"We never have the kind of mismanagement problems elsewhere that we do here, and all sorts of obstacles always seems to pop up.”
There are two parts to that sentence - not necessarily related.
It's a long time since I had any dealings with the Planning Dept, so I no longer know anything about its staff, processes or 'culture'.
It's certainly the case that over decades planners/politicians (and public) have been fairly conservative. Which is one reason Edinburgh wasn't overrun by roads.
Things like the St. James Centre have served as a very visible reminder not to 'do that again'.
In the past large companies (notably Scottish and Newcastle) got away with things because 'the planners' knew they were "large employers" and "could move elsewhere".
I suspect that the second part of the developer's sentence implies that 'the planners' didn't just let them do what they wanted.
Planning is far from an exact science - even less (in spite of legislation/rules) just a 'process'
In an ideal world environment, streetscape, heritage, employment etc. wouldn't be in conflict, but...
Then of course there are egos - developers, architects, planners politicians, campaigners...