Around here, rain storms, a slowly gestating wall of humidity, and the odd perfect 70-degree day or two have announced the beginning of lawn mowing season (also known as spring) in Washington. The two-and-a-half-story rowhouse I live in leaves me acquitted of this duty, and for that I’m glad, but I didn’t realize the (non)decision to live in a house without a lawn had a moral and sustainability component until I heard of Fritz Haeg.
Haeg is an architect in Los Angeles who’s been getting scads of attention for his Edible Estates campaign. Its mission is to abolish the suburban residential lawn.
His argument: Lawns are useless, cosmetic spaces that extract our time and sweat while giving very little in return. They turn the focus of the community inward to individual houses and don’t encourage relationships across a neighborhood.
In Haeg’s view, community gardens are a far better investment of space and time, for many of the same reasons that other sustainability buzzwords like New Urbanism and green roofs have risen to wider public consciousness. Community gardens become a focal point for the entire neighborhood, and, with transportation from fields to grocery stores unnecessary, they help to reduce the carbon footprint of the nation’s food supply. The urban farmers growing produce in Detroit, New York, St. Louis, Los Angeles, and other cities all already understand this. Also, you’ve probably noticed that food and commodities prices are skyrocketing.
Haeg links American’s attachment to the lawn back to Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello, but since the 18th century, it seems like appetites for lawns must have also been fed by bad urban planning of the type Jane Jacobs abhorred. If a community lacks quality communal green space, everyone is going to insist on having bigger and bigger lawn. If they get them, then no quality communal green space will ever be built. There’s also enough middle class conspicuous consumption attached to the average suburban spread to make it suspect. What is a lawn for, except to exhibit to your neighbors how much free time and disposable income you have to pour into a manicured and cropless field? Certainly, lawns have value as a transitional zone to mediate public and private space between the street and the home, but compared to the crisis of sustainability and global food shortages, this is another luxury. And I bet Haeg would say that community gardens can perform the same function.
It’s yet another inversion of the illusionary mentality of booming postwar suburbs that still drives development in many places: A big house with a big lawn, away from all the people, leads to a lifestyle that is definitively less livable and sustainable.
So who’s trading in their lawn mower for gardening shears?
Comments (7)
so informative, thanks to tell us.
Posted by Guirequarfdaf | September 29, 2010 9:30 PM
Posted on September 29, 2010 21:30
hi
Posted by Rekesiareeve | June 20, 2009 7:50 PM
Posted on June 20, 2009 19:50
Upon further investigation through the link to Edible Estates (which is one of the worst web sites I've ever laid eyes on), it becomes apparent that Mr Haeg's problem is only with front lawns!
How about a little accuracy and knowledge of your subject next time, Mr. Mortice?
Posted by Derek Brooks | April 25, 2008 4:23 PM
Posted on April 25, 2008 16:23
Reggie: Good point about the dogs. I almost made that one too. I have a dog as well.
There is a also fallacy in the entry that smacks of the author not knowing his subject. Who builds "bigger and bigger" lawns? Have you seen the sized of lawns in new housing? "Postage stamp" is a good descriptor. Lawns have gotten smaller over the last 20 years not bigger. I'd wager the average size of the lawn for a sizable percentage of new construction is less than the footprint of the house.
Posted by Derek Brooks | April 25, 2008 10:49 AM
Posted on April 25, 2008 10:49
This is a great blog entry. In working with landscape architects across the nation I have definitly seen a trend towards landscapes losing their lawns. Especially with the water constraints on a national level I think more people, cities, and landscape architects are grasping onto the need to be more sustainable and promote water conservation in their designs.
Posted by Jeff Simeone | April 25, 2008 10:24 AM
Posted on April 25, 2008 10:24
I guess Haeg doesn't have dogs, either. With two large German Sheapards (rescued dogs, by the way) who love to romp in their yard, I can't imagine life without a backyard. And I don't know how congenial my neighbors would be to have my big pups sharing a neighborhood communal property? Let's face it, unlike Europe their are not many dog-friedly places in this country. At least with my own small yard, I can keep my dogs AND my neighbors happy.
Posted by Reggie Konet | April 25, 2008 9:54 AM
Posted on April 25, 2008 09:54
I guess Haeg doesn't have kids. I spend an awful lot of family time in my yard, so I'd hardly call it "cosmetic".
Posted by Derek Brooks | April 25, 2008 9:30 AM
Posted on April 25, 2008 09:30