Remember, folks, nice parks, walking trails, pools, and trees have nothing to do with 'urban' versus 'suburban'. Even porches and alleys have made their way into 'new suburban' developments like Plum Creek. Trails are a feature in just about every big suburban housing development since the mid 1990s around these parts. Everybody has pools and parks.
To me, to have 'urban', you have to have most of the following:
1. Horizontal mix of uses (at a minimum) - i.e. apartments NEAR houses NEAR townhouses - ideally on the same block, but at least within the same section. Mueller fails this miserably. Vertical mix of uses on main corridors is a bonus - but I can yield on that one if you at least get horizontal mixes. On the same block as my single-family home, there are two small apartment complexes, one duplex, a triplex, a handful of garage apartments, and a couple of backyard cottages.
2. Variability in dwelling style and size. Mueller fails this one miserably. See
Austin Contrarian's post today for an example of this from Pensacola. Tract housing (where you pick from a small menu) is not urban. (No, this isn't the same thing as picking from a menu of units in a condo building - the condo building is on one lot).
3. Nearby commercial (within SHORT walk). Even my house is iffy on this metric - I have a convenience store within 5 minutes but otherwise it's 15. For Mueller residents, currently, everything is >15, and the retail they do have is standard suburban strip garbage.
4. Homes oriented to the street rather than to the driveway. Mueller does OK here - although the fact that there's nothing to walk to means this is kind of window dressing at this point.