Residents' perceptions and preferences of vacant lot vegetation, wildlife and use in St. Louis, Missouri

Abstract

Vacant lots are a prevalent issue in many urban neighborhoods nationwide. These lots are often targeted by city officials for greening interventions, though nearby, marginalized residents may not adequately be involved in the planning process. This exclusion disempowers residents and provides greenspace that while ecologically useful, can be socially unjust. St. Louis, Missouri is one of many Midwest cities dealing with a high level of vacancy, with lots concentrated in the predominantly low-income, African-American areas. The Green City Coalition (GCC), a collaboration between the city of St. Louis and its partners, has selected several lots in two neighborhoods within these areas to implement management strategies for storm water control and biodiversity conservation. To understand residents' management preferences for the lots, I sought to answer the following questions: 1) How do residents' perceive wildlife and vegetation in the vacant lots? 2) What are residents' preferences for lot use? I administered semi-structured interviews combined with vacant lot photo-evaluation surveys to 27 residents affiliated with at least one of the neighborhoods. For both questions, I found that residents' framed their thoughts within a larger picture of the vacant lots, the vacant homes, and the surrounding community. Through analysis of the interview transcripts and photo-evaluation survey comments, I created the themes of community change, neighborhood care, maintenance effort, and safety to explain residents' perceptions of wildlife and the vegetation within the lots, as well as their preferences for vacant lot use. Comments of the top ranked vacant lot photograph scenes in the survey focused on clear lines of sight and signs of care such as mowing, fencing and litter absence. While wildlife was sometimes tolerated or appreciated, most wildlife was associated with negative area changes or seen as sources of nuisance or danger, with minor impact on how residents perceived the vacant lots. In contrast, vegetation was pivotal in how residents felt an area was cared for and whether a vacant lot was seen as being safe and usable, with low, uniform vegetation preferred. In the absence of home and business development, I found that residents preferred vacant lots be used as park-like areas for community gatherings and recreation, incorporating mown lawn and low-maintenance structures such as benches, walking paths, or fencing to signal community care and prevent litter accumulation. I found mixed feelings about the GCC's current and planned vacant lot management interventions. Familiar residential landscapes incorporating mown lawn, such as water detention basins, are far more accepted than areas like prairie grass or woodlands. I recommend the GCC undertake an earlier collaborative vacant lot planning process to incorporate residents' vacant lot desires. This helps ensure vacant lot management improves the well-being of surrounding communities, with sociological benefits as well as ecological ones.