	One of the most serious challenges facing the Historic Preservation movement today is demolition of historic properties from long-term neglect, otherwise known as “demolition by neglect.”  This neglect is usually intentional by the property owner, in an effort to evade local preservation ordinances.  And because most city’s historic preservation codes to do not have any provisions that impose an affirmative duty on a property owner to maintain their property, many owners succeed in letting their property deteriorate past the point of repair. The city of Louisville is not immune to this phenomenon, as is evidenced by the legal battles between developer Todd Blue over the Whiskey Row development or the conflict with Genny’s Diner owner, Frank Farris. These examples illustrate the catastrophic economic, political and cultural implications demolition by neglect has on the community and the preservation movement. By examining these examples, and exploring how other cities have attempted to address the issue of demolition by neglect through statutory and judicial means, the city of Louisville might be able to avoid further loss of historic properties. 

	The city of Louisville has several local ordinances that affect the issue of demolition by neglect. The first is the Historic Landmarks and Preservation Districts Commission established under Metro Ordinance §32.250. The ordinance states that historic preservation of “neighborhoods, areas, places structures and improvements” is a “public necessity” that is “required in the interest of the health, prosperity, safety, welfare, and economic well-being of the people.” The purpose of the statute is to “effect and accomplish the preservation, protection, perpetuation, and use of historic landmarks, landmark sites, prehistoric or historic archeological sites...”, to “safeguard the Metro Government’s history and heritage,” to “stabilize and improve property values,” to “foster civic pride in the value of notable accomplishments of the past,” to “assure that new construction and renovation or alteration to existing structures…will be compatible with the historic, visual and aesthetic character of such historic district,” to “strengthen the economy of the Metro Government,” and to “maintain a secure and safe environment in such districts.” To accomplish these the goals the ordinance also lists all of the designated Historic Preservation Districts that have been established by other ordinances, and states that “no person shall make any exterior alteration to any structure or property designated a local landmark or to any property or structure located within a district without obtaining a certificate of appropriateness.” It is this part of the code that most property owners are trying to avoid when they neglect their properties, especially if they know the Commission will be unfriendly to their plans for construction or demolition. 

The ordinance also established the Historic Landmarks and Preservation Districts Commission, which is to consist of 13 members, ten of which are to be appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Metro Council. The commission is granted the power to classify all applications for exterior alterations, review applications to issue certificates of appropriateness, provide assistance to applicants, coordinate review with the Department of Inspections, Permits and Licenses or any other Metro Department, and provide assistance with respect to appeals of the commissions decisions. 