Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Back to map
Urban Plazacluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (enclosure-leaning)Kensington-Chinatown (78)confidence moderate

Butterfield Park

Urban Plaza, one of the city's strongest overall (score 54, rank ~97th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: connectivity.

Butterfield Park scores 53.7 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and edge activation. Weakest: amenity diversity (11.9). 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 · 0.14 ha

What's here

Facilities
Benches
Vitality Score
54/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 63%

Data Confidence
53.7 / 100
Citywide
97th
of all 3,788 parks
Among Urban Plaza
94th
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
38
median in pocket Urban Plaza (n=360)
Performance gap
+16
raw − expected · context confidence high
strong overperformer

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 54 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
Amenity Diversity12 · p63
-7.6
Border Vacuum Risk0 (risk)
+5.0
Enclosure / Eyes on Park89 · p95
+3.9
Edge Activation65 · p99
+3.8
Connectivity43 · p46
-1.4
Natural Comfort50 · p57
+0.0

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

Butterfield Park works because its edge activation score (65) is one of the city's strongest and its enclosure (89) is also top decile (its perimeter is lined with active uses).

What limits this park

Butterfield Park doesn't have a clear weakness. Every measured dimension is at or above the middle of the pack.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high edge activation (65, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Butterfield Park sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat: moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Performance in context

  • This park is a strong overperformer for its cohort: raw 54 versus an expected 38 for similar parks (pocket Urban Plaza) (gap +16).

Typology classification

confidence 70%
Urban Plaza

Classified as Urban Plaza: 1420 m², paved (0% canopy), 19.9 buildings/100 m

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
65.3 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 26 active uses (restaurant, retail, community, cafe) and 2 dead/hostile uses (parking_lot). 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%
42.9 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 12 mapped paths/walkways and 6 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 2 street intersections within 100 m; 27 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~191 m of perimeter. low edge density, significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m0
Intersections within 100 m2
Paths/walkways (50 m)12
Sidewalk segments (50 m)6
Transit stops (400 m)27
Estimated entrances0
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.00
Park perimeter191 m

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

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
11.9 / 100

1 distinct amenity types in the park (bench). 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 15%
50.0 / 100

Natural Comfort requires inputs not yet loaded for this park (Treed Area / Ravine / Waterbodies / Street Trees). Score is held at a neutral 50 with low confidence. Read with caution.

Canopy coverage0.0%
Canopy area0.00 ha
Inside ravine system0.0%
Water surface inside park0.0%
Nearest water (if outside park)1,500 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon0
Tree density0.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used11

Source: Treed Area / Ravine / Waterbodies / Street Trees

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
89.0 / 100

38 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (27 mid-rise, 7 low-rise, 4 tower); avg edge height 22.0 m (~7 floors); 19.9 buildings per 100 m of 191 m perimeter (strong frontage density); edges lean tall but still framed; 4 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 27 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m38
Buildings within 50 m38
Avg edge height22.0 m (~7 floors)
Tallest edge building51.7 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)27
Low-rise (< 3 floors)7
Towers (≥ 13 floors)4
Frontage density19.86 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge71%
Tower share of edge11%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter191 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)

  • bench

Nearby active-edge features (70)

  • retail: Cheers Smoke Shop23 m
  • retail: Carolyn McAuley Hair Studio24 m
  • restaurant: Wafflian59 m
  • cafe: Ka-Nom67 m
  • restaurant: Popeyes69 m
  • restaurant: Manpuku72 m
  • parking lot76 m
  • restaurant: Nai Nai77 m
  • restaurant: Black Mill Tea80 m
  • retail: Jerk King80 m
  • cafe: Coffee Exchange83 m
  • restaurant: Karine's85 m
  • restaurant: La Sani Grill85 m
  • restaurant: McDonald's86 m
  • restaurant: Eats Manilla87 m
  • restaurant: Pho 36988 m
  • community: Dorothy H. Hoover Library89 m
  • retail: OCAD U Copy & Print Services90 m
  • parking lot91 m
  • restaurant: Top Bistro91 m
  • restaurant: Jaffna Street Food92 m
  • restaurant: The Bowl Korean Food92 m
  • cafe: Fruiteao93 m
  • restaurant: Kezy Döner93 m
  • restaurant: Thai Bright96 m
  • restaurant: Village by the Grange98 m
  • retail: Village Custom Cleaners99 m
  • restaurant: Sushi Cafe Bon Gung99 m
  • restaurant: Tasty Chinese Food102 m
  • retail: Perfect Threading & Beauty Salon103 m
  • retail: Grange Green Farms106 m
  • retail: Grange Lottery & News107 m
  • restaurant: The Fresh Italian Eatery115 m
  • parking lot117 m
  • restaurant: All Spice Jerk Express121 m
  • retail: June Hairdresser On Fire128 m
  • restaurant: Yakiniku Legend128 m
  • parking lot130 m
  • retail: Baro Natural136 m
  • retail: The Tec Fixer140 m
  • transit stop: Stephanie Street145 m
  • retail: Glo Nails Studio146 m
  • parking lot151 m
  • restaurant: Pizzaiolo151 m
  • restaurant: Lili Kitchen152 m
  • restaurant: The Katsu & Salmon153 m
  • restaurant: Patchmon’s Thai Desserts154 m
  • cafe: Tuck Shop Provisions154 m
  • cafe: The Library Specialty Coffee157 m
  • transit stop: McCaul Street159 m
  • restaurant: Gallery Sushi159 m
  • transit stop: McCaul Street161 m
  • restaurant: Subway165 m
  • parking lot166 m
  • retail: Hagen Hair & Barber167 m
  • restaurant: Village Idiot Pub172 m
  • restaurant: DZO172 m
  • community: Toronto Chinese Baptist Church Senior Citizen Centre175 m
  • cafe: Matcha Matcha175 m
  • retail: Cowley Abbott Canada’s Art Auctioneers177 m
  • cafe: Evana Cafe & Lounge180 m
  • cafe: Mersivity180 m
  • retail: Perfect X Hair181 m
  • retail: Emo Paints181 m
  • parking lot181 m
  • retail: Emo Paints183 m
  • cafe: Thor Espresso183 m
  • retail: Wizard Market188 m
  • retail199 m
  • restaurant: Ema-Tei Authentic Japanese Food200 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureButterfield Park
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
    97th
  • Edge activation
    99th
  • Connectivity
    46th
  • Amenity diversity
    63th
  • Natural comfort
    57th
  • Enclosure
    95th

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 Butterfield Parkmatters. 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.

  • 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.

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.