[kbenson]

How many years until we be stuck with this archaic and elitist concept of a lawn?

Grass where it serves some benefit such as a backyard at least serves a purpose. Front lawns in locations where they are ornamental are a blight.

[akgerber]

The problem is that the standard American house is modeled after a farmhouse or country house, despite the fact that we all live in cities.

Townhouses don't have lawns: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Townhouse And they're excellent building blocks of walkable neighborhoods.

[whoiskevin]

For as long as I live where a lawn does not require a sprinkler. Think outside the box.

[kbenson]

So we are all stuck with an outdated concept that originated from aristocratic landowners who wanted to show how much money they had by devoting a portion of their estate to not growing crops and just being manicured because you can do it without watering?

How very kind of you to epitomize the "get off my lawn" meme, but I'm not on your lawn. I'm not telling you to get rid of your lawn, but the concept as it exists now and it's popularization is at best wasteful, and in some cases actively causes problems with water availability in some areas. Some reform in the popularized concept of a front lawn would be beneficial to everyone.

[spdionis]

Lawns look nice. Sounds like a good enough reason to keep them. We are not THAT overpopulated.

[brc]

They also stop erosion, provide habitat for insects and animals and are pleasing to walk on.

I get having a lawn in a desert is a poor use of water, but for many houses and recreational areas, it's an excellent way to cover ground.

[kbenson]

I have no problem with lawns that are used, but what percentage of front lawns do you think get any use? I'm full in support of rear lawns or front lawns that are used, but as a status symbol I think they are wasteful of land, resources and time. Parks are an excellent place for a grass, and I'm not complaining about those either.