Maybe I'm crazy, but I guess I don't see thinking we don't *need* something like SFHs (at some minimum % of all parcels) but also that even an urbanist's greatest wet dream wouldn't see the majority of them go away as being absolutist or extreme. I don't think it's a straw man to say life would move on if they did all disappear over the next 200 years. It was an unnecessary swipe at you, but you actually did claim
that you don't like large apartment buildings because you can't knock on their doors to have neighborly interaction - something I find hard to reconcile with your advocacy for 13-story apartment buildings (*real neighbors are for the neighborhood interior in small structures, right?), and disingenuous given the many places people in apartments are out and about in the public realm.
And whatever you might believe the opinions of the silent majority in given neighborhoods are re: development, the actual history in this city (and, particularly in many Uptown neighborhoods) has been repeated downzoning over time, including getting the vast majority of land zoned R1 or R2/B to prevent even the gentlest kind of density (triplexes, 4-plexes, 6-8-unit single lot apartment buildings). People appeal 4-story, single-lot, 10-unit structures based on made up claims of renters having more garbage than homeowners. Even simple things like re-allowing duplexes on standard lot sizes in R2/R2B and ADUs didn't go through without a little pushback. I'm waiting for anyone but the urbanist community to propose any sort of up-zoning, including missing middle. I actually testified at the recent Wedge re-zoning planning commission hearing and said I felt the downzones of R5 and R6 should have been counterbalanced by allowing many R2B to become R3 or R4 in much more of the Wedge, and that the whole thing shouldn't have been done without a broader look across Hennepin, Lyndale, and Lake. I attended the neighborhood walk and staff meeting regarding that downzoning proposal and heard several people become giddy upon hearing neighboring parcels were being brought down to R2B. And I read the history of that proposal, where neighbors were so extreme in their demands (proposing leaving literally 5 R5 or R6 parcels in the entire Wedge) that they couldn't even find a compromise with CPED. So, I dunno, you'll excuse me for being a little surprised at that accusation toward me.
In any case, I only brought this whole damn thing up because the specific e-democracy thread was about our precious shoreland overlay district. My point was that of all the things people get riled up about, the height of a building against a park+river/lake has very little to do with its environmental impact, and the very post defending its creation spoke directly to that (caring about profit and aesthetic preferences).