All developers have people who take the development paperwork/plans/proposals through the various governmental hoops. In addition to fulfilling bureaucratic needs, they also lobby to ensure that their development is really built.
The developers also work hard to develop political influence. That is why the biggest campaign contributors in my city/county are real estate developers.
Citizens -- not activists -- who object to all or part of a development plan are at a huge disadvantage. Meetings are held during normal working hours, which makes it tough if you've got a job. Money is limited -- you have no political influence, and cannot match the developers ad-for-ad. The process is arcane -- can you pay a lawyer to help you through it?
It's just a fact, e-s: the developers have the upper hand. It's far easier for them to build, than for you to oppose.
You live in a dream world !!
LOL! It's a lot more real than the one you apparently inhabit.
I'm not actually against house-building -- far from it. And I'm strongly opposed to the cute-fuzzy-animal tactics of the enviros.
What I'm opposed to is Pave-and-Pack developments and strong-arm developer tactics, not to mention the immense infrastructure costs that these developments inevitably impose on the city/county budgets.
Call them what you want; I call them NIMBY activists because that's what they are. - What they are doing is immoral, and unreasonable. - If they wish to influence the use of property, then they are morally obligated to purchase that property. - Nobody has a right to encumber the property of another so that they can use it to further their own enjoyment.
These "pave and pack" developers meet a legitimate market need for affordable housing solutions. If they didn't, they wouldn't be in business.