Owner of Senior Tiny Village seeks independent-living permit; council presses on ADA, gender separation and zoning transition

Chiquita Bryant, who identified herself as the owner of Senior Tiny Village, presented a petition for a special-use permit to operate an independent-living residence at 4002 Pennsylvania Street.

Planning staff explained the BZA granted a favorable 4-0 recommendation with conditions. Staff read the conditions: the operator must hold a general business license; the use is restricted to independent-living residential occupancy (not a short-term rental); assisted living, medical care, institutional services, supervised medication and 24-hour custodial care are not allowed; a certificate of occupancy and compliance with building and safety standards are required before operation; the property must retain a residential appearance and any expansion or change in occupancy requires returning to the BZA; off-street parking and maintenance are required; approval is specific to the designated operator and is nontransferable; violations can result in revocation and penalties. Staff noted the maximum of three residents is a condition tied to the property’s three bedrooms.

Bryant told the committee she founded Senior Tiny Village to provide a home-like, community-based option for seniors who can no longer fully maintain their houses but do not need assisted-care services. She said units are furnished, rooms are rented individually, and optional services — such as occasional meals and transportation — would be available and included in rent when chosen. Bryant said the house has operated with a short-term rental certificate since 2023 and she is CPR certified.

Committee members probed the model’s differences from assisted-living and AFC homes, asking whether the city’s zoning and regulations would cover possible future needs (e.g., residents who later require care), how shared bathrooms and mixed genders would be handled, and whether the property is ADA accessible. One council member urged written age and admission parameters to match the intended senior population.

Carla Morgan, corporation counsel, advised that the Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibits discrimination based on gender; she told the committee the petitioner cannot legally exclude men or women solely on that basis. Staff and counsel reiterated they govern land use, not operational services; eviction or tenant-removal issues would follow ordinary landlord-tenant procedures. Staff said the city is transitioning to a new zoning code effective Aug. 1 and that re-running the application under the new code would require a new public-hearing cycle of roughly three months (application, BZA/plan commission, then council). Attorney Molina said the petitioner’s path under the old code remains valid because the application predates the new code’s effective date, but acknowledged overlap and transitional complexities. Several council members asked staff to return with guidance or recommend tailored conditions so the petitioner would be properly categorized and so the city avoids future code conflicts.

No committee vote appears in the transcript. The committee concluded with instructions to refine code application or conditions and to help the petitioner comply with the forthcoming new code.