I agree. It's OK for a small house, urban environment, but when you're building 5,000-7,000 s.f. houses with no yards, it's just way too much mass. Certain small clusters are OK, but here in CA we're seeing entire cities springing-up on this concept and they're very isolating. Asphalt and walls.
When I fly into cities I like to look at the spacing in the neighborhoods. One of the most interesting is coming into Ohare. There are new neighborhoods where the “little people” live. They almost look like townhouses. They remind me of a monopoly board with four houses on every property.
Then there are the newer neighborhoods where the “rich” live. Some have large yards, and some appear to sit in the middle of an acre each.
What is most interesting is the huge yards in the “little people” neighborhoods that are over 20 years old. They are bigger than the medium sized yards in the newer “very upper middle class” neighborhoods.
At our home in Seattle, during the spring fall and summer, our yard is an extension of our house. Our three level deck is as large or larger than most back yards today and yet it only covers a small part of our yard. The fact that all our neighbors have equally sized yards only enhances the large parklike effect.
And yet to get a NEW home the same size and price just a few blocks away I would get a 4,600 sq. ft. lot. No wonder rechargeable lawn mowers are even thinkable - when you only have to mow a couple hundred square feet. Scissors would probably work ok.