“That word "balance" again. It's the answer to all dilemmas.”
Yes, sometimes people think it’s possible to reconcile different demands and aspirations ‘equitably’.
For many years the apparent balance has been between status quo/stagnation and progress/‘the future’.
Sometimes the ‘progress’ side of the scales has been largely altruistic - piped water, sewers, paved roads etc.
In recent decades progress/development have mostly been promoted by people likely to make money from it. Opposers are of course NIMBIES (by definition, a ‘bad thing’).
This has largely been promoted as ‘a good thing’ - more jobs (never mentioning ones lost in the process) or ‘your pension fund relies on it’ etc.
After the WW II there was a lot of optimism and utopianism about rebuilding bombed cities. Somehow this was allowed to infect cities that had barely been bombed!
Some parts of Europe rebuilt in a pre-war style, in the UK it was more likely to be more like the USA.
Change is inevitable and often a good thing. “Balance” is largely impossible but sometimes it’s worth considering who is holding the scales and whose hand may be weighting one side or the other.
Those with large amounts of money usually have the advantage. Unfortunately there is currently a planning system often unwilling or unable to balance that.