Neil Baxter

Last week Wayne Hemingway, founder of the Red Or Dead fashion label, pronounced that the British public had been well and truly stitched up by the banks and housing developers. In the interest of balance, he might also have thrown Margaret Thatcher's government, the great advocates of housing ownership for all, into the mix.

Hemingway's thesis is that over recent decades, a combination of marketing hype and financial chicanery has persuaded the public the best place to put their money is high-density, new-build property.

Of course, as with so much of his pithy Lancashire good sense, he has a point. Before we plunged into the financial maelstrom of 2008, it was already apparent that much new urban development was about a buy-to-let delusion rather than addressing a housing need. Throughout the 1990s, such properties were snapped up by those with the cash or, more usually, the borrowing ability, to build up a buy-to-let portfolio.

For many of these investors, their dreams of becoming property millionaires have ended in negative equity and short-term lets which, if they are lucky, are providing a modest return while interest rates are depressed.

It's easy to write off the folly of those who bought into the buy-to-let hype with a dismissive "hell mend them". Unfortunately, for all those who can afford to take the hit there are many whose modest venture into residential property speculation is their pension plan - and not one ever likely to reap real dividends.

Of course, the situation that Hemingway bemoans is rather more complex than his straightforward blaming of banks and developers who have built dense high-rises on urban sites. In fact, for decades it has been acknowledged that dense urban development is the most sustainable form of human habitation. While most people might aspire to finding a new home in the country, there simply isn't enough country to go round.

Something else that Hemingway might want to add to his hit list is the despoliation of greenfield sites by the inexorable advance of semi-detached villas, all made out of ticky-tacky, which are the predominant housing type at the edge of every town and city in the UK. And they all look just the same.

Hemingway's argument is wisely levelled at institutions which manipulate money. The banks have, after all, been proven as the villains of the piece whose profligacy and greed has brought us to our dire economic straits. Housing developers, certainly those with large-scale operations, are assumed to be awash with wealth, with an eye only to the main chance.

This rather simplistic view may be true of some banks and some developers. However, there are other financial institutions which have continued to lend responsibly and developers who create appropriate new homes with significant care for context and for design quality. That perhaps is the nub of the issue. Hemingway is a very able designer. Doubtless, he has long ago learned that arguments for design quality rarely raise much press interest or get you on the telly. Thus, his dismissal of financial institutions is the stepping off point for a much more nuanced argument for where we should be going with our cities.

It is undoubtedly much more difficult for politicians and planners to promote the regeneration of towns and cities by filling in the gaps and supporting residential development of a quality which will encourage people to see living within the city as highly desirable. The UK attitude seems to be that living in town is OK for singles, couples, even retirees. However, it's not really the place for families.

Yet, if you visit Paris, Barcelona or Rome, there are family apartments in the heart of town and communities are a rich mix of businesses, shops, bars, restaurants - and homes.

It would be wrong to suggest the UK is without exemplar projects that we could look to for inspiration. Hemingway's own background as a planner and his passion for design is demonstrated in the housing project which he created, in tandem with Wimpey, in Gateshead. He is bringing a similar approach to West Lothian.

Yet he is far from the only innovator in housing. In Glasgow, March 1989 saw the opening of the so-called 21st Century Tenement in Maryhill. This development proved that in its scale and the quality of life it generates, the Glasgow tenement is not simply something of history but a thoroughly appropriate model for new, medium-rise development.

Many further examples since demonstrate the benefits of medium-rise tenemental urban development. Perhaps the finest is Glasgow's Gorbals, with subtle, understated and elegantly simple new tenements around shared gardens on broad tree-lined boulevards, and cars parked safely at the centre of the street.

So Hemingway is right. The buy-to-let bubble has burst. Housing is not about investment. It's about creating places where people want to live. It's about generating pride in our towns and cities. That can only be achieved by harnessing political will, careful planning and trusting to the skills of our architects. That's the only way to ensure that the future we build for ourselves is viable, attractive and, hopefully through design, even fun.

Neil Baxter is secretary and treasurer of The Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland