City strikes right balance on aesthetics of community

By Sioux City Journal

-----

Aesthetics play an important role in the life and success of any community.

An overall pleasing look builds self-confidence, increases the value of property, contributes to economic development and attracts visitors and new residents and businesses.

Because we all have a stake in how our city looks, we all share responsibility for its appearance.

We visit this subject today because aesthetics is one element of the current discussion within Sioux City government about parking recreational vehicles. Last Monday, the City Council discussed, then sent a revised RV ordinance back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for additional work.

We support the idea of easing RV ordinance rigidity while still protecting the aesthetic interests of the city as a whole. It doesn't strike us as unreasonable for the city to have rules about where and when RVs can be parked. (We agree, for example, with Councilman Aaron Rochester, who said: “We don't need boats in the yard in a snowstorm.”)

Another recent city decision involving an element of aesthetics, not to mention public health, was the 3-2 council vote two years ago to ban indoor furniture and appliances from porches. Again, we supported the council's action.

Similarly, we appreciate ordinances about junk and debris and overly long weeds and lawns, and we applaud city efforts to pick up litter, to partner with neighborhood coalitions for annual spring cleanup days and to support the annual Missouri River cleanup day.

Human nature being what it is, some residents will in myriad ways let their property fall into what commonly would be described as unsightly and in need of repair. The city can't and shouldn't seek to pass ordinances to cover all of them, but instead should seek to strike the proper balance on what is a fine line. Go too far in telling property owners what they can and can't do with what they own and the city unfairly infringes on rights. Don't do enough, though, and it abdicates responsibility for the greater good of the community and its citizens.

No hard and fast rules exist for this stuff. Each case must be judged on its own merits. To this point, in our view, the city continues to stay on the right side of the fine line in this area. Steps taken by the city to improve aesthetics - some mandatory, others voluntary - strike us as reasonable, not overly intrusive.