Frank Lloyd Wright is primarily known for his architecture. However he had associations with Lewis Mumford, Jens Jensen and Walter Burley Griffin, as well as influences from Ossian Cole Simonds, which facilitated his perspective concerning integrated site design and architecture, urban design, and living systems [4]. In many respects his abilities to merge landscape and site were far beyond the abilities of his Bauhaus contemporaries. While in Europe, architects were enthusiastic about new materials, industrialization, and collaboration between structure and artists; their approach to landscape was minimal, simplistic, aesthetically mundane, and ecologically un-aware [6]. For example Corbusier's brilliant vision for the city of Paris treated the landscape as a uniform green forested sea where nothing really happened surrounding his monolithic buildings [7]. Although Corbusier understood the importance of biospheric features in the urban landscape, as he intended his massive buildings be hidden at the ground level by the urban forest [7]. Meanwhile in Japan, site and architecture were often married together as a couple, and Frank Lloyd Wright was sympathetic to this unified approach [4].

Frank Lloyd Wright was formatively influenced by his rural “upbringing”; and while he worked professionally in Chicago, he did not abandon his intimate understanding concerning the significance of the land and the numerous important functions that are associated with the land. Thus when he focused his attention upon urban design, his approach was quite similar to how many landscape architects develop landscape urbanism plans considering site hydrology, softscape spaces, recreation, circulation and way-finding, wildlife habitat, vegetation complexes, aesthetics, socialization, cultural identity, utility corridors, multiple land-uses, and building footprints. He was also inspired by Ebenezer Howard's “Garden City” ideas creating a decentralized city [4].

Wright employed the Taliesin area in Wisconsin to develop his plan and prepare sketches (Figure 1). A model was built of the plan and exhibited in 1935 [4]. Wright believed the city should be everywhere and yet nowhere [4]. Cities should be highway-less and highways should be without cities. Figure 2 illustrates a plan featuring his “Broadacre City.” Buildings could not cast shadows on other buildings. Land-uses were assigned to fit the land similar to what landscape architects were doing and would do when they developed new towns in Eastern United States such as Radburn, Greenbelt, and Reston and as popularized later by Ian McHarg [8,9]. This approach was far different than the obtrusive and self-indulgent architecture and urban design that occurred in much of the world during the 20th Century such as in Detroit, Michigan (Figure 3).

In 1942, Wright proposed a plan for the Cooperative Homesteads Community Project in the Detroit, Michigan area [4]. The design was an applied Broadacre City proposal [4]. His design for the structures included rammed-earth homes. The project was never built. Wright designed several other un-built and partially built community housing projects, such as Usonia I in East Lansing, Michigan, the Galesburg Country Houses in Galesburg, Michigan, know as “the Acres”, and Usonia II in Pleasantville, New York, of which Usonia II might be considered the most successful [4].

With the exception of visions shared by landscape architects, featuring many build projects such as Sea Ranch in California by the late Lawrence Halprin or the Valleys near Baltimore, Maryland, directed by Ian McHarg and David Wallace, the ideas expressed by Wright were rarely explored [10]. The decentralized city in many respects became a lost possibility. The city became a sea of architectural monuments competing for attention.

After the fire of 1805, the City of Detroit had its origins in a radiating French “goose-foot” design near the old fort, and radiating octagon plan for streets and city blocks, designed by Woodward [11]. Later, Detroit, Michigan was one of the cities that eventually became a participant in the City Beautiful movement. But starting with the decline in American industrialization, the city was under economic stress. While the greater Detroit region is quite active, modern, and prosperous with many “green-field” urban communities competing for economic development, Detroit proper kept losing population with abandoned properties and buildings. Even today much of the area looks quite unkempt. Detroit in land area is quite large, much larger than the area of many cities combined. The renewal of this environment is considered an extensive “gray-field” redevelopment project, where planners and designers are considering various “gray-field” reclamation and re-use ideas.

One of the ideas receiving much attention lately is the idea of a much less dense urban population, with urban farming [12], the retention of some retrofitted buildings, and the creation of some new structures (Figure 4). Many of the proposals are quite similar to ideas expressed by Frank Lloyd Wright in his “Broadacre City” proposal. The future of Detroit may be in experimentation to create the decentralized city.

Since the 1960s quantitative measures to assess environmental quality and lessons learned from these studies have greatly expanded. Two excellent primers on the subject include a review by Taylor, Zube, and Sell and a book by Smardon, Palmer, and Felleman [13,14]. Professionally, in the United States visual quality assessments methods are dominated by the synthetic, expert derived methodology attributed to Grant Jones in collaboration with others [15]. However, this approach relies upon assumptions based in artistic principles about visual quality that have been long refuted in the fine arts. Because this approach does not have science-based knowledge to support the method, the expert approach may be eventually discarded. For the most part, science based highly predictive models have been difficult to build. Models such as the one by Burley in 1997 typify the general predictive power of the best models, explaining about 67% of the variance [16]. In general these models suggest that respondents prefer environments with animals, plants, and geological features; most man-made features are not preferred. Numerous investigators have confirmed these findings and have provided general principles to follow when managing the landscape [17,18]. The implication is that buildings, cars, streets, and people comprise features that are not preferred. Research indicates that even a finely crafted and honored building such as a Frank Lloyd Wright building is less preferred than images from nature [19]. These findings do not sit well with people who build cities and the research has largely been ignored. In addition, researchers are finding that people evaluate the environment through a multiple factor lens and do not just consider aesthetics. They also consider economics, culture, ecology, as well as functions [19]. Again this may not be welcome news, especially by single use stakeholders such as environmentalists who do not wish to consider economic issues, or a single use highway transportation advocate who does not wish to consider cultural issues, or an architect who does not understand why people do not want to look at his or her wonderful building from their backyard. Nevertheless, some investigators remain focused upon improving their predictive models to assess the environment, working toward potential universal models that may be widely applied.

We were interested in building a new predictive, somewhat universal model with predictive power that explains over 70% of respondent variance, based upon respondents from France, Portugal, and North America. In addition we were very interested in applying the model to understand the predicted environmental quality of Frank Lloyd Wright's “Broadacre City” vision as compared with the past built structure of Detroit and with the new vision for Detroit. Our hypothesis is “the new proposals for Detroit and Frank Lloyd Wright's “Broadacre City” proposal will be significantly preferred over the past configuration of Detroit during its most prosperous years”.