Just what is being done by city legislators when it comes to fixing the boulevard ordinance?

by

IMG_5304

That is a very good question. The current ordinance states:

96.010  RIGHT-OF-WAY LANDSCAPING.

   (a)   The portion of a dedicated public right-of-way between the street and the property line excepting the sidewalk shall be landscaped and maintained by the abutting property owner. Landscaping shall be limited to sod, seed or other living ground cover approved by the city. Nonliving ground cover, including, but not limited to, rock, stone, brick concrete, asphalt or other like materials, shall not be used as landscape material except as provided herein.
   (b)   The city may authorize the use of nonliving ground cover for landscaping a public right-of-way when it is determined that a location will not allow for adequate maintenance of sod or other living ground cover. This exception shall not include the use of loose rock or asphalt as landscaping material.
(1992 Code, § 38-12)  (Ord. 37-03, passed 5-5-2003)
As you can see, as it currently states, your boulevard can ONLY be green cover. When is our council going to fix this? I do know that some councilors agree, this needs to be revised so thousands of residents can be in compliance. The mayor and some of the council say just leave it as is.
The problem with that is that there is NOTHING stopping code enforcement from giving out violations. Nothing. As the ordinance is written right now, they can give out a violation to anyone who is not in compliance. And they can pick and choose who those violators are.
So how is ‘doing nothing’ fixing the problem? I encourage our council works on revising the ordinance.
Posted in: Code Enforcement, SF City Council, Sioux Falls

9 Thoughts on “Just what is being done by city legislators when it comes to fixing the boulevard ordinance?”

  1. Dan Daily on August 20, 2014 at 4:07 pm said:

    Before this ordinance, revise the ordinance that doesn’t allow citizens or the city appeals into court. Citations are unenforceable unless fines or action are upheld and enforced by circuit court. It’s civil procedure and fundamental liberty the city refuses to acknowledge.

  2. Poly43 on August 20, 2014 at 4:34 pm said:

    Landscaping shall be limited to sod, seed or other living ground cover approved by the city.

    Does this include weeds…..the only ground cover that will flourish after we plow all the chemical de-icers onto it?

  3. James on August 21, 2014 at 7:53 am said:

    just make it simple and say, ” nothing that obstructs the view of traffic”. I know simple and Sioux Falls government don’t go hand and hand, but give me a break!

  4. rufusx on August 21, 2014 at 8:34 am said:

    Poly, yes – so long as they are less than 6 inches tall. James – that would be less than 3 feet high or no lower than 12 feet.

  5. rufusx on August 21, 2014 at 8:36 am said:

    DL -if someone plants vegetables in the boulevard – should the city come pull weeds and perform other garden maintenance chores for them? That would be consistent with your insistence that the city should trim the trees for them. Or is consistency not really that much of a thing with you?

  6. l3wis on August 21, 2014 at 9:27 am said:

    Oh, Ruf, you love to split hairs don’t you.

  7. anominous on August 21, 2014 at 11:13 am said:

    So if you have no sidewalk on your property, can you plant whatever you want out there, since the statute clearly doesn’t apply?

  8. rufusx on August 21, 2014 at 4:17 pm said:

    I love CONSISTENT policy. It’s owner planted vegetation on city property. Tree, grass, shrub, watermelon…………

  9. teatime on August 23, 2014 at 1:17 am said:

    I think they look nice and the city should drop this, unless a view is obstructed.

Post Navigation