No Green Grass? It’ll Cost You

From the outbox of Meyer’s inbox:

Wasn’t quite sure whether to file this under the “Brown Before Green” section or “Economy.” Realizing how silly it is, naturally it belongs in politics. Seems like a young couple with a kid was trying to do their bit for conserving water and it landed them in hot water. (See what I did there with the “water?”). Imagine working hard for your dream home and then being told what you should put in your front lawn. Of course this begs the question what do you have in your front yard and would you get sued for it? Can’t wait to hear the answers and see the pictures!

ORANGE OFFICIALS SUE COUPLE WHO REMOVED THEIR LAWN by Amina Kahn writing for the Los Angeles Times

City codes require that live landscaping cover 40% of the yard. Quan and Angelina Ha say their water use has dropped 80% since they replaced the grass with wood chips and drought-tolerant plants.

Some Southern California cities fine residents for watering their lawns too much during droughts. But in Orange, officials are locked in a legal battle with a couple accused of violating city ordinances for removing their lawn in an attempt to save water.

The dispute began two years ago, when Quan and Angelina Ha tore out the grass in their frontyard. In drought-plagued Southern California, the couple said, the lush grass had been soaking up tens of thousands of gallons of water — and hundreds of dollars — each year.

They said they were trying to do something good for the environment. “We’ve got a newborn, so we want to start worrying about her future,” said Quan Ha, an information technology manager for Kelley Blue Book.

But city officials told the Has they were violating several city laws that require residents to cover significant portions of their frontyards with live ground cover. On Tuesday, the couple is scheduled to appear in Orange County Superior Court to challenge the city’s lawsuit against them.

Soon after the city complained about the yard, the Has placed wood chips on top of the dirt, with help from neighbor Dennis Cleek.

“It’s their yard, it’s not overgrown with weeds, it’s not an eyesore,” said Cleek, whose own yard boasts fruit trees. “We should be able to have our yards look the way we want them to.”

But city officials determined the fix was not acceptable, saying city codes require that 40% of the yard be landscaped predominantly with live plants. “Compliance, that’s all we’ve ever wanted,” said Senior Assistant City Atty. Wayne Winthers.

Last summer, the couple tried to appease the city by building a fence around the yard and planting drought-tolerant greenery — lavender, rosemary, horsetail and pittosporum, among others.

They sent a photo of the yard to city officials in October. But according to the city, their landscaping still did not comply with city standards. “They put up a nice fence, but [the photo] didn’t show anything about how they had complied with code, as far as the frontyard goes,” Winthers said, “nor did it include a site plan.”

To read the rest of the article go here.