Originally Posted by Stu from NYC (Post 1795388)

Why would they object to it as it would save huge amounts of water?

Originally Posted by Chitown (Post 1795618)

The turf looks great. It is designed to let the water soak through the turf into the soil. It needs no watering, does not attract bugs, stays green, as for the expense, if one can afford it God Bless them. As for the comments about what happens 5 years down the line, well if it needs replacing or maintenance well the owner will need to be responsible for it just like any other piece of there property. All rules had good intentions when they first came out. But all rules and laws can easily be amended and in this case I believe it should be amended.

Originally Posted by Chitown (Post 1795618)

The turf looks great. It is designed to let the water soak through the turf into the soil. It needs no watering, does not attract bugs, stays green, as for the expense, if one can afford it God Bless them. As for the comments about what happens 5 years down the line, well if it needs replacing or maintenance well the owner will need to be responsible for it just like any other piece of there property. All rules had good intentions when they first came out. But all rules and laws can easily be amended and in this case I believe it should be amended.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 1795407)

Thanks for sharing this. I had often thought about doing something like this. We spend so much on irrigation to water the crumby grass. We, the community, spend a ton of money on trying to fight bugs, fungus and other things that kill or damage our lawns. We dump tons of toxic chemicals into the sewers and ground water to try to keep the lawns alive. And any attempt by home owners like this one, to promote a landscape that could save water, reduce chemical pollution or save money and improve curb appeal with less required maintenance get squashed. In the cyv's like the picture shows, I wonder what the reason is for not allowing it. Does it interfere with something? Or is it just the rule?
When we purchased our home we didn't know there was a grate covering a sewer/runoff drain in our yard. Since we bought new, it must have been cleared with the developer to cover it with old carpet and cover that with sod. After some time (well over a year) trying to deal with flooding in the low spot, I discovered what had been done to try and disguise this sewer to make the home more sellable. Still love our home, but.? I think that unless there is a real and demonstrable reason this artificial grass actually hurts in some real way, why not allow it or some viable option for making a landscape that looks good while saving water, eliminating the need for chemicals and reducing or eliminating constant maintenance. Just asking.

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC (Post 1795388)

Why would they object to it as it would save huge amounts of water?

Originally Posted by terenceanne (Post 1795521)

We drove by - Its only the front section of the villa and looks very nice. That's more cosmetic. Not sure how it would look to have a full lawn of it.
Unfortunately we have rules here and it's part of living in TV.

Originally Posted by kendi (Post 1795644)

Wonder if it would be hard to clean if needed. i.e. dog poop that is mushy can't be picked up all the way. It smears on the grass. Wonder too if eventually enough dirt would build up between the blades that weeds would take root.

Originally Posted by terenceanne (Post 1795521)

We drove by - Its only the front section of the villa and looks very nice. That's more cosmetic. Not sure how it would look to have a full lawn of it.
Unfortunately we have rules here and it's part of living in TV.

Originally Posted by TooColdNJ (Post 1795578)

SERIOUSLY?
What person in their right mind would spend all that money on something that had to be submitted for approval first, and probably never would be ??

Everyone breaks the rules... even with a 6 inch garden flag. Sometimes bylaws can be changed after an appeal for the flag or (frog, or flowerpot, etc.) that was probably reported (by a disgruntled neighbor not invited to a party or you had words with! Vindictive? Of course.

The the rules are in place to set limits. Whatever is determined in an appeal is on an issue by issue basis, and between the committee members and homeowners. If there’s a decision to change that rule, all homeowners should receive a copy of the addendum. Then if someone pushes the limit by putting up a 6 foot flag(statue, flowerpot, etc), they would be fined.

The ARTIFICIAL turf looks a hell of a lot better than some lawns, and definitely would help solve a lot of other problems mentioned here. It looks like it needs a LEGO house now. Not everyone can afford to put the turf down, so use your imagination- and think about what the road would look like with houses with a mixture of some with artificial turf and others with ugly grass!