Not really, as usual with Liew, he makes clever sounding arguments that end up being very thin. He complains about creating insecure jobs or buy-to-let landlords buying up properties, but doesn't explain why having no jobs or no houses would be better.
Most bizarre is the claim that "Any uplift to local property prices comes at a cost to other areas of the city." This is a completely wild argument to read in the The Guardian. Rampant property prices due to lack of housing is one of the worst economic ills in the country. Yes, building more houses will slow or even lower the valuation of properties elsewhere in the city, and yes, this is absolutely a good thing. But in his attempt to make rattle out his arguments, he's put his critical faculties on hold, and ended up making a nimby argument that would be better served in the Telegraph.
This is normal Liew, he doesn't just do it about United to be fair, he's just a try hard.