1715 4th St NW- Looks vacant but isn't

It was not the scaffolding that has been up since 2016 (looked at Google Street view for October 2016) that made me question the occupancy of 1715 4th St NW. Nor is it the torn plastic in the windows. It was the hole in the roof that I spotted. Too bad the owner didn't finish whatever exterior repairs she was planning in 2016 or early 2017, 'cause that block, the whole block, is now a Historic Landmark. Yeah, that kinda sucks. Well blame the developer several doors down who threatened to tear a structure down if they weren't approved for an ugly pop up.

Normally when I look in the DC Property tax database and see a Senior Citizen Homestead Deduction, and a house that is in some disrepair, I think, the person is a) dead or b) in a nursing home. The owner had an uncommon name so I plugged it into Google. No, the owner is very much alive and active. She's got an active Twitter page. Actually, she's a notable activist. I've never spoken to her but I've seen her around the neighborhood and she is quite spry.
 I'm guessing she has better things to do than repairing stuff. But that turret roof, really needs to get fixed.

I started writing this prior to seeing who the owner was, but this gave me an opportunity to point out the historic landmarking. If only, if only, the developers of 319 R St NW had taken the example of the house 1721 4th St NW, a few doors down, we might not have had this landmarking mess.The third floor is a pop up. It looks great, and when that was negotiated, I'd hoped that it would provide an example to others on the block, should they decide to pop up one more floor. But that chance is gone. The developer at 319 R St NW played chicken and we all lost.

Okay, I'll get back to vacant properties....

234 Florida Ave NW- 1/2 occupied

So there is a commercial property that a landlord is holding on to and seems to have little interest in actually having a commercial tenant. That place is 234 Florida Ave NW, in Truxton Circle. I've reviewed it before, and today I'm taking it off the list, even though there still isn't a tenant in the commercial space.

Why?

Kitty in the upstairs window.

Across the street from 234 FL Ave on 3rd St NW is a lovely establishment called ANXO. It was a warm day, and I was in the mood to sit out on the patio with my infant. While I was there I observed the landlord with a gentleman. They may have just reviewed the space. Then my eyes gazed upward to the upstairs, where there was a black and white cat doing what cats do. That looks occupied enough for me.

As far as I know he could be Airbnb'ing the place as a unique space, with cat. I've seen that kind of ad when we were staying in San Francisco. We could have stayed at this gal's Mission District studio apartment but we'd have to take care of her cats during our stay. I support Airbnb, I've used that platform as a guest and as a host, but mainly as a guest.

However, I digress.

It is unclear to me how the vacant thing works with commercial properties. And even more unclear as to how occupied a building needs to be. I'll have to stay beyond Happy Hour to see if the lights come on and there is more than a cat living upstairs.