Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Back to map
Urban Plazacluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (enclosure-leaning)Bayview Village (52)confidence moderate

Canadian Tire Park

Urban Plaza, in the top tier overall (score 49, rank ~92th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: natural comfort.

Canadian Tire Park scores 48.8 / 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 · 0.50 ha

What's here

Facilities
Fountain
Vitality Score
49/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 68%

Data Confidence
48.8 / 100
Citywide
92nd
of all 3,788 parks
Among Urban Plaza
87th
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
42
median in small Urban Plaza (n=115)
Performance gap
+7
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 49 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 · p65
-7.6
Border Vacuum Risk12 (risk)
+3.8
Enclosure / Eyes on Park82 · p87
+3.2
Natural Comfort40 · p35
-1.5
Edge Activation54 · p97
+0.9
Connectivity50 · p60
+0.1

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

Canadian Tire Park works because its edge activation score (54) is one of the city's strongest and its enclosure (82) is also top quartile (its perimeter is lined with active uses).

What limits this park

Canadian Tire 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 (54, top decile).

Jacobs reading

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

Tradeoffs

  • 5 nearby towers cast wind and shadow without contributing canopy: passive surveillance is plentiful but human-scale comfort is not.

Performance in context

  • A modest overperformer for its urban plaza typology (+7 vs the median in small Urban Plaza).

Typology classification

confidence 70%
Urban Plaza

Classified as Urban Plaza: 5008 m², paved (0% canopy), 8.6 buildings/100 m

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
53.8 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 21 active uses (transit_stop, restaurant, retail) 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%
50.3 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 12 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 5 street intersections within 100 m; 11 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~315 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m4
Intersections within 100 m5
Paths/walkways (50 m)0
Sidewalk segments (50 m)12
Transit stops (400 m)11
Estimated entrances0
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter1.27
Park perimeter315 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 (fountain). 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%
39.8 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: ~4.9% effective canopy (0.0% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); nearest waterbody ~480 m; 7 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (7.0/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)480 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon7
Tree density7.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used36

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
81.8 / 100

27 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (8 mid-rise, 14 low-rise, 5 tower); avg edge height 19.2 m (~6 floors); 8.6 buildings per 100 m of 315 m perimeter (strong frontage density); edges are at a Jacobs-scale walkable mid-rise (3 to 7 floors); 5 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 8 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m27
Buildings within 50 m27
Avg edge height19.2 m (~6 floors)
Tallest edge building70.0 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)8
Low-rise (< 3 floors)14
Towers (≥ 13 floors)5
Frontage density8.56 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge30%
Tower share of edge19%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter315 m

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

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%
12.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: 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 (1 types · 1 records)

  • fountain

Nearby active-edge features (28)

  • transit stop: Blue Ridge Road8 m
  • retail: Concord Park Place Presentation Centre19 m
  • transit stop: Sheppard Av - South30 m
  • transit stop: Bessarion Avenue34 m
  • parking lot35 m
  • transit stop: Blue Ridge Road West Side38 m
  • transit stop: Burbank Drive - Bessarion Station45 m
  • parking lot52 m
  • parking lot54 m
  • transit stop: Sheppard Av - North56 m
  • restaurant: Shatter Abbas71 m
  • retail: Pet Valu72 m
  • restaurant: Pizza Pizza72 m
  • restaurant: Kourosh Fresh Bread & Sandwiches72 m
  • retail: Kourosh Supermarket72 m
  • retail: Fairstone Financial73 m
  • retail: Sahara Travel73 m
  • retail: Taro's Fish74 m
  • restaurant: SunShine Spot75 m
  • retail: MEC North York Bike Shop80 m
  • retail: The Underground83 m
  • transit stop: Bessarion83 m
  • retail: Shell Select84 m
  • transit stop: Bessarion85 m
  • parking lot112 m
  • parking lot120 m
  • cafe: Starbucks130 m
  • parking lot131 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureCanadian Tire 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
    92th
  • Edge activation
    97th
  • Connectivity
    60th
  • Amenity diversity
    65th
  • Natural comfort
    35th
  • Enclosure
    87th

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 Canadian Tire 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.

  • 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.