I think there’s a basic flaw in your logic, in that committee’s don’t always act logically or in the best interests of all owners.
One common example of that would be where one or two dominant members of a committee have imposed their will on the others to the extent that the majority of committee members decide life will be easier if they go along with the bullies rather than make a reasonable judgent on the merits of a case, thereby only upsetting one owner.
I recall a couple of old ladies who ruled a small apartment block with iron fists and even stopped gas from being supplied to any floors above theirs for entirely bogus reasons (except that they didn’t like the people upstairs.)
But one hypothetical example would be where someone’s renovations are blocked because the committee is persuaded that having tradespeople in the building would be a bad thing. Obviously that is unreasonable because tradies would need to come into the building, sooner or later, for repairs and maintanance.
One unreasonable excuse for refusing an application, frequently given, is “we have never allowed that before.” That’s not a reason, it’s a statement of historical fact.
I know a building committee that’s full of intelligent, educated people, but there are many cases where the arguments for and against are almost equal, and they might go against their better judgement and vote along with the loudest voice rather than face the shouting match that would ensue if they voted no.
People vote for reasons that may be personal, political or emotional. None of these may be reasonable by any objective measure.