Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Back to map
Urban Plazacluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (enclosure-leaning)Annex (95)confidence moderate

Monsignor Fraser College Park

Urban Plaza, in the top tier overall (score 47, rank ~90th percentile). Strongest: enclosure; weakest: natural comfort.

Monsignor Fraser College Park scores 46.8 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: amenity diversity (21). 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 · 0.28 ha

What's here

Facilities
Picnic areaBenches
Vitality Score
47/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 66%

Data Confidence
46.8 / 100
Citywide
89th
of all 3,788 parks
Among Urban Plaza
82nd
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
42
median in small Urban Plaza (n=115)
Performance gap
+5
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.

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 Diversity21 · p77
-5.8
Edge Activation33 · p89
-4.2
Enclosure / Eyes on Park90 · p96
+4.0
Border Vacuum Risk24 (risk)
+2.6
Connectivity56 · p70
+1.2
Natural Comfort44 · p43
-0.9

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

Monsignor Fraser College Park works because its enclosure score (90) is one of the city's strongest and its edge activation (33) is also top quartile (27 mid-rise buildings frame the edge with passive surveillance).

What limits this park

.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high enclosure (90, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Monsignor Fraser College Park 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 urban plaza typology (+5 vs the median in small Urban Plaza).

Typology classification

confidence 70%
Urban Plaza

Classified as Urban Plaza: 2798 m², paved (0% canopy), 39.7 buildings/100 m

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
33.1 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 8 active uses (cafe, retail, 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%
56.1 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 12 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 11 street intersections within 100 m; 18 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~232 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m9
Intersections within 100 m11
Paths/walkways (50 m)0
Sidewalk segments (50 m)12
Transit stops (400 m)18
Estimated entrances0
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter3.89
Park perimeter232 m

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

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
21.0 / 100

2 distinct amenity types in the park (bench, picnic). 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 36%
43.8 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: ~11.2% effective canopy (0.0% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); nearest waterbody ~1267 m; 16 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (16.0/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)1,267 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon16
Tree density16.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used20

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
89.7 / 100

92 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (27 mid-rise, 65 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 8.5 m (~3 floors); 39.7 buildings per 100 m of 232 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 27 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m92
Buildings within 50 m92
Avg edge height8.5 m (~3 floors)
Tallest edge building17.8 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)27
Low-rise (< 3 floors)65
Towers (≥ 13 floors)0
Frontage density39.73 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge29%
Tower share of edge0%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter232 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 (2 types · 2 records)

  • bench
  • picnic

Nearby active-edge features (77)

  • parking lot16 m
  • parking lot43 m
  • parking lot63 m
  • restaurant: Smart & Morris Jamaican Takeout90 m
  • retail: Lloyd's Barber Shop91 m
  • retail: Nella Cucina92 m
  • retail: Spanish Book Store94 m
  • retail: Simcoe94 m
  • retail: World Wide Cosmetic Centre94 m
  • restaurant: PreGame96 m
  • cafe: Emily Rose Cafe97 m
  • parking lot114 m
  • transit stop: Markham Street119 m
  • retail: Stanley's Variety and Grocery135 m
  • restaurant: Pizzaville141 m
  • transit stop: Bathurst145 m
  • transit stop: Bathurst Station146 m
  • transit stop: Bathurst148 m
  • retail: Canadian Centre For Language And Cultural Studies149 m
  • rail: Line 2 Bloor-Danforth150 m
  • transit stop152 m
  • transit stop: Barton Avenue152 m
  • rail: Line 2 Bloor-Danforth153 m
  • transit stop: Bathurst Street155 m
  • transit stop: Barton Avenue156 m
  • retail: Pelo Salon159 m
  • retail161 m
  • transit stop: Bathurst Station164 m
  • restaurant: Arisu165 m
  • restaurant: Kimchi House166 m
  • retail: Aroma Waxing Clinic166 m
  • retail: Real Nails Spa166 m
  • restaurant: Sammie's166 m
  • retail: Trendy Laundromat & Dry Cleaners166 m
  • cafe: Snakes & Lattes167 m
  • retail: Rogers/Fido167 m
  • retail: Village Market168 m
  • restaurant: Namaste Indian Cuisine169 m
  • restaurant: CODA170 m
  • retail: Gold Leaf Fruit Market172 m
  • retail: Qi Natural174 m
  • transit stop174 m
  • retail176 m
  • cafe: Jjin Toast177 m
  • highway: Bloor Street West178 m
  • retail178 m
  • restaurant: Yupdduk179 m
  • highway: Bloor Street West180 m
  • highway: Bloor Street West180 m
  • retail: Price War182 m
  • retail182 m
  • restaurant: Pizzeria Forno183 m
  • retail: Juxtapose Home184 m
  • highway: Bloor Street West184 m
  • retail: Secrets From Your Sister185 m
  • retail: Kimkor187 m
  • retail: Sis Hair & Beauty188 m
  • restaurant: Pizza Pizza189 m
  • highway: Bloor Street West189 m
  • restaurant: Kimsoonrye Soonsal Chicken190 m
  • retail: Sunny Health Spa190 m
  • retail: Touchbaes191 m
  • restaurant: Her Chef191 m
  • cafe: Rustle & Still191 m
  • restaurant: Hancook Cheese Dakgalbi191 m
  • retail: Ed's Mercantile192 m
  • retail: Duck Duck Games & Collectibles192 m
  • retail: Photoism192 m
  • highway: Bloor Street West193 m
  • cafe: Isabella's Mochi Donut193 m
  • parking lot193 m
  • retail: Mr. Nonno Barber Shop194 m
  • highway: Bloor Street West194 m
  • retail: Tibetan Paper & Handicraft194 m
  • retail: H2GOA196 m
  • parking lot199 m
  • retail200 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureMonsignor Fraser College 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
    90th
  • Edge activation
    89th
  • Connectivity
    70th
  • Amenity diversity
    77th
  • Natural comfort
    43th
  • Enclosure
    96th

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 Monsignor Fraser College 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.

  • Activate the edges: encourage cafés, retail or community uses on the streets that face the park; replace blank or parking-lot edges where possible.
  • 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.