Of course, the shape of the lot and other physical factors put general limitations on the bounds of the house, but filling the entire lot isn't usually the primary goal.
Maybe it's more useful for a renovation?
Commercial real estate generally optimizes for profit, which means, floor space, however this may be subject to regulation and particularly significant cost constraints (eg. maximum height before alternate structural features required, maximum height of available raw materials, HVAC/insulation, site aspect, site topography).
High end residential real estate is perhaps the most interesting, because good residential architecture facilitates aesthetic concern and draws from the full palette of commercial architecture in addition to traditional methods while not being constrained by finance. Hence, very interesting results can sometimes be obtained from good architects who will consider factors such as foliage, natural audio, etc. which are often ~ignored or afterthoughts in commercial/industrial.
IMHO good and original design in adequately resourced contexts tends to be iterative and to consider all paths toward a solution, not only a preconceived approach and a waterfall solution.
I kind of feel like its overkill, but I'm curious what it would come up with if given a pretty strict boundaries in terms of space and dimensions even on a very large, multi-million dollar house. What's the threshold for when it could be applicable, versus "Yeah, we don't need something this insane to do this."
I do agree, it would be completely applicable in large sprawling buildings are being renovated, but are looking at how they can utilize existing space better.