 

Demolition by neglect has proven to be a real issue that needs to be addressed in Louisville, and fortunately there are many examples of prominent cities that have taken proactive legislative action to address the issue.  The District of Columbia is one example of a city that was also plagued by demolition by neglect and where the regulatory agencies responsible for historic preservation had no power to stop deterioration before it was too late. However, the District passed several key amendments to local ordinances, the first of which was to its Historic Preservation Act, which placed an affirmative duty on property owners to prevent structures on their property from decaying, and authorizing the mayor to prevent such neglect.  Additionally the city passed an amendment to its building codes, which required the city to consult with the Historic Preservation Board on any of its decisions to demolition a historic property. Based on these amendments, D.C. now has methods of enforcing the statutes preventing demolition by neglect: first is administrative enforcement where the City can impose civil or criminal fines for violations of the statutes, or the city can seek judicial enforcement through a court order. New York City also has a similar system for enforcing their demolition by neglect laws, first the city will send two warning letters to the homeowner, and if the homeowner does not comply then they must attend an administrative hearing to explain any “mitigating circumstances.” Both New York and D.C. have been reluctant to rely on judicial enforcement to enforce their demolition by neglect laws,  because “officials from both cities strongly believe that selective judicial enforcement increase the legitimacy of the ordinance and prevents community backlash against broader historic efforts.” The additional issue raised by using judicial enforcement is that it would be difficult for any court to set a rule for what demolition by neglect requires judicial action. Despite judicial enforcement of these statutes being potentially arbitrary and time consuming, and therefore an ineffective method of preventing neglect, the threat of its use is still an important weapon that the government must have.   

Based on the experiences in cities like D.C. and New York, it seems like the best solution to addressing demolition by neglect in Louisville is to follow in their footsteps. The Historic Landmark and Preservation Commission should be amended to give the Commission the power to hear allegations of neglect, and the ability to impose fines and penalties on any homeowners who are not taking properly maintaining their historic properties. Additionally, the loophole in the Building Code that does not allow the Preservation Commission to have a say in emergency demolition orders should be abolished, and there should be a coordination effort between the Department of Inspections on how best to proceed to preserve a historic home in situations where the structure has decayed enough to be a threat to the public safety. 