Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Don Panos Parkette, site photograph
Back to map
ParketteType:Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Park (enclosure-leaning)Weston-Pelham Park

Don Panos Parkette

Parkette, in the top tier overall (score 47, rank ~88th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: amenity diversity.

Photo by Matt Mernagh via Google Places · cached 5/9/2026

Data updated

Don Panos Parkette scores 46.6 / 100. Strongest dimensions: connectivity and enclosure / eyes on park. Weakest: amenity diversity (0). Border-vacuum risk is elevated (42). This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best fora quiet siteveryday neighbourhood use

Area · 0.20 ha

Getting around

Paths

80 m of mapped path. Too little surface tagging to say how much is paved.

Too little path mapped to check for steps.

Seating

No seating mapped in OpenStreetMap.

Arrival

Nearest parking 26 m away. None of the 5 nearby lots records whether it has accessible spaces.

Path, seating and parking data comes from OpenStreetMap and reflects what volunteers have mapped, not a survey. Absence here means nobody has recorded it. This section does not assess wheelchair access: the relevant OpenStreetMap tag is present on well under 1% of Toronto paths.

Vitality Score
47/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 57%

Data Confidence
46.6 / 100

Data confidence: moderate

Citywide
88th
of all 3,753 parks
Among Parkette
92nd
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
32
median in pocket Parkette (n=263)
Performance gap
+15
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. Connectivity, transit, and edge conditions read at a glance.
Don Panos Parkette, aerial top-down view
Top-down view. City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px. Reads the park’s footprint, paths, treed area, and edge conditions from above. City of Toronto Orthophoto · cot_ortho most-current MapServer · cached 5/9/2026.

Boundary: OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).

Explain this score

Where did the 47 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 Diversity0 · p6
-10.0
Connectivity72 · p94
+4.4
Natural Comfort39 · p33
-1.6
Edge Activation56 · p97
+1.5
Enclosure / Eyes on Park65 · p61
+1.5
Border Vacuum Risk42 (risk)
+0.8

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

Don Panos Parkette works because its edge activation score (56) is one of the city's strongest and its connectivity (72) is also top decile (its perimeter is lined with active uses).

What limits this park

Don Panos Parkette is held back by amenity diversity (0, bottom quartile); border-vacuum risk is also elevated (42).

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high edge activation (56, top decile).

Jacobs reading

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

Tradeoffs

  • Connectivity (72) significantly outpaces natural comfort (39): well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.

Performance in context

  • This park is a strong overperformer for its cohort: raw 47 versus an expected 32 for similar parks (pocket Parkette) (gap +15).

Typology classification

confidence 70%
Parkette

Classified as Parkette: small (2011 m²) with strong building frontage (23.4 per 100 m)

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
56.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 24 active uses (retail, transit_stop, cafe, restaurant) and 3 dead/hostile uses (rail, 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: OpenStreetMap: cafes, restaurants, shops, schools, community centres, transit, parking, highways, rail. All data sources.

Connectivity

20% weightmeasured 85%
72.1 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 6 mapped paths/walkways and 14 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 14 street intersections within 100 m; 6 streetcar or LRT stops, 1 bus stop within a 400 m walk; 4 estimated access points across ~188 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m11
Intersections within 100 m14
Paths/walkways (50 m)6
Sidewalk segments (50 m)14
Transit stops (400 m)7 (0 subway/GO, 6 streetcar/LRT, 1 bus)
Estimated entrances4
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter5.84
Park perimeter188 m

Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops. All data sources.

Amenity Diversity

20% weightinferred 30%
0.0 / 100

No amenities recorded.

Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags. All data sources.

Natural Comfort

15% weightinferred 36%
39.3 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; 12.5% inside the ravine system; nearest waterbody ~1323 m; 1 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (1.0/ha). Reading: exposed. Source coverage: ravine, waterbodies, street_trees. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).

Canopy coverage0.0%
Canopy area0.00 ha
Inside ravine system12.5%
Water surface inside park0.0%
Nearest water (if outside park)1,323 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon1
Tree density1.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)54.4
Sample points used16

Source: Toronto Treed Area + Ravine + Waterbodies + Street Tree Inventory. All data sources.

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
64.6 / 100

44 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (0 mid-rise, 44 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 6.0 m (~2 floors); 23.4 buildings per 100 m of 188 m perimeter (strong frontage density); edges are low-rise (mostly 2 to 3 floors); no towers immediately adjacent. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 0 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m44
Buildings within 50 m44
Avg edge height6.0 m (~2 floors)
Tallest edge building8.6 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)0
Low-rise (< 3 floors)44
Towers (≥ 13 floors)0
Frontage density23.36 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge0%
Tower share of edge0%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter188 m

Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights). All data sources.

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%
42.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: Newmarket Subdivision, Carpark 133, parking_lot. Jacobs warned that highways, rail, parking lots and blank institutional edges act as "vacuums" that suppress foot traffic and isolate the park from its neighbourhood.

Source: OpenStreetMap: highways, rail, parking. All data sources.

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: Not loaded yet: Toronto Neighbourhood Profiles. All data sources.

Amenities (0)

No amenities recorded for this park.

Nearby active-edge features (51)

  • restaurant: Samba19 m
  • transit stop: Laughton20 m
  • retail: Lucky Star Flowers23 m
  • parking lot: Carpark 13326 m
  • rail: Newmarket Subdivision28 m
  • retail: Boston Variety35 m
  • retail: Art Collective CODA38 m
  • restaurant: Flor do Ave40 m
  • retail: West York Appliances & Furniture40 m
  • retail: Sandro's Barber Shop40 m
  • parking lot40 m
  • retail: City Nails46 m
  • restaurant: Távora47 m
  • retail: Dollar & Variety Store49 m
  • retail: St. Clair Bakery49 m
  • retail: Golden Star53 m
  • retail: Sister's Choice63 m
  • restaurant: El Rancherito64 m
  • cafe: Capri Caffe74 m
  • retail: Bad Buddha Tattoes79 m
  • transit stop: Caledonia84 m
  • retail: Versatile Barbers & Hair Studio84 m
  • cafe: Aunty Em's Deli & Coffee88 m
  • retail: TJ Fine Upholstering Furniture89 m
  • transit stop: Laughton94 m
  • retail: Power Coin Laundry94 m
  • cafe: Portovelo Cafe100 m
  • restaurant: Kapital Resturant and Grill105 m
  • restaurant: Unique Cafe Restaurant110 m
  • restaurant: Dairy Freeze113 m
  • restaurant: Garagem 1675116 m
  • restaurant: Sabors Tradicionais116 m
  • retail: Librarie Mosaique121 m
  • parking lot122 m
  • restaurant: Marina’s Casa da Comida126 m
  • cafe: Venti Twenty138 m
  • retail: Tokes & Tins143 m
  • retail: Caledonia Bakery & Pastry145 m
  • retail: Tip Top Barbershop149 m
  • retail155 m
  • transit stop: Caledonia Road156 m
  • transit stop: Caledonia163 m
  • parking lot174 m
  • parking lot177 m
  • restaurant: Sabor Brazil180 m
  • retail: Newediuk Funeral Home182 m
  • transit stop: St Clair Avenue West186 m
  • retail: Benjamin Moore186 m
  • retail: Nova Era199 m
  • restaurant: Marinho Sports Bar199 m
  • rail: Newmarket Subdivision199 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureDon Panos Parkette
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
    88th
  • Edge activation
    97th
  • Connectivity
    94th
  • Amenity diversity
    6th
  • Natural comfort
    33th
  • Enclosure
    61th

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.

Visitor signals

Public attention measured by Google Places aggregates. This proxies attention, not occupancy. Aggregate-only: no usernames, no review text, no extra photos beyond the cached hero.

high-confidence match
Visitor signal score37 / 100
36.6 / 100

p32 citywide · p31 within Parkette

Volume (saturated)4
Density / ha47
Rating contribution70
Match dampener×1.00
Average rating
★ 3.8
out of 5
Ratings collected
18
total reviews
Photos uploaded
10
total contributors

Source: Google Places API · match high (0.97 composite confidence) · last refreshed 5/9/2026. Privacy contract. Measures public attention, not occupancy.

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 Don Panos Parkette matters. 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.

  • 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.
  • Mitigate border vacuums (highways, rail, parking) with active programming on the still-permeable edges and treat the hostile edge as a design challenge.

Data sources

real Toronto data
  • City of Toronto Open Data: Green Spaces
    Polygon boundaries, official names, land classes. 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.
  • OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)
    Cafés, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking, highways, rail.