Biguc, while I don't disagree with some of your points, a quick sidenote: 400m is a 5 minute walk, not 10 minutes.
Here's a video posted in one of these threads a while back, of what Bridgwater Centre
could be.
• Video Link
I doubt it will develop exactly like this for lots of reasons (market demand, economics, retail trends, etc.). However, it's tough to argue that the idea behind it isn't a good first step. I mean, I'm not sure if you've ever been to Bridgwater (I doubt many have by the way they talk about it), but it's miles ahead of our 80s suburbs. I mean, this isn't Royalwood. It's a lot denser than anything we've seen in probably 50 years (in terms of lot sizes, patterns, and inclusion of pockets of 4-storey condos and townhouses) - density that may surprisingly come close to some of the oft-cited "inner-suburbs" lauded here. There are backlanes along some streets, and in many ways, it's the fused-grid that planners love. Connectivity in the grid isn't an issue, because there are tonnes of egresses that connect bays/streets - this isn't the cliche'd Florida example where a kid needs to drive 15 miles to his friend's cul-de-sac which he backs onto. Lots of pathways and cycling trails too.
As for the Centre shown in the video, isn't this what we're striving for in our new communities? Built to the street, higher density, mixed-use? It's basically as close as we can get to Osborne without building a community using 1900s standards.