neighbor's yard is nasty looking

[feh]

Bad lawns are like cigarette smoke, they effect those around you. Those who are too lazy to keep up a property next to others are free to move somewhere else.

Freedom comes with responsibility, as well.

That's a ridiculous analogy. Weedy lawns don't cause cancer.

If manicured lawns in the neighborhood are that important to a homeowner, then they should live somewhere with covenants. If the owner of the weedy lawn is not breaking any laws/rules, then the onus is on the other person to move if they are so offended.

[Joan.of.the.Arch]

A really unmown lawn, so tall it is going to seed, can be a beautiful thing to me. I love to see the waves of grass bowing under the wind. It makes me feel at peace. I do not see that very often in areas with houses and lawns, but once in while.... Movement of plants is a wonderful part of nature. We tend to think of them as static and unchanging (like a crisp lawn that never visibly moves except vertically, signally a need to be mown) but when the wind causes wands of butterfly weed flowers to jostle, dangling vines to swing, and that unmown grass to bend in traveling waves, nature breathes, "Ah, mmmm, isn't this a gentle, lovely day? Won't you sit with me a while?"

Again, I do weed and keep a green, fertile, mowed lawn, but it is not a great thing in itself. It is a like a frame for the rest of my garden. Its texture, height, and sedateness, have a purpose that only exists in interplay with the other plants in the garden. If I gardened differently, I might keep my lawn differently.

Caoineag's situation is an great example of why a lawn is not owed to anyone. When I have travelled in arid parts of Colorado and the eastern side of the Rockies, the otherwise gorgeous lawns in some yards really piqued my concern. They looked far too out of place and surely must have been sapping both private and public resources. ( But I do live in the most Midwest, same as the original poster and I think varying ways of dealing with what grows on the land around our homes is entirely appropriate, even here)

Another example of accepting different looking lawns-- In some city neighborhoods the trees are tall and 75 or 100 years old. The ground is shaded and dry because of the trees drawing so much water. Grass won't grow there. Often, whatever nature fills in looks inviting and fabulous.

About four years ago in Texas there was a woman who had a house with natural woodland. She was there when no other homes were there. A development with an HOA built up all around her. She was surrounded, right to her property lines. After some years, the HOA (of which she was not a member) started demanding that she cut out the saplings in her yard and make it more like theirs. If I remember correctly, they spoke of doing that kind of "de-foresting" as cleaning up. As though baby trees sprouting up where nature puts them is a dirty thing! I saw photos of her place in winter. It looked like she had a lot of native shrubs and small trees concentrated on the periphery of the property. For all my life I have seen country folks manage their property at roadside just that way. It gives them privacy, keeps the native flora (and fauna) intact, lessens the need for mowing, and often even helps the road by stabilizing the ditches alongside it. And her place was "country" when she moved there. These new people took her to court....Sadly, I think they won. I have not heard whether she removed her trees, razed her property and put in grass and maybe three nursery grown trees to look more like the HOA neighbors. I sure hope not. Gyah, if we cannot tolerate a difference in how our neighbors manage their property, can't we at least have a little sense of history? Her house was there long before theirs.

Yeah, I took this beyond commenting on the original post, but it all does feel related to me.

[maat55]

That's a ridiculous analogy. Weedy lawns don't cause cancer.

If manicured lawns in the neighborhood are that important to a homeowner, then they should live somewhere with covenants. If the owner of the weedy lawn is not breaking any laws/rules, then the onus is on the other person to move if they are so offended.

You make quite a leap from my saying that smoking affects those around you to causing them cancer.

My point was that smoke is bothersome to those who do not smoke. I also, never said a weedy lawn was a bad lawn. Unmowed, trashy, cluttered lawns are a menace to your neighbors. Having a deweeding lawn service is not necessary.

I live in a nice neighborhood with covenants, but not everyone has a fully manicured lawn.

[maat55]

Almost everything affects people around you. It is almost literally impossible to imagine something a person could do in modern society that doesn't affect those around you.

It's funny how some only open up to that fact when the negative effects of others' actions are right in their face.

BLA,BLA,BLA sounds like a lazy excuse for not keeping ones property up. Fact is, people who have self-respect and respect for their neighbors will keep their property up, those who don't are selfish and lazy.

[Inkstain82]

BLA,BLA,BLA sounds like a lazy excuse for not keeping ones property up. Fact is, people who have self-respect and respect for their neighbors will keep their property up, those who don't are selfish and lazy.

No, the selfish and lazy people are the ones who can't conceive of legitimate reasons why another person isn't acting the way the original person wants them to.

[maat55]

No, the selfish and lazy people are the ones who can't conceive of legitimate reasons why another person isn't acting the way the original person wants them to.

There is always a legitimate reason for why people don't do what they should, typical liberal thinking.

[Inkstain82]

There is always a legitimate reason for why people don't do what they should, typical liberal thinking.

I get to do whatever I want because of my freedoms, but everyone else should be compelled to do what it's in my best interests because of my freedoms.

Typical conservative thinking.

[maat55]

I get to do whatever I want because of my freedoms, but everyone else should be compelled to do what it's in my best interests because of my freedoms.

Typical conservative thinking.

I'll let what you said speak for itself. LOL.

[Inkstain82]

I'll let what you said speak for itself. LOL.

I'll remember your concern for the needs of society in the face of individual rights the next time taxation comes up.

[cschin4]

My point is that you have no control over who is next door. I guess he could be unclean and a jerk so this isn't too bad.

No, you don't . He has the right to live his life however he wants and so do you on your own properties. And, there are and should be some minimal laws but I certainly wouldn't want to see anymore laws just because people aren't always thrilled with their neighbor's choices. In many instances, people cannot afford the maintenance that YOU think they should do or they can afford it, but whatever it is may be important to you and not to them. Everyone has different priorities. If their roof doesn't look so hot so what? But, if those things really bother you, you might want to consider putting up a privacy fence.

[cschin4]

BLA,BLA,BLA sounds like a lazy excuse for not keeping ones property up. Fact is, people who have self-respect and respect for their neighbors will keep their property up, those who don't are selfish and lazy.

Funny, I usually find that those who complain the loudest are the ones complaining about people who do keep up their yards but not up to the "standard" of the complainer. More people really need to mind their own business.

[wnlbutterfly]

I don't live in a HOA, but in our town they do have city ordiances that cover this. 12 yrs back when I was pregnant, the mower broke and the lawn at our rental was getting deep (hubby was working out of town). I had finally gotten to the point of heading over to rent a mower. The city sent the landlord and I both a letter saying it had to be mowed. Okay, but the landlord got his letter first, and came over with the mower and a helper (there were some deep ditches). If the yard doesn't get mowed after the letter (don't remember how much time they give), the city comes and mows it themselves but bills you. Guess what, the landlord billed us $200 to mow the yard. REALLY? He claimed it took him and the other guy 2 hrs to mow the yard when I had only been out of the house about 30 minutes to pick up my kids from school, he wasn't there when I left and was leaving when I got home.

And if you have a car that they might even think for a second isn't running, they will be sending you a letter. We had gotten a letter last fall, we only have a one car garage but have a space out back we can park. I just sent back copies of the registrations (although why they didn't just check themselves is beyond me).

Why does the city have such ordinances? Because there are people that don't mow their yard, which can increase rodents and snakes in the neighborhood (and other pests as well), and there are people that don't get rid of junk cars or other property. OH, and we have a snow removal ordinance also, have to have the snow removed from the sidewalk within so many hours after snowfall.

And no, I don't live anywhere fancy, midwest boring little town.

[maat55]

BLA,BLA,BLA sounds like a lazy excuse for not keeping ones property up. Fact is, people who have self-respect and respect for their neighbors will keep their property up, those who don't are selfish and lazy.

Funny, I usually find that those who complain the loudest are the ones complaining about people who do keep up their yards but not up to the "standard" of the complainer. More people really need to mind their own business.

I don't have a high standard for property maintenance. I find very few people who do not maintain to the normal of the neighborhood. I understand people have different standards and am not a complainer.

Seldom you will find those that are well below the standards of the neighborhood, those are the ones I despise. Like it or not, there are standards for every neighborhood.

[maat55]

I'll remember your concern for the needs of society in the face of individual rights the next time taxation comes up.

You think taxation is the remedy to everything, I say it is the downfall of society. The less people take responsibility for themselves, the worse off for everyone. No, I don't believe in the nanny state.

[Inkstain82]

You think taxation is the remedy to everything, I say it is the downfall of society. The less people take responsibility for themselves, the worse off for everyone. No, I don't believe in the nanny state.

You just believe people should choose voluntarily to do whatever you want them to do?