Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
HODGSON PUBLIC SCHOOL - Building Grounds, site photograph
Back to map
Athletic / Recreation Parkcluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (enclosure-leaning)Mount Pleasant East (99)confidence moderate

HODGSON PUBLIC SCHOOL - Building Grounds

Athletic / Recreation Park, in the top tier overall (score 47, rank ~90th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: natural comfort.

Aerial, City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px source · cached 5/9/2026

HODGSON PUBLIC SCHOOL - Building Grounds scores 47.4 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: natural comfort (34.5). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best fororganised sportactive recreation

Area · 1.70 ha

What's here

Recreation
Sports fieldIce rink
Facilities
WashroomBenches
Vitality Score
47/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 68%

Data Confidence
47.4 / 100
Citywide
90th
of all 3,788 parks
Among Athletic / Recreation Park
87th
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
38
median in medium Athletic / Recreation Park (n=113)
Performance gap
+9
raw − expected · context confidence high
modest 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.

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
Enclosure / Eyes on Park84 · p90
+3.4
Amenity Diversity35 · p89
-3.1
Border Vacuum Risk24 (risk)
+2.6
Natural Comfort35 · p20
-2.3
Edge Activation43 · p94
-1.8
Connectivity43 · p46
-1.3

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

HODGSON PUBLIC SCHOOL - Building Grounds works because its edge activation score (43) is in the top tier and its enclosure (84) is also top quartile.

What limits this park

HODGSON PUBLIC SCHOOL - Building Grounds is held back by natural comfort (35, bottom quartile): only 0% canopy means little summer shade.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high edge activation (43, top decile).

Jacobs reading

HODGSON PUBLIC SCHOOL - Building Grounds sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat: moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Performance in context

  • A modest overperformer for its athletic / recreation park typology (+9 vs the median in medium Athletic / Recreation Park).

Typology classification

confidence 75%
Athletic / Recreation Parkalso reads as Neighbourhood Park

Classified as Athletic / Recreation Park: 50% of amenity types are athletic (ice_rink, sports_field). Secondary read: Neighbourhood Park (1.7 ha, framed by 23 mid-rise vs 0 towers).

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
42.7 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 12 active uses (transit_stop, retail, school, restaurant) and 3 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%
43.4 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 7 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 6 street intersections within 100 m; 17 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 1 estimated access points across ~549 m of perimeter. low edge density, significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m1
Intersections within 100 m6
Paths/walkways (50 m)0
Sidewalk segments (50 m)7
Transit stops (400 m)17
Estimated entrances1
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.18
Park perimeter549 m

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

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
34.5 / 100

4 distinct amenity types in the park (bench, ice_rink, sports_field, washroom). 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% weightpartial 45%
34.5 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: ~1.7% effective canopy (0.0% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); nearest waterbody ~842 m; 4 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (2.4/ha). Reading: exposed. Source coverage: 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 system0.0%
Water surface inside park0.0%
Nearest water (if outside park)842 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon4
Tree density2.4 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used118

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
83.9 / 100

160 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (23 mid-rise, 137 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 7.6 m (~3 floors); 29.1 buildings per 100 m of 549 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 23 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m160
Buildings within 50 m160
Avg edge height7.6 m (~3 floors)
Tallest edge building22.3 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)23
Low-rise (< 3 floors)137
Towers (≥ 13 floors)0
Frontage density29.13 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge14%
Tower share of edge0%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter549 m

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

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%
24.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: parking_lot, 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: 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 (4 types · 7 records)

  • bench
  • ice rink
  • sports field
  • washroom

Nearby active-edge features (40)

  • parking lot0 m
  • retail: CCMH Toronto Student Intern Clinic27 m
  • transit stop: Belle Ayre Boulevard28 m
  • school: Toronto Prep School29 m
  • parking lot45 m
  • transit stop: Belle Ayre Boulevard50 m
  • parking lot58 m
  • retail: Pampered Paws65 m
  • transit stop: Mount Pleasant Road69 m
  • restaurant: Starving Artist Waffles & Espresso78 m
  • restaurant: Millwood Bread & Butter79 m
  • retail: Ixxy Vape82 m
  • transit stop: Davisville Avenue85 m
  • retail: Mountain Convenience95 m
  • transit stop: Davisville Avenue100 m
  • restaurant: Sushi Supreme101 m
  • retail: Neptune Hairstyling103 m
  • restaurant: Krabi Thai Cuisine109 m
  • transit stop: Mount Pleasant Road111 m
  • retail: Bob's Cleaners112 m
  • retail: E. Bapst Custom Upholstering117 m
  • restaurant: Hazel's Diner121 m
  • restaurant: Wild Chicory125 m
  • retail: Eye Studio126 m
  • restaurant: Subway128 m
  • retail: Saati Fine Jewellery131 m
  • transit stop: Mount Pleasant Road West Side132 m
  • retail: Second Nature Boutique132 m
  • parking lot145 m
  • parking lot146 m
  • transit stop: Belsize Drive155 m
  • retail: Tech-Net Professional Auto Service165 m
  • parking lot166 m
  • restaurant: The Belsize Public House176 m
  • transit stop: Belsize Drive184 m
  • retail: Circle K190 m
  • retail: Mabel’s Fables196 m
  • cafe: Tim Hortons197 m
  • retail: The Box Spot199 m
  • retail: Manderley Fine Furniture199 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureHODGSON PUBLIC SCHOOL - Building Grounds
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
    90th
  • Edge activation
    94th
  • Connectivity
    46th
  • Amenity diversity
    89th
  • Natural comfort
    20th
  • Enclosure
    90th

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 HODGSON PUBLIC SCHOOL - Building Groundsmatters. 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.