Yes, of course. There are plenty of things I'm not allowed to do on my property; that's part of living in an orderly society.
Where I live, for example: it's fine for me to build a shed in my back yard, but I'd need special permission (and probably couldn't get it) to build one in the front. And that's fine, in my opinion.
So while the SF case here does seem unreasonable, so does your apparent expectation that "your property" should mean a complete absence of rules.
This sounds like something that needs to just be repealed, but nobody bothered before because nobody even knew about it until some dickhead neighbor decided to comb through all the city codes to find something they could pin on a person they don't like.
The prevalence of poverty in the 1930s was the impetus for "aesthetics" laws like these. Like today, homeowners wanted to preserve property values and living standards in their immediate surroundings.
Which cities don't? The only regulations I've seen about this come from HOA's, not cities.