofit began its search for place in October with the Butte County Homeless Continuum of Care.

“I would say I was taken aback by that. … It ignored the effort that we’d gone through looking for it. Finding an intake center is difficult every year,” Narad said. “Asking someone to donate their building for three months is a big ask. … We absolutely know it’s a problem every year, and it would be very irresponsible of us to wait until the last minute to even start looking. … We’ve been doing this 10 years; we know better than that.”

Narad also said he disagrees with Sorensen’s decision and interpretation of “emergency public health and safety needs.”

“That is the city’s interpretation,” Narad said. He argues the language in the city code — which reads “Emergency Facilities. Emergency public health and safety needs/land use activities” — is unclear.

Narad said that in lieu of a definition in city code, he provided Chico with a definition from the official manual of Department of Public Health and Medical Emergency Operation, “any incident, whether natural or manmade, that requires responsive action to protect life or property.”

“We’re saying it supports our definition of emergency, and you’re just giving us something saying ‘it doesn’t work.’ We think that’s incorrect,” Narad said. “I’m going to keep going back and say 27 people died on the street last year. If that’s not an emergency, I don’t know what is.”

You May Also Like

+ There are no comments

Add yours