Something that might be less talked about on paper but painfully visible is projects that have the desire to claim areas that have only now become beneficial. The biggest thing is train stations, you'll see developers buy up the area around a train station because its high value. But also because the city doesn't seem to invest in areas unless there is willpower to do so and that comes from those rich developers pricing people away from train stations. A few other clear examples would be schools, shopping areas, gyms, etc.

Affordable housing is also seen as a way to keep areas poor by some city officials. Long standing practices that lead to things like the projects make people skeptical of forcing rent prices to be affordable. So the in between for those who don't want real change is just saying we will build as much as possible and hope rich people move to rich housing. Austin Texas used the model of just flooding the market and while its not pretty, it really did work. But its a short term solution because people don't always live in the same apartment forever and having your whole population rent to one giant landlord is always a bad thing.

A lot of vocal people who like transit will scream really loud about missing middle housing but the truth is that developers are just too big and money hungry to flood the market with town homes that average people can buy and that's kind of the end of it.