Capitalising Antigentrification

Gentrification is now recognised as a core problem by urban policy makers, who insist that cities must protect spaces and rents for low-income sectors like artworkers (and other creative sector entrepreneurs) in order to maintain urban vitality, and mend cities from the pernicious effects of unhindered gentrification. Checking back gentrification is a good result for the creative class, artists included, and may even be the optimal one: creatives can then maintain their role in converting cities to their own ends with the added advantage of subsequent development taking place around them.
But what of those who also have claims—perhaps more trenchant, historically- based claims—to urban sites but who are not creatives? How do the interests and material conditions of this population fare when the combination of creative-led gentrification and antigentrification shape policy?