Here's a link to the Google Street View of that first set of row houses. To Kevin's point, and as easily seen in street view, there is a corner cafe just at the end of the block and an Italian restaurant and home goods store around the corner a bit. This is also a reasonable walk to NYU and has good access to several subway stops.
What is great about these types of buildings is that they provide the perfect (and sorely needed in Fort Worth) way of gradually deescalating or, alternatively, intensifying levels of density within a given neighborhood, such that you could transition down to more urban single family homes and then larger single family homes (as is the case in parts of Georgetown in Washington, D.C.) and/or scale up to larger 5-10 story mixed use buildings. This is, as I understand it, precisely why the City and the surrounding neighborhoods had planned for and been seeking a developer to provide this kind of a residential product (one that developers gave up on a couple of generations back and have since forgotten how and where to build them). It would help to create a gradual intensification of density from the small single family houses in the Bluebonnet neighborhood to duplexes and row houses on up toward Berry where you'd eventually hit buildings the size of GrandMarc.
Oh, and for those who feel the need to inevitably resort to the whole "multifamily inevitably turns into slums" remarks, please note that just one of those buildings (i.e. one stoop) seen in the first picture and in the link above sells for about $19 million and just one unit within it (there are two units in most of these buildings) rents for $8,900 per month. Even for New York, that is pretty steep and shows that there really are people who will throw down good money to live in this kind of a home (built in this case in the late 1800s).
I very rarely use the term cookie cutter to describe the suburbs, but I think that in most cases, people who use that term are commenting as much on the perceived quality of the buildings as the uniformity or blandness of the environment. You can have very consistent architectural design that repeats patterns, materials and formats (see Paris or even Rivercrest or Fairmont for that matter) without approaching the type of development issues that most people are driving at when labeling the latest suburban exurb as "cookie cutter."
Edit: By the way, there are places where developers have gone in and tried to put in self-contained pods of nothing but the same set of townhomes or row houses that sit pretty much off on their own without any other uses mixed in and fairly divided from any surrounding development (see Fairfax, VA or parts of Houston), and they just don't work (or at least, not nearly as well as they could). You really need to use them as one ingredient among several that make up a good urban or near-urban neighborhood.