Probably a good thing I'm never going to run for office, since I'd be pretty unelectable. Plus, nobody holds elections for benevolent dictator.
But still, I have no sympathy for people like Bob Carrick, or the Linden Hills neighborhood, or any other place complaining about development destroying the "character" of a neighborhood. What gives them the right to decide when a neighborhood has reached peak character? Who lobbies for the potential residents?
The way I read that article is that we already have this big comprehensive plan built with citizen input blah blah blah, but if the end result is nothing over 4 stories can be built in an area as valuable as Lake Calhoun because it'll affect the "character" of the neighborhood or make it harder to drive their single occupancy vehicle to work or whatever lame excuse, well then at that point I think the process is intellectually bankrupt.
I'm glad there have been NIMBYs that have stopped freeways, and I have no problem with a neighborhood group negotiating with a developer for better design or things like that, but when it becomes blocking market rate units for the sake of blocking new construction, I start to get angry.
You have several valid point that I agree with. Why can a few vocal few speak for the whole city's tax base! This is a city and NOT Mayberry!