Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Back to map
Urban Plazacluster ·Underperforming / Leftover Spaces (enclosure-leaning)Niagara (82)confidence moderate

Arcadia Co-operative Backyard

Urban Plaza, middle of the pack overall (score 34, rank ~49th percentile). Strongest: enclosure; weakest: natural comfort.

Arcadia Co-operative Backyard scores 34.2 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: edge activation (0). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best fordaily passing-throughpocket meetings

Area · 0.12 ha

What's here

Facilities
Shelter
Vitality Score
34/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 65%

Data Confidence
34.2 / 100
Citywide
49th
of all 3,788 parks
Among Urban Plaza
29th
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
38
median in pocket Urban Plaza (n=360)
Performance gap
-4
raw − expected · context confidence high
typical

Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.

Loading map…

The parks map is loading.
Street context. Park polygon highlighted on the citywide map.

Boundary: OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).

Explain this score

Where did the 34 come from? Each weighted contribution against a neutral 50 baseline. Green = pushed up; red = pulled down.

Download JSON
What pushed this score up or down vs a neutral 50weight × score
Edge Activation0 · p59
-12.5
Amenity Diversity11 · p53
-7.9
Border Vacuum Risk0 (risk)
+5.0
Enclosure / Eyes on Park94 · p98
+4.4
Natural Comfort26 · p13
-3.6
Connectivity44 · p47
-1.2

Sum of contributions = the headline score. A negative bar means that dimension dragged the park below the city-wide neutral baseline.

Why this park works

Arcadia Co-operative Backyard works because its enclosure score (94) is one of the city's strongest (25 mid-rise buildings frame the edge with passive surveillance).

What limits this park

Arcadia Co-operative Backyard is held back by natural comfort (26, bottom quartile): only 0% canopy means little summer shade.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high enclosure (94, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Arcadia Co-operative Backyard sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat: moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Tradeoffs

  • The park is enclosed by buildings (94) but the surrounding streets are quiet (edge activation 0): frame without animation.

Performance in context

  • Citywide rank is high (49th) but typology rank is more modest (29th): the strength likely comes from the dataset average pulling lower than this typology’s baseline.

Typology classification

confidence 70%
Urban Plaza

Classified as Urban Plaza: 1233 m², paved (0% canopy), 21.2 buildings/100 m

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
0.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 0 active uses (none) and 1 dead/hostile uses (highway). Active edges keep "eyes on the park" through the day; parking lots, blank institutional walls, rail and highway frontages drain street life.

Source: OSM POIs (amenity/shop) + Toronto Building Footprints + land use

Connectivity

20% weightmeasured 85%
43.9 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 2 mapped paths/walkways and 13 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 6 street intersections within 100 m; 13 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~212 m of perimeter. low edge density, significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m0
Intersections within 100 m6
Paths/walkways (50 m)2
Sidewalk segments (50 m)13
Transit stops (400 m)13
Estimated entrances0
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.00
Park perimeter212 m

Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
10.7 / 100

1 distinct amenity types in the park (shelter). Diversity, not raw count, drives the score so a park with many distinct activity types can outrank a larger park that repeats the same use.

Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags

Natural Comfort

15% weightinferred 24%
26.1 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~141 m. Reading: water-cooled. Source coverage: waterbodies. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).

Canopy coverage0.0%
Canopy area0.00 ha
Inside ravine system0.0%
Water surface inside park0.0%
Nearest water (if outside park)141 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon0
Tree density0.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used10

Source: Toronto Treed Area + Ravine + Waterbodies + Street Tree Inventory

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
93.6 / 100

45 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (25 mid-rise, 17 low-rise, 3 tower); avg edge height 15.8 m (~5 floors); 21.2 buildings per 100 m of 212 m perimeter (strong frontage density); edges are at a Jacobs-scale walkable mid-rise (3 to 7 floors); 3 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 25 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m45
Buildings within 50 m45
Avg edge height15.8 m (~5 floors)
Tallest edge building41.9 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)25
Low-rise (< 3 floors)17
Towers (≥ 13 floors)3
Frontage density21.25 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge56%
Tower share of edge7%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter212 m

Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights)

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%
0.0 risk

Park edges face the city. No significant border vacuum detected.

Source: Toronto Street Centreline (highways) + rail layer + OSM landuse + building footprints

Equity Context

contextinferred 15%
50.0 / 100

Equity Context requires inputs not yet loaded for this park (Toronto Neighbourhood Profiles). Score is held at a neutral 50 with low confidence. Read with caution.

Source: Toronto Neighbourhood Profiles

Amenities (1 types · 1 records)

  • shelter

Nearby active-edge features (25)

  • highway: Lake Shore Boulevard West89 m
  • highway: Lake Shore Boulevard West103 m
  • retail: Harbour Green Farms109 m
  • transit stop: Fleet Street112 m
  • highway: Lake Shore Boulevard West117 m
  • parking lot117 m
  • transit stop: Bathurst Street, Billy Bishop Airport119 m
  • transit stop: Bathurst Street125 m
  • highway: Lake Shore Boulevard West130 m
  • highway: Lake Shore Boulevard West132 m
  • parking lot135 m
  • retail: TD Canada Trust149 m
  • retail: Harbour Nails150 m
  • highway: Lake Shore Boulevard West159 m
  • parking lot159 m
  • highway: Lake Shore Boulevard West160 m
  • transit stop: Fleet Street168 m
  • retail: Hunny Pot Cannabis174 m
  • retail: Mr & Mrs Dry Cleaners183 m
  • highway: Lake Shore Boulevard West188 m
  • retail: Joe Fresh189 m
  • parking lot189 m
  • restaurant: Subway195 m
  • retail: Platis Cleaners198 m
  • retail: Pet Social199 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureArcadia Co-operative Backyard
Edge activation, connectivity, amenity diversity, natural comfort, and enclosure, each 0 to 100.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

  • Overall vitality
    49th
  • Edge activation
    59th
  • Connectivity
    47th
  • Amenity diversity
    53th
  • Natural comfort
    13th
  • Enclosure
    98th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

Most opposite parks

Furthest in metric space. Useful for recognising what kind of park this isn’t.

Human activity signals: not available

No activity signals have landed for this park yet. The model has scored its physical form but it can’t yet say how often it’s programmed, photographed, or walked through. See /data-ethics for what we will and will not collect.

Does this score feel accurate?

Your read of Arcadia Co-operative Backyardmatters. We’re testing whether the model lines up with how people actually use the park. Submissions are stored locally; no account needed.

Tell us how this park feels

We measure structure (canopy, edges, connectivity). You measure feeling. Both matter, and disagreement is itself useful civic data.

Rate this park on as many dimensions as you have an opinion about. 1 = not at all, 5 = strongly. Skip the ones you don't feel sure about. Aggregated only, no comments stored at the row level.

feels socially active
feels comfortable
feels safe
feels connected
feels welcoming
feels ecological / natural
feels good for lingering
feels family-friendly
feels culturally important
70%

What would improve this park?

Generated from the weakest measured dimensions: a starting point, not a prescription.

  • Activate the edges: encourage cafés, retail or community uses on the streets that face the park; replace blank or parking-lot edges where possible.
  • Add or open more entrances and improve sidewalk continuity around the park. More permeability means more spontaneous use.
  • Diversify what people can do in the park (playground, washroom, water, shade, performance, sport, garden): even small additions raise this score.
  • Increase canopy and reduce paved area. Shade and water features extend usable hours and seasons.

Data sources

real Toronto data
  • City of Toronto Open Data: Parks (Green Space)
    Polygon boundaries, official names, types. Boundaries are reconciled against OpenStreetMap (ODbL) for new and updated parks.
  • Parks & Recreation Facilities
    Inventory of in-park amenities (washrooms, fields, rinks…).
  • Toronto Pedestrian Network
    Sidewalk segments around and through parks; estimated park entrances.
  • Toronto Centreline V2
    Street segments + intersection nodes near park edges; trails and walkways.
  • Toronto 3D Massing
    Building footprints + heights for edge-building counts, frontage density, and tower-in-the-park risk.
  • Toronto Treed Area
    Tree canopy share inside park polygons via stratified-grid sampling.
  • Toronto Waterbodies & Rivers
    Water surface inside parks + nearest-water distance for cooling.
  • Ravine & Natural Feature Protection
    Ravine overlap as a cooling / natural-comfort signal.
  • Toronto Street Tree Inventory
    Tree count + density inside park polygons.
  • Neighbourhood Profiles
    (Pending) Equity context proxy.
  • OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)
    Cafés, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking, highways, rail.