The driving force behind today's alarming decline in species is the destruction, degradation and fragmentation of habitat. A review of recovery plans for endangered and threatened plants identified urban development as the greatest threat to the plants' survival . Considering this, our planning team has its extended research of developmental impacts to wildlife and habitat .

The project site is located within the Emerson Park Neighborhood at Winstanley and 13th.  In comparison to the scale of East St. Louis it may seem like a small block area, but may be an entire ecosystem to particular species.  An investigation of any potential wildlife viability was completed for this area. When examining the impacts that development has on habitat and wildlife survival a study of the specific site as well as the surrounding area was done.
                                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    *The map shown below shows the land cover in the East St. Louis region.
Coverage is deemed important for wildlife survival not solely for shelter from predators, but protection from excessive human interaction. The map table shows variety of possible land cover conditions in the East St. Louis Area ranging from high urban density to barren land, however, the actual map displays a massive amount of medium dense urban development. All is not lost! There are a few fragments of neighboring grassland and forest land.

 
 
 

            *The maps below show the location of city parks in East St. Louis. Kenneth Hall Park is labeled below
There is a noticeable amount of flooded areas near to this park.  These areas have the potential to support native Bottomland plants and animals and possibly a larger variety of small game and Species.

1)The green areas illustrate the amount of open space within the area. Residential areas are represented by yellow, and potential areas to be flooded are formulated in blue.

2)Although Kenneth Hall Park may seem a distance from 13th and Winstanely, it could be considered safe  refuge for any species displaced by the development on the proposed development site.

1)                                                                                              2)

 
 

Habitat loss and degradation are definite threats to species survival, however, habitat fragmentation may be less obvious but equally harmful to wildlife. The area including and surrounding the proposed site of development favors the edge shape most which is seen below. This shape represents a good amount of coverage that allows wildlife a chance of good survival.
 

Edge shape

 

Spatial organization deemed quite crucial to wildlife's ability to travel throughout the area, and seek shelter is well laid out in the Emerson Park Neighborhood and favorable to wildlife. From an analysis of differences in the spatial conditions for open land and the effects of development, there seems to be a pretty good linkage between the development of in-fill housing and restaurant in terms of intensity and land to man ratio, and the level of  economic development and urbanization.  In general terms three zones can be differentiated on the basis of this linkage and, in these zones are: grasslands, forestland, and developed land. The developed land being the "central zone", grasslands the "intermediate zone" , and forestland the "periphery zone" (Kenneth Hall Park).

                                                            CITYGreen Analysis of Wildlife Potential

    Below are four summary reports of  wildlife potential given wildlife food benefit. These reports consider  the amount of trees          (existing/proposed and in thirty years time) to determine the likelihood of survival for the wildlife.
 

Existing Wildlife Benefits	Existing Wildlife Benefits           in 30  years	Proposed Wildlife Benefits	Proposed Wildlife Benefits               in 30 yrs
Wildlife Food Benefit 0 Tree(s) are not suitable for wildlife 12 Tree(s) have fair suitability for wildlife 0 Tree(s) have good suitability for wildlife 17 Tree(s) have very good suitability for wildlife 10 Trees(s) have an unknown suitability for wildlife American Forests has assigned wildlife ratings to tree species according to their ability to provide food, cover, and nesting to urban wildlife. The wildlife rating definitions are as follows: Moderate = <= 1 (Fair) High = 2 (Good) Very High = 3 (Very Good) Unknown = 9	Wildlife Food Benefit 0 Tree(s) are not suitable for wildlife 12 Tree(s) have fair suitability for wildlife 0 Tree(s) have good suitability for wildlife 17 Tree(s) have very good suitability for wildlife 10 Trees(s) have an unknown suitability for wildlife American Forests has assigned wildlife ratings to tree species according to their ability to provide food, cover, and nesting to urban wildlife. The wildlife rating definitions are as follows: Moderate = <= 1 (Fair) High = 2 (Good) Very High = 3 (Very Good) Unknown = 9	WIldlife Food Benefit 0 Tree(s) are not suitable for wildlife 10 Tree(s) have fair suitability for wildlife 0 Tree(s) have good suitability for wildlife 14 Tree(s) have very good suitability for wildlife 19 Trees(s) have an unknown suitability for wildlife American Forests has assigned wildlife ratings to tree species according to their ability to provide food, cover, and nesting to urban wildlife. The wildlife rating definitions are as follows: Moderate = <= 1 (Fair) High = 2 (Good) Very High = 3 (Very Good) Unknown = 9	Wildlife Food Benefit 0 Tree(s) are not suitable for wildlife 0 Tree(s) have fair suitability for wildlife 0 Tree(s) have good suitability for wildlife 1 Tree(s) have very good suitability for wildlife 0 Trees(s) have an unknown suitability for wildlife American Forests has assigned wildlife ratings to tree species according to their ability to provide food, cover, and nesting to urban wildlife. The wildlife rating definitions are as follows: Moderate = <= 1 (Fair) High = 2 (Good) Very High = 3 (Very Good) Unknown = 9

        Will the proposed development effect the habitat and wildlife of Emerson Park and East St. Louis?

The effect that the development of Blue's Family Restaurant may have on wildlife is a concern in this process of  planning. The possibility of eventually losing any amenities that come from these species and habitat can be frightening. The ramifications that movement and extension of populations to new areas have on species and habitat has been greatly considered. Aside from the aesthetic factors and values that wildlife and its habitat hold, the ecological principles are even more substantial.

Given the land use change proposed by our urban planning team, and wildlife food benefit analysis run via CITYGreen, there is a poor chance of wildlife potential within our immediate area. The proposed site for development uses approximately 5 acres of land. In relation to the amount of grassland and forest land coverage in the surrounding area, wildlife and its habitat population should not change dramatically in overpopulation or disappearance however survival chances are slim within the next thirty years.  That slim chance of survival can be succeeded if wildlife takes refuge in nearby grassland and forest lands as well as Kenneth Hall Park.

The area in which Blue's Restaurant is proposed to be has medium dense urban development so it would not be invading  grasslands or forest lands dramatically for that matter. Yet, our proposed development will however impact plant habitat  through expansion and  introduction of new trees and reduction of space for the restaurant.  Due to this future loss of habitat, wildlife has a slight chance of surviving.

Return to Home