It's a bit like removing busstops as a municipality, in favour of car lanes. If you know that busses are used 4x as much by a low socioeconomic class compared to say an upper class, and vice versa for cars, then a law preventing the elimination of (even unprofitable) bus stops is essentially a protection of vulnerable citizens.
Same with housing stock. If you only have gigantic housing units that only the ultra-rich can afford, poorer people get pushed out the city even faster compared to a housing stock with many smaller (and thereby affordable) units. Preventing parties from eradicating this stock again is a protective measure for people who rely on this housing stock to have a home in the city.
Same with housing stock. If you only have gigantic housing units that only the ultra-rich can afford, poorer people get pushed out the city even faster compared to a housing stock with many smaller (and thereby affordable) units. Preventing parties from eradicating this stock again is a protective measure for people who rely on this housing stock to have a home in the city.