As in everything, I’m sure there are people who like and don’t like bamboo. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And if your neighbor happens to be one who doesn’t like the same plants that you do, that should be irrelevant. That is why they have their property and you have yours. Heck, I don’t like one of the most popular and commonly used natural privacy barriers there are — thick, tall bushes that are trimmed flat and square. But I would never dream of complaining if a neighbor had them on their property. I may like one type of flower or plant and they another. Thank goodness people have different tastes, otherwise neighborhoods and the world would be quite monotonous.
Yes, bamboo is an aggressive plant, and like all aggressive plants, it takes work and maintenance that I would not want to do to contain it. But for that matter, beautiful large flower gardens take work I would not want to do (which is why I don’t have them). But I am glad there are other people who are willing to do the work so I can see and appreciate them.
In my opinion if people don’t contain any aggressive plant species they plant in cities, they should not be allowed to have them. But there are many aggressive ornamental trees and plants in cities that would be even harder to stop from spreading than bamboo, including Bradford pear, mimosa and lombardy poplar trees which not only spread by roots but by yearly seeds and seedpods. At least any new bamboo shoots sprout up close to and in easy sight of the existing bamboo, while birds and animals spread the seeds of mimosa and pear far away from the owner’s yard and tree, unknown, unnoticed, and not removed.
There are also many aggressively spreading ornamental bushes and flowering vines that are common in cities. To not allow bamboo, while allowing other equally and even more problematic aggressively spreading plants, is both illogical and prejudicial.