"John R Cambron" * wrote in message
...


wrote:

About that citation for "excessive"
vegetation: The inspector didn't show
up at the hearing, so the hearing officer
declared it dismissed for lack of
prosecution. Kind of a letdown, actually.

My neighbor across the street told me she
had seen somebody photographing my furry
front yard, (http://cpacker.org/a1.jpg)
and I assume it was the inspector. Maybe
they studied their prints and realized
that it formed the right backdrop, after
all, for the fake wooden mushrooms I had
"planted" earlier this year
(http://cpacker.org/a2.jpg).

--
(Charles Packer)
ungoogled: mailboxATSIGNcpacker.org
http://cpacker.org/whatnews

To my eye your "furry front yard" looks unkempt. Being that it
yours I have no say in the matter.


I find it hard to tell from the picture. I can't tell if the vegetation is
weeds or a groundcover. Also, there is no context. I see similar yards in
the "old money" section of the city. These lots are planted with
groundcovers like ivy, creeping phlox, vinca, etc. because it is too shady
for grass and the slope is not safe for mowing. That said, they don't look
unkempt with tall weeds growing in them nor are the edges spilling over the
hardscape. I think that the strip near the street looks shaggy. I think it
could be much better, and as a gardener, I would look at is as a lost
opportunity. I guess it depends on how you approach life. Lots of people
think of gardening and landscaping as a necessary evil, sort of like doing
dishes, and would never consider doing more than the absolute minimum. It's
funny though, how when people put their house on the market, they understand
the impact that landscaping has on the home's value.