Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
Improving the visual quality of commercial
development at the rural–urban fringe
William C. Sullivan ∗ , Sarah Taylor Lovell
The Environmental Council, University of Illinois, NRES Department, 1101 W. Peabody Drive, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
Received 18 February 2004; received in revised form 19 January 2005; accepted 19 January 2005
Available online 31 March 2005
Abstract
Rapid growth at the rural–urban fringe has resulted in increased commercial development along arterial roads connecting cities
and the countryside. These developments, often termed “commercial strips” or “linear commercial complexes”, are characterized
by a mix of many different types of businesses that often lack any separation from the road, spatial definition, or natural features
such as trees. The result is too often an open, barren, confusing setting with little aesthetic appeal. Could a change in the
design of the commercial setting or the addition of natural features improve the visual quality of the roadway at the rural–urban
fringe? This study examines the extent to which local citizens prefer various development patterns for a roadway corridor at
the fringe of a medium-sized community. Participants responded to a photo-questionnaire that included images of alternative
design treatments for the roadside and written items dealing with visual quality. The results revealed moderate preference for
the existing condition that showed a typical Midwestern US agricultural setting. The addition of various types of commercial
development to the settings caused preference ratings to plummet. However, the addition of trees to the commercial development
scenes increased preference ratings substantially. In fact, this low cost alteration in the design not only caused preference ratings
to rebound, but actually exceed the ratings for the existing condition. Ratings were higher still for scenes in which trees were
added to the existing condition. The findings suggest that nature plays an important role in the aesthetics of developed settings
at the rural–urban fringe, and that trees in particular can be used to improve visual quality. This study has implications for the
design of roadways and commercial developments at the fringe.
© 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Rural–urban fringe; Sprawl; Commercial development; Land use; Landscape preferences; Roadway design
1. Introduction
Where rural arterial roads approach cities, they become magnets for urban commercial expansion. When
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 217 244 5156;
fax: +1 217 244 1507.
E-mail address: wcsulliv@uiuc.edu (W.C. Sullivan).
0169-2046/$ – see front matter © 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.01.008
approaching a city from the countryside, these roads
too often present visually chaotic settings consisting of commercial development that represents the
worst of urban sprawl—settings that are open, barren, monotonous, and overwhelmingly ugly. Designed
for maximum visibility and convenience, commercial
strips along the roads of the rural–urban fringe include
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
enormous parking lots in front of superstores that are
set a great distance from the road, with a striking openness and lack of spatial definition or trees that might
block views to a store, its merchandise, or its advertisements. The result is a landscape that people dislike, but
somehow tolerate.
Should we relegate commercial strip development
at the rural–urban fringe to the visual category of landscape that includes industrial sites and junkyards? Or
are there inexpensive ways to improve the visual quality, and ultimately, the experience of the users of such
settings? In this paper, we explore the extent to which
typical commercial development in a Midwestern US
agricultural landscape impacts the visual quality of the
countryside. We also explore the reactions of nearby
residents to alternative patterns of commercial development at the rural–urban fringe.
We begin by examining commercial development at
the rural–urban fringe and the resulting landscape that
it too often creates. Next, we review recent research regarding preferences for various landscape settings, focusing on roadsides, scenic corridors, and central business districts. Finally, reporting the results of a new
study, we examine the extent to which local citizens
prefer various development patterns for a roadway corridor at the fringe of a medium-sized community and
discuss the implications of the findings for planning
commissions, designers, and businesses.
2. Background
In order to better understand the how the design
of commercial strips can alter the visual quality of
the rural–urban fringe, we provide a critical review of
the literature that addresses several essential questions.
What is the rural–urban fringe and why is it growing? How has commercial development evolved at the
fringe? What do previous studies tell us about individual’s preferences for various settings that might provide insight into a better design for development at the
fringe?
2.1. The setting
The rural–urban fringe is the landscape located just
outside of established cities and towns, where the countryside begins. The fringe is characterized by diver-
153
sity in land uses, with many areas in continuous transition (Friedberger, 2000). An assortment of settlements including farmsteads, dispersed housing, and
commercial strips make up this transitional space between countryside and city (Daniels, 1999, p. 87). The
rural–urban fringe has become a target for rapid commercial development by a range of businesses including
car dealerships, superstores, and fast food restaurants.
The consequences of this development include the destruction of trees, settling of floodplains, development
of businesses and monotonous housing (Friedberger,
2000).
Despite problems with development at the fringe,
the popularity of this area continues to grow. Many
individuals are drawn to the fringe because it offers the
bucolic atmosphere of a semi-rural area (Lapping et
al., 1989; Daniels, 1999), without sacrificing the
conveniences of the nearby city. Advances in transportation and telecommunication have added to the
popularity of fringe settings by allowing individuals
to live further from their jobs (Edwards and Edwards,
1999). For many individuals, the rural–urban fringe
seems like the perfect place to call home—a peaceful
environment with all modern conveniences close by.
2.2. Commercial development at the fringe
With rapid growth at the rural–urban fringe, communities are experiencing a change in the location of commercial development. Many businesses have moved
from urban centers or shopping malls to linear shopping
developments arranged parallel to the primary streets
and highways that connect the countryside to the urban center. These developments, termed “commercial
strips” or “linear commercial complexes” (Davies and
Baxter, 1997), are characterized by mixing many different types of businesses, both retail and non-retail,
with unrelated functions and activities (Reimers and
Clulow, 2004).
There are a number of reasons commercial development is attracted to the rural–urban fringe. First, the
popularity of the fringe has resulted in a higher traffic density along the roadways, as individuals travel
longer distances between home and work. This allows
for increased visibility of the store and better automobile access (Davies and Baxter, 1997). Second, greater
land availability for development results in lower taxes,
rent, and land values and allows plenty of space for
154
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
parking compared with the urban settings where past
businesses resided (Lynch and Southworth, 1996). Additionally, the expansion of individual businesses or
developments can be made easily by extending the
strip lengthwise to consume more land. Finally, the
controls on development are often not as strict as in
other areas where ordinances and zoning restrictions
can severely suppress growth (Lynch and Southworth,
1996). In many fringe areas, development permits are
not required or are easily obtained, and the involvement
of city planners is very limited (Davies and Baxter,
1997).
Commercial strips at the rural–urban fringe play an
important role in the experience of entering a city. Commercial strips can create a positive, or more likely negative, impression of the city itself. Too often they are
noisy, confusing, monotonous areas that contribute to a
decline in quality of the region (Lynch and Southworth,
1996). Lynch and Southworth (1996, p. 584) suggest
the improvement of the roadway and commercial strip
at the entrance of a city could enhance the public image and the social and economic value of a much wider
surrounding district.
There are literally thousands of miles of commercial
strips within the rural–urban fringe in North America. To what extent can these already built areas be
improved today? What changes could be made to the
designs of future strip developments to improve their
visual quality and functionality? Researchers have suggested using trees to help unify the strip or the roadways of the fringe (Lynch and Southworth, 1996;
Myers, 2002). The location of parking lots, the distance
of businesses from the road, and the size and placement
of signs could also be altered in an effort to make the
strips more aesthetically pleasing and functional.
2.3. Preferences for roadside landscapes
What does the literature tell us about the extent to
which individuals prefer typical patterns of development along roadsides at the rural–urban fringe? Although we found no evidence that directly address this
question, inferences can be drawn from research on
preferences for landscapes in general, and for rural environments, scenic corridors, and central business districts, in particular.
Preferences for the roadside development at the
rural–urban fringe are likely to be similar to other more
general landscape preferences. A large body of research
examines preferences for various landscape settings,
and the importance of nature in those preferences
is well established. People prefer natural landscapes
to urban ones, and the inclusion of a high degree of
human influence in a scene is likely to decrease preference (Kaplan and Kaplan, 1989, pp. 43 and 61). The
presence of trees is also an important indicator of preference – scenes including trees typically receive higher
preference ratings than those that do not. The highest
preference ratings in many studies are earned by scenes
that include a combination of open natural space with
trees at the edges providing spatial definition (Kaplan
and Kaplan, 1989, pp. 34–35; Sullivan, 1994).
There is evidence from rural settings that roadside
development reduces scenic quality. In a study of a
scenic corridor in California, an increase in roadside
development caused a proportional decrease in perceived scenic quality, even with small or sympathetic
changes in development (Evans and Wood, 1980).
In rural Wisconsin, landscapes characteristic of the
urban edge were rated lower for enjoyability than farm
and forest settings by all stakeholder groups (Brush
et al., 2000). In that study all groups except farmers
also rated forested settings higher than farms, demonstrating that treed landscapes are preferred over open
farmland. And finally, preferences for a road corridor
in Utah were most positive for scenes that contained
a central open meadow framed by forest (Clay
and Daniel, 2000). Taken together, these studies
suggest that natural roadside settings, especially those
with trees, are preferred over roadsides that exhibit human influence. Do these patterns of responses predict
how local residents will respond to a landscape at the
rural–urban fringe that is less dramatically beautiful to
begin with?
There is evidence from urban settings that the addition of trees to barren or lightly vegetated roadsides
and streets has a strongly positive impact. In a study
of urban freeways, preference for roadsides increased
with increased vegetation and greater height and density of trees (Wolf, 2003a). Another study compared
reactions to central business districts with varying levels of tree cover, and found those with trees were systematically tied to more positive consumer experiences
and a greater willingness to pay for goods and services
(Wolf, 2003b). These studies help substantiate earlier
findings that urban settings with trees are preferred over
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
those without trees (cf. Kaplan and Kaplan, 1989). Still,
even with these recent findings, we lack a clear understanding of how typical development patterns impact
the visual quality of the countryside landscape. In fact,
to our knowledge, citizens’ reactions to a variety of
development patterns at the rural–urban fringe remain
unexplored.
2.4. Research questions
Several questions are pressing. Are there agricultural and development patterns that local people prefer
for the roadway corridors bridging the city and countryside? Can any of these patterns accommodate economic development and enhance the visual quality of
the corridor? What role does nature (i.e., trees, prairie
flowers, and grasses) play in people’s preferences for
the roadside settings in the rural–urban fringe?
3. Methods
In order to examine these questions, we developed
a photo-questionnaire that included pictures and written items. The photo-questionnaire was distributed to
a sample of individuals in Champaign County, Illinois.
3.1. Study area
The study was conducted in a portion of east-central
Illinois located between the urban core of ChampaignUrbana and a rural area of Champaign County where
the nearest airport (Willard Airport) is located. Many
visitors to the Champaign area are introduced to Savoy,
Champaign, and the University of Illinois as they drive
north from Willard Airport on Route 45. Currently, the
Route 45 corridor is a transitional zone between the
agricultural land use typical of central Illinois, and developed areas including a number of local businesses.
Urban Planning students at the University of Illinois
found that Route 45 was “disharmonious and incoherent”, and many visitors and residents echo those
sentiments. The poor visual quality of the Route 45
corridor, however, is not unusual for roadways in the
rural–urban fringe. In fact, many of the roadways
that connect the countryside to the developed areas
share characteristics that create this disharmonious and
incoherent look.
155
3.2. Photo-questionnaire
A photo-questionnaire was used to develop a better understanding of the preferences of local residents
for various land-use options for the Route 45 corridor.
The photo-questionnaire included 36 black and white
photographs showing a two-mile stretch of Route 45
between the airport and the developed areas of greater
Champaign-Urbana. The questionnaire focused on the
relationship between Route 45 as it existed (as a two
lane road) and as it may exist in the future, based on
surrounding land-use and development patterns.
Four of the 36 photographs in the questionnaire
served as “base” images. The base images showed
farmland along Route 45 that may be lost or dramatically altered as a result of development. As such, these
scenes can be thought of as “before” scenes. The remaining 32 photographs were composite images, developed by computer simulation. The composite images communicated how the corridor might look under 11 different conditions. These images were created through computer simulation by modifying one
of the four base photographs. For instance, to assess
preference for typical strip development along Route
45, the base images were modified to include commercial strip development. Some of the simulated images
were similar to the kinds of places that have typically
developed along Route 45 within Champaign. These
images therefore represented the type of development
with which participates were already familiar. Other
images included considerably more trees planted in
close association with buildings, parking lots, and agricultural lands than is the norm for the Route 45 corridor.
Two to four images were presented for each of the 11
different conditions.
The 11 different conditions for the corridor fit into
three classes that relate to the research questions about
roadside settings at the rural–urban fringe. The Typical Development and Development with Trees classes
address questions regarding preference for specific development patterns for roadway corridors. Comparison
of preferences for commercially developed areas with
or without trees also focuses on the patterns that might
accommodate economic development while enhancing
the visual quality of the corridor. The third class, Natural Additions, specifically addresses questions about
the role that nature plays in people’s preferences for
roadside settings. The conditions and number of images
156
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
Table 1
Modifications to the base images of the Route 45 corridor
Type of modification
Number of images in
photo-questionnaire
Class I: Typical Development
Billboards
Commercial strip development
Development with large parking lot
Development with small parking lot
Utility lines
4
3
3
3
2
Class II: Development with Trees
Commercial strip development
Development with large Parking lot
Development with small parking lot
3
2
3
Class III: Natural Additions
Prairie flowers and grasses
Trees in cluster
Trees in row
2
3
4
representing each of these three classes are identified
in Table 1.
Participants were asked to indicate their preference
for each of the 36 pictures by circling a number on
a five-point scale located beneath each photograph. A
“1” on the scale denoted very low preference, while a
“5” denoted very high preference.
Asking people to respond to pictures is one way
to investigate attitudes about design and development.
Another way is to ask people to respond to written items
that deal with visual quality. In this study, participants
responded to 24 such items concerning the development and visual quality of Route 45 by circling a number on a five-point scale. A rating of “1” indicated a low
or negative assessment (e.g. “not at all”), while “5” indicated the highest or most positive assessment. The
responses to written items were examined using factor
analysis to distill the items into related categories.
3.3. Participants
In order to identify participants for this study, we
purchased a mailing list of 1000 randomly selected individuals from Champaign, Savoy, and Urbana, Illinois. We mailed each of these individuals a photoquestionnaire during the winter, and a reminder postcard 7 days later. Of the 1000 questionnaires mailed,
the post office returned 16 as undeliverable. A total of
984 questionnaires were delivered, 396 were filled out
and returned, for a final return rate of 40.2%.
4. Results
The results examine participant’s ratings of the existing conditions along Route 45 and make comparisons to a variety of development and planting scenarios. The picture ratings are presented first followed by
reactions to the written items on the questionnaire.
4.1. Base Images
How did participants react to the Base Images?
Fig. 1 shows the Base Images—the unmanipulated pictures taken along Illinois Route 45. The Base Images
are characterized by agricultural land with a vast, open,
Fig. 1. Two of the four Base Images: category mean 2.71, S.D. 1.13.
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
157
Table 2
Preference ratings for visual images along the Route 45 corridor
Category
Mean rating
S.D.
Base Images
2.71
1.13
Change from Base Image
t-Value
P-Value
Typical Development
Billboards
Commercial strip development
Development with large parking lot
Development with small parking lot
Utility lines
1.64
1.81
1.85
1.97
2.12
0.72
0.82
0.87
0.91
1.02
−1.07
−0.90
−0.86
−0.74
−0.59
18.2
12.6
13.1
11.2
12.1
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
Development with Trees
Commercial strip development
Development with large parking lot
Development with small parking lot
3.55
3.19
3.48
0.85
0.95
0.90
+0.84
+0.48
+0.77
11.6
5.6
9.2
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
Natural Additions
Prairie flowers and grasses
Trees in cluster
Trees in row
3.03
3.88
4.44
1.14
0.93
0.84
+0.32
+1.17
+1.73
9.9
19.1
25.2
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
undistinguished foreground and a considerable amount
of sky. Overall, the Base Images obtained a mean rating of 2.7, with a range of 2.6–2.9. A mean of 2.7
reflects a moderately low preference. The mean rating
obtained here is consistent with findings from previous
research examining images that included open spaces
with undistinguished foregrounds (Kaplan and Kaplan,
1989).
4.2. Typical Development
Each of the scenes in the five categories comprising
the Typical Development class includes built elements
that were digitally added to the Base Images. As can be
seen in Table 2, this class received the lowest overall
ratings, with category means ranging from 1.6 to 2.1.
In fact, each category mean was significantly lower
than the mean of the corresponding Base Images. In
a review of over two decades of preference research,
Kaplan and Kaplan (1989, p. 42) report, “it is most
unusual to find a grouping . . . that is at 2.0 or lower.”
It is clear that participants find these images undesirable.
The Billboard category (Fig. 2) showed billboards
spaced at varying distances on both sides of Route
45. This category obtained a mean rating of 1.6, with
Fig. 2. Two of the three images from the Billboards category: mean 1.6, S.D. 0.72.
158
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
Fig. 3. Two of the three images from the Commercial Strip Development category; category mean 1.81, S.D. 0.82.
a range of 1.5–1.9. The Billboard category earned
the lowest preference rating of any category in the
study.
The three scenes comprising the Commercial Strip
Development category (Fig. 3) showed development on
the west side of Route 45, the side that contained agricultural land. These images are characterized by dense
commercial development clustered close to Route 45.
The mean for this category was 1.8, with a range of
1.5–2.0, indicating very low preference for this type of
development.
Three scenes showing large parking areas next to
Route 45 were included in the Development with Large
Parking Lot category (Fig. 4). The mean for this category was 1.8, with a range of 1.8–1.9. As with the
previous category, the category reflects very low preference ratings.
The three scenes comprising the Development with
Small Parking Lot category (Fig. 5) show small scale
commercial development on the west side of Route 45.
The mean for this category was 2.0, with a range of
1.9–2.0. A rating this low indicates very low preference.
The final category in the Typical Development class,
Utility Lines, included two scenes (Fig. 6). These
scenes show how Route 45 might look if utility lines
were added along the east side of the corridor. The
mean for this category was 2.1 and both images earned
an average of 2.1, indicating a very low preference for
utility lines being place along the roadside.
In sum, the addition of built features to the existing agricultural scenes resulted in a dramatic decrease
in preference across each of the Typical Development
categories.
Fig. 4. Two of the three images from the Development With Large Parking Lot category: category mean 1.85, S.D. 0.87.
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
159
Fig. 5. Two of the three images from the Development With Small Parking Lot category: category mean 1.97, S.D. 0.91.
Fig. 6. The two images from the Utility Lines category: category mean 2.12, S.D. 1.02.
4.3. Development with Trees
The three categories that make up the Development
with Trees class show trees added to three of the Typical Development categories: Commercial Strip Development, Development with Large Parking Lot, and Development with Small Parking Lot. In each case, the
trees added to these scenes were imported from pictures of trees that grew along other nearby roads in the
Champaign County.
As Table 3 shows, survey participants rated the images in the Development with Trees class significantly
higher than the counterpart categories in the Typical
Development class. Each category was also rated significantly higher than the Base Images. Category means
ranged from 3.2 to 3.5, indicating a clear preference for
these scenes (see Table 2).
Three scenes made up the Commercial Strip Development with Trees category (Fig. 7). These scenes
were identical to the other strip development cate-
Table 3
Change in preference ratings between development categories with and without trees
Category
Without trees
With trees
Rating change
t-Value
P-Value
Commercial strip development
Development with large parking lot
Development with small parking lot
1.81
1.85
1.97
3.55
3.19
3.48
+1.74
+1.34
+1.51
33.1
21.7
26.7
<.0001
<.0001
<.0001
160
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
Fig. 7. Two of the three images from the Commercial Strip Development With Trees category: category mean 3.55, S.D. 0.85.
gory except for the addition of two to four trees.
The mean for this category was 3.5, with a range of
3.4–3.7. The addition of two to four trees to these
scenes increased preference ratings an average of 1.7
points—a considerable increase. A rating of 3.5 indicates a moderate preference for this type of development.
The two scenes that make up the Large Parking Lot
with Trees category (Fig. 8) show development on the
west side of Route 45 separated from the roadway by a
single row of four trees. The mean for this category was
3.2, nearly a point and one-half higher than the same
development without trees. A rating of 3.2 indicates
moderate preference for this type of development.
The three scenes that make up the Small Parking Lot
with Trees category (Fig. 9) are identical to the previous Small Parking Lot category, except for the addition
of three to five trees between the parking lot and the
roadway. The mean for this category was 3.5, with a
range of 3.4–3.6. Adding trees to these scenes increased
preference ratings by one and one-half points.
4.4. Natural Additions
The final class of modifications to the Base Images
includes three categories, each of which shows trees
or prairie plants added along the edge of Route 45.
The trees added to these scenes were similar to the
trees added to the development scenes in that they grew
along nearby roads in Champaign County. Participants
rated the three categories in the Natural Additions class
significantly higher than the Base Images. Category
means ranged from 3.0 to 4.4, indicating moderate to
very high preference (see Table 2).
Fig. 8. The two images from the Large Parking Lot With Trees category: category mean 3.19, S.D. 0.95.
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
161
Fig. 9. Two of the three images from the Small Parking Lot With Trees category: category mean 3.48, S.D. 0.90.
Two scenes constitute the Prairie Flowers and
Grasses category (Fig. 10). These scenes show the addition of prairie flowers and grasses to the right-of-way
along Route 45. In both cases, a strip of mowed grass
lies between the prairie plantings and the roadway. The
mean for this category is 3.0, an increase of nearly onethird of a point compared to the Base Images. A mean
of 3.0 indicates moderate preference.
The three scenes that make up the Trees in Clusters category (Fig. 11) show small groupings of trees
along Route 45. Clusters of one to three trees appear on
both sides of the roadway. Considerable distance exists
between each cluster. The mean for this category was
3.9, with a range of 3.6–4.0. The mean was more than
a point above the Base Images. Participants preferred
this category quite a bit.
The final category, Trees in Rows (Fig. 12), includes four images, each with trees on both sides of
Route 45. The trees in this category, while not touching each other, are more densely planted than trees
in the previous category. These trees appear approximately 100–125 ft apart. The mean for this category
was 4.4, with a range of 4.3–4.5. The mean was nearly
one and three-quarter points higher than that of the
Base Images. Category means above 4.0 are very high,
and indicate a strong preference (Kaplan and Kaplan,
1989).
To sum up thus far, citizens preferred the Base Images over the Typical Development class (Table 2). Both
the Development with Trees class and Natural Additions class earned higher ratings than the Base Images.
We found dramatic changes in preference when trees
Fig. 10. The two images from the Prairie Flowers and Grasses category: category mean 3.03, S.D. 1.14.
162
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
Fig. 11. Two of the three images from the Trees in Clusters category: category mean 3.88, S.D. 0.93.
were added to the Typical Development images. In each
case, the images without trees earn very low preference
ratings, whereas those same images earned moderate
to high preference ratings after trees were added along
the roadway.
4.5. Written items
How did the responses to written items compare to
those for the visual images? We used Factor Analysis
to distill the 24 written items to a set of five categories.
Each category included items that had a strong relationship to one another. The five categories referred to Billboards, Economic Development, Nature Near Cities,
Planting More Trees, and Requirements for Planting
(Table 4).
The written items were consistent with the picture
preference results. The Billboard category earned the
lowest mean (1.8), indicating citizens harbor notably
negative attitudes about billboards—a result also evident in the picture preference data. The Economic
Development category faired better, earning moderate support with a mean of 3.2. This finding is also
consistent with the results of the preference data.
The final three categories, Nature Near Cities (mean
4.1), Planting More Trees (mean 4.4), and Requirements for Tree Planting (mean 4.6), indicate tremendous support for planting more trees along Route
45. These findings are consistent with the preference data that showed the addition of trees along
the roadway made significant contributions to visual
quality.
Fig. 12. Two of the four images from the Trees in Rows category: category mean 4.44, S.D. 0.84.
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
163
Table 4
Means and categories of written questionnaire items
Mean
S.D.
Billboards
Having more billboards
Adding billboards
1.76
0.85
Economic development
Encouraging growth and economic development in non-urban areas
Attracting new residents to the county
Having more urban development leads to a higher quality of life
Encouraging new commercial development
Encouraging new residential development
Encouraging commercial development with landscape guidelines
3.17
0.86
Nature near cities
Preserving rural character
Having nature near the city
Finding ways to preserve agricultural land in the country
Protecting rivers, woodlands, and other natural features
It is important to maintain green, open space, between cities
There should be a green buffer zone around urban areas
Preserving agricultural land near urban centers is important
Preserving the agricultural character
4.14
0.73
Planting more trees
Planting more trees along the roadways
Planting more trees
Improving the visual attractiveness
4.44
0.71
Requirements for tree planting
New commercial and professional buildings should have requirements for tree planting
4.55
0.84
5. Discussion
This study examined the extent to which local citizens preferred various designs for the roadside margins
at the rural–urban fringe. The results revealed moderate
preference for the existing agricultural landscape presented in the base images. The addition of typical forms
of development to the existing condition reduced visual
quality considerably. The addition of trees to the typical
developments, a low cost and simple intervention, improved visual quality of the commercial settings even
beyond that of the existing agricultural landscape. The
addition of trees to the existing condition was the most
effective intervention, resulting in the highest preference ratings. The responses to written items produced
similar results, demonstrating strong support for trees
along the roadside and negative attitudes regarding billboards.
These findings provide new information about preferences for nature in roadside settings, suggest design
alternatives for land use at the rural–urban fringe, and
raise new questions regarding the role of roadside nature in human functioning.
5.1. Contributions
This work contributes to our understanding of the
importance of vegetation as a part of the rural–urban
fringe. A decrease in vegetation reduced the visual
quality of the settings, while an increase improved visual quality considerably. Individuals also responded
positively to statements about preserving rural character and agricultural land, as well as protecting natural
features such as rivers and woodlands. These findings
are consistent with previous work on landscape preferences at rural–urban fringe. In a study of rural–urban
fringe communities in Michigan, residential settings
containing a combination of woods, farmland, and open
space were highly preferred for residential development over settings that either ignored or did not con-
164
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
tain such natural features (Sullivan, 1994). On working farms located at the fringe, the use of agricultural
buffers containing natural features was also found to be
a highly approved management option (Sullivan et al.,
2004). The study presented here extends our previous
knowledge by demonstrating that the addition of natural features to commercial sites can have a dramatic
impact on visual quality.
A second contribution of the work concerns the extent to which trees in particular influence perceptions
of the roadside landscape. The results here, demonstrating higher preference for undeveloped land with
trees compared to undeveloped land without trees, are
not surprising. A number of studies have found that
individuals prefer settings containing trees over similar
types of settings without trees (Kaplan and Kaplan,
1989; Kent and Elliot, 1995; Brush et al., 2000;
Erickson et al., 2002; Sullivan, 2003). What is new
here is that the results indicate a preference for developed areas with trees over undeveloped agricultural
land without trees. The findings provide new evidence
regarding the tremendously positive impact of the
trees and their capacity to mitigate the negative reaction people universally have for barren commercial
development. It is important to note that the scenes
containing commercial development with trees did
allow views of the commercial buildings. Because the
trees in the scenes covered mostly the sky, they did not
screen or block views to features such as large parking
lots or buildings. Rather, the trees created an edge and
provided a strikingly positive element. The addition
of trees is an example of a simple, low cost design alternative that can greatly improve the visual quality of
rural–urban fringe landscapes where aesthetics are
often neglected.
A third contribution of the work is to demonstrate
the impact that negative features such as billboards
and commercial development have on visual quality
of the roadside. Billboards are known to be a negative feature of the roadside landscape, because they
block views and increase visual clutter (Flad, 1997;
Myers, 2002; Wolf, 2003a). Our work demonstrates
that, similar to billboards, commercial development
without trees is not acceptable for roadsides of the
rural–urban fringe. As growth at the fringe continues,
greater regulation may be needed to establish minimum
standards for visual quality of commercial development.
5.2. Implications
The results from this work have implications for
the design and management of roadway corridors of
the rural–urban fringe. Although land planners and developers explore many different layers of design in
landscape planning and land development, one layer
is usually missing—a layer for green infrastructure.
The findings here suggest roadways are an ideal place
to establish a connected, innervated, green infrastructure. With the growth of commercial and residential
development at the rural–urban fringe, roadways are
likely to be added or expanded. Planners and designers should take the opportunity to incorporate roadside
nature in the planning process from the beginning. The
cost of improving the quality and quantity of roadside
nature in the early planning process is surely lower
than making changes after the roadways are developed
(Myers, 2002). With existing roadways, low cost approaches such as adding a few trees or native vegetation could improve the view. Some management approaches, such as selecting native prairie species and
allowing them to grow naturally could decrease maintenance costs by eliminating the need for repeated mowing. This study demonstrates that commercial development can be combined with natural features to produce
a setting that is both visually appealing and functional.
The findings also suggest that citizens’ preferences
should be considered in the design of the rural–urban
fringe. Sullivan (1993) presented evidence that individuals prefer more sustainable approaches to development over approaches that are purely economically
driven. The research reported here indicates current
development patterns are missing the mark on visual
quality because these developments too often fail to
incorporate natural features such as trees. This failure
may come at a considerable expense to the shop keepers because, as Wolf (2003b) has shown, individuals
are willing to pay more for goods they purchase from
stores that are surrounded by a healthy tree canopy.
The results also have implications for human functioning. The health benefits of being exposed to nature are widely documented (cf. Frumkin, 2001). These
benefits are available to individuals who travel through
green landscapes and to those who view such landscapes through a window (Kaplan, 2001; Kuo and Sullivan, 2001a, 2001b). A large number of studies now
show that settings that contain nature, even urban envi-
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
165
ronments that have trees and grass, foster recovery from
mental fatigue and restore mental functioning (Kaplan
and Kaplan, 1990; Hartig et al., 1991; Kaplan, 1995,
2001; Kuo and Sullivan, 2001a; Taylor et al., 2001,
2002; Cimprich and Ronis, 2003). And that exposure to
nearby nature enhances the ability to cope with and recover from physiological stress, cope with subsequent
stress, and even recover from surgery (Parsons, 1991;
Ulrich, 1984; Ulrich et al., 1991). Given that individuals are spending increasing amounts of time in automobiles, the addition of natural elements such as trees
and prairie plants to roadsides could have an important
impact on their ability to function optimally, particularly while driving. Residents of the rural–urban fringe
could be greatly affected by such efforts, since they are
likely to spend a significant amount of time commuting
to and from work.
Finally, future research should focus on the extent
to which roadside nature improves human functioning, particularly functioning while driving. Parsons et
al. (1998) compared peoples’ responses to videotaped
simulated drives with settings dominated by natural
vegetation versus settings that were mainly built. They
found greater stress recovery and immunization from
future stresses for participants who viewed the naturedominated drive. Still, the need exists to learn more
about the importance of nature for drivers’ attention
and stress level through field experiments utilizing real
driving conditions. The results of such research could
provide insight into very important driver safety issues
such as “road rage” and “road hypnosis”.
5.3. Generalizations and future research
At the rural–urban fringe, changes in the design and
management of public roads should be the result of purposeful decisions that consider citizens’ preferences.
By doing so, the important visual characteristics that
attracted individuals to the fringe are more likely to be
preserved. The body of evidence is now strong enough
to support the argument that roadside nature, in the
form of trees and other vegetation, is a key aspect of any
new development. Designers, planners, shop keepers,
and citizens should insist upon a healthy tree canopy
for all new developments at the rural–urban fringe.
Because the study focused on a single road corridor located in the Midwest, the results may not reflect the attitudes of individuals living in different
settings. In our study, the base images depicted the
view of much of the rural landscape in the Midwest,
with continuous fields and very few trees. Trees, however, are more common in some rural areas, so the
preference for a commercial development setting with
trees over an agricultural setting might not hold in
other areas—although we suspect that the findings here
would in fact generalize to a great variety of communities. Future research should include locations outside
of the Midwest where trees or other natural features are
more and less common.
Another opportunity for future research would be
to compare the attitudes of different stakeholders to
changes in roadside design and management. The participants in this study were residents of the nearby area,
but other stakeholders might have differing opinions regarding roadside nature. Business owners, for example,
might be concerned that the trees would decrease the
visibility of their stores, advertisements, and merchandise. Roadside maintenance workers might be concern
about the increased maintenance required with the addition of natural vegetation. By understanding the preferences of different stakeholder groups, we might be
better equipped to improve design of roadside landscapes.
6. Conclusions
References
Brush, R., Chenoweth, R.E., Barman, T., 2000. Group differences in
the enjoyability of driving through rural landscapes. Landscape
Urban Plan. 47, 39–45.
Cimprich, B., Ronis, D.L., 2003. An environmental intervention to
restore attention in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer.
Cancer Nursing 26 (4), 284–292.
Clay, G.R., Daniel, T.C., 2000. Scenic landscape assessment: the
effects of land management jurisdiction on public perception of
scenic beauty. Landscape Urban Plan. 49, 1–13.
Daniels, T., 1999. When City and Country Collide: Managing the
Growth in the Metropolitan Fringe. Island Press, Washington,
DC, USA.
Davies, W.K.D., Baxter, T., 1997. Commercial intensification: the
transformation of a highway-oriented ribbon. Geoforum 28 (2),
237–252.
Edwards, P., Edwards, S., 1999. Working from Home: Everything
You Need to Know about Living and Working under the Same
Roof. Tarcher/Putnam, New York, NY.
166
W.C. Sullivan, S.T. Lovell / Landscape and Urban Planning 77 (2006) 152–166
Erickson, D.L., Ryan, R.L., De Young, R., 2002. Woodlots in the rural
landscape: landowner motivations and management attitudes in a
Michigan (USA) case study. Landscape Urban Plan. 58, 101–112.
Evans, G.W., Wood, K.W., 1980. Assessment of environmental aesthetics in scenic highway corridors. Environ. Behav. 12 (2),
255–273.
Flad, H.K., 1997. Country clutter: visual pollution and the rural roadscape. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 553, 117–129.
Friedberger, M., 2000. The rural–urban fringe in the late twentieth
century. Agric. History 74 (2), 502–514.
Frumkin, H., 2001. Beyond toxicity: human health and the natural
environment. Am. J. Prev. Med. 20, 234–240.
Hartig, T., Mang, M., Evans, G.W., 1991. Restorative effects of natural environment experience. Environ. Behav. 23 (1), 3–26.
Kaplan, R., 2001. The nature of the view from home—psychological
benefits. Environ. Behav. 33 (4), 507–542.
Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., 1989. The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., 1990. Restorative experience: the healing
power of nearby nature. In: Francis, M., Hester Jr., R.T. (Eds.),
The Meaning of Gardens: Idea, Place and Action. MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, USA, pp. 238–243.
Kaplan, S., 1995. The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework. J. Environ. Psychol. 15, 169–182.
Kent, R.L., Elliot, C.L., 1995. Scenic routes linking and protecting natural and cultural landscape features: a greenway skeleton.
Landscape Urban Plan. 33, 341–356.
Kuo, F.E., Sullivan, W.C., 2001a. Aggression and violence in the
inner city: impacts of environment and mental fatigue. Environ.
Behav. 33 (4), 543–571.
Kuo, F.E., Sullivan, W.C., 2001b. Environment and crime in the inner city: does vegetation reduce crime? Environ. Behav. 33 (3),
343–367.
Lapping, M.B., Daniels, T.L., Keller, J.W., 1989. Rural Planning and
Development in the United States. The Guilford Press, New York,
NY.
Lynch, K., Southworth, M., 1974. Designing and managing the strip.
In: Banerjee, T., Southworth, M. (Eds.), City Sense and City Design: Writings and Projects of Kevin Lynch. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, pp. 579–616.
Myers, M.E., 2002. One view from the road: where is the leading
edge of highway aesthetics to be found? A critical review of
a recent road inventory in Michigan. Landscape Architect. 10,
80–87.
Parsons, R., 1991. The potential influences of environmental perception on human health. J. Environ. Psychol. 11, 1–23.
Parsons, R., Tassinary, L.G., Ulrich, R.S., Hebl, M.R., GrossmanAlexander, M., 1998. The view from the road: implications for
stress recovery and immunization. J. Environ. Psychol. 18 (2),
113–140.
Reimers, V., Clulow, V., 2004. Retail concentration: a comparison of
spatial convenience in shopping strips and shopping centers. J.
Retailing Consumer Services 11 (4), 207–221.
Sullivan, W.C., 1993. A yearning for conservation: the conflict between citizen attitudes and economic development. In: Arias, E.,
Gross, M. (Eds.), Equitable and Sustainable Habitats. EDRA,
Oklahoma City, pp. 50–55.
Sullivan, W.C., 1994. Perceptions of the rural–urban fringe: citizen
preferences for natural and developed settings. Landscape Urban
Plan. 29, 85–101.
Sullivan, W.C., 2003. The savanna and the city: nature at home. In:
Barlett, P. (Ed.), Urban Place: Reconnections with the Natural
World. The Academic Exchange, Emory.
Sullivan, W.C., Anderson, O.M., Lovell, S.T., 2004. Buffers
at the rural–urban fringe: a strategy approved by farmers,
residents, and scientists. Landscape Urban Plan. 69, 299–
313.
Taylor, A.F., Kuo, F.E., Sullivan, W.C., 2001. Coping with ADD: the
surprising connection to green play settings. Environ. Behav. 22,
54–77.
Taylor, A.F., Kuo, F.E., Sullivan, W.C., 2002. Views of nature and
self-discipline: evidence from inner city children. J. Environ. Psychol. 22, 49–63.
Ulrich, R.S., 1984. View through a window may influence recovery
from surgery. Science 224, 420–421.
Ulrich, R.S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B.D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M.A.,
Zelson, M., 1991. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J. Environ. Psychol. 11, 231–
248.
Wolf, K.L., 2003a. Freeway roadside management: the urban forest
beyond the white line. J. Arboric. 29 (3), 127–136.
Wolf, K.L., 2003b. Public response to the urban forest in inner-city
business districts. J. Arboric. 29 (3), 117–126.
William Sullivan is an associate professor and a founder of the
interdisciplinary Human-Environment Research Laboratory in the
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences at
the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Sullivan holds a Ph.D.
from the University of Michigan with a concentration in Environment
and Behavior. His research focuses on the psychological and social
benefits of urban nature, and citizen participation in environmental
decision-making.
Sarah Taylor Lovell is a postdoctoral scientist in the Department
of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences at the University
of Illinois, where she is also working to obtain a Master’s Degree in
Landscape Architecture. She holds a PhD in agronomy (weed science
emphasis), Master in agronomy, and Bachelor of Science in agricultural sciences from the University of Illinois. She has been a senior
research biologist for Dow AgroSciences and field research biologist for Zeneca Ag Products. Her research examines opportunities
to combine agricultural productivity, ecological integrity, and visual
quality in the design and management of rural landscapes. Her current efforts focus on sustainable agricultural design, GIS mapping of
rural landscapes, agroecology and food systems, restoration ecology,
and conservation buffers.