I've often been asked, as an avid reader, "Do you like books with a lot of detailed description?" A discussion usually ensues over this point, that partially includes not only the reader's preference for detail, but also the specific book in question.
For example, when a setting is so unique, as in Delia Owens' Where the Crawdads Sing, I relish the beautiful prose that paints the scenery in vivid sensory delights. In this particular novel, it is of special importance to the essence of the story. And therein lies the answer to the question, how much description is too much?
It only makes sense to delve into detail about a marsh teaming with plants and wildlife, when the main character is referred to as "The Marsh Girl." It's intrinsic to the development of Kya. However, should a writer include page after page of setting description in every novel? Probably not. So, it is up to the author to determine if such detail is deemed necessary.
Certain stories demand the author provide a detailed setting for the reader. After all, how difficult would it be to read a fantasy novel, if the other realm was not described with care? Readers crave to easily imagine a place they've never experienced before, which only comes through the author's words.
On the other hand, a novel written with the goal of evoking an emotional response, requires building upon something quite different than a detailed setting. The same would apply to a suspenseful story that builds upon action more so than setting. Not that a certain amount of description isn't necessary in these novels, but the demand for it from the reader is less.
At the risk of frustrating some, I would suggest the amount of description depends on the specific goal of the book. Let that be the general guide. The rest is still personal preference.