The architect and developer won't be living next to it. Keep that in mind as to judging the community's feelings.
PE asks a good question.
I don't mind that jibe about a developer/architect/planner etc. insofar as what one is saying is they are advocating for something they would not be ok with in their own neighbourhood etc.
But I don't see why that perspective, even if true, has any relevance to the community's actual position on the development itself.
****
I'm one of those people who is happy enough to entertain objections to any development from anyone, whether that objection maybe 'NIMBY'ish' or not.
By entertain, I mean, I'll listen, now 'make your case'.
It's too tall..........ok; why is that a problem?
If your answer is ' because it's too tall' I'm no longer listening.
If your objection is shadowing, I may be listening, because we have a study to look at, to see what will actually be shadowed, and for how long each day, and we can reasonably discuss what effect that may have on a park, a school yard, a sidewalk, a patio or a backyard. That's not a free pass to chop a building height in half, but its a fair ask to consider that impact.
Equally, I'm happy to entertain complaints about very high streetwalls, as the evidence is that most people don't care for them, and that on most roads, there is an adverse impact on pedestrian conditions, particularly above 4 floors.
But the object is to have a constructive objection, where a proponent, planner or architect can give that 'problem' real consideration and examine options which may mitigate the issue.
If the object is 'no because I don't like it' w/o any further substance......I don't know what one expects for a reply; or how anyone thinks that argument will fly at OLT.