Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Back to map
Waterfront ParkType:Underperforming / Leftover Space (enclosure-leaning)St Lawrence-East Bayfront-The Islands

Pier 27 Promenade Park

Waterfront Park, middle of the pack overall (score 30, rank ~32th percentile). Strongest: natural comfort; weakest: connectivity.

No photograph yet. If you have one of Pier 27 Promenade Park, we would like to use it.

Submit a photo

Data updated

Pier 27 Promenade Park scores 30.2 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and natural comfort. Weakest: edge activation (0). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best forwaterfront recreationlong walks

Area · 0.35 ha

What's here

Recreation
Garden

Getting around

Paths

375 m of mapped path, 100% paved.

No steps mapped on the path network.

Seating

No seating mapped in OpenStreetMap.

Arrival

Nearest parking 74 m away. 1 of 4 nearby lots reporting accessible spaces without a count.

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
30/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 60%

Data Confidence
30.2 / 100

Data confidence: moderate

Citywide
32nd
of all 3,752 parks
Among Waterfront Park
43rd
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
30
median in small Waterfront Park waterfront (n=103)
Performance gap
+0
raw − expected · context confidence high
typical

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 30 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
Edge Activation0 · p28
-12.5
Amenity Diversity12 · p60
-7.6
Connectivity16 · p14
-6.8
Border Vacuum Risk0 (risk)
+5.0
Enclosure / Eyes on Park62 · p52
+1.2
Natural Comfort56 · p72
+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

Pier 27 Promenade Park works because its natural comfort score (56) is above average.

What limits this park

Pier 27 Promenade Park is held back by connectivity (16, bottom quartile).

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally low connectivity (16, bottom quartile).

Jacobs reading

Pier 27 Promenade Park sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat: moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Tradeoffs

  • Natural comfort (56) significantly outpaces connectivity (16): restorative but hard to reach for daily use.
  • The park is enclosed by buildings (62) but the surrounding streets are quiet (edge activation 0): frame without animation.

Typology classification

confidence 75%
Waterfront Park

Classified as Waterfront Park: name suggests waterfront and nearest waterbody is ~16 m away

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
0.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 1 active uses (transit_stop) 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% weightpartial 45%
16.2 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 0 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 0 street intersections within 100 m; 21 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~410 m of perimeter. low edge density, significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m0
Intersections within 100 m0
Paths/walkways (50 m)0
Sidewalk segments (50 m)0
Transit stops (400 m)21
Estimated entrances0
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.00
Park perimeter410 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 (garden). 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%
55.9 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: ~23.1% effective canopy (0.0% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); nearest waterbody ~16 m; 33 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (33.0/ha). Reading: water-cooled. 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)16 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon33
Tree density33.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used25

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
62.4 / 100

23 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (11 mid-rise, 3 low-rise, 9 tower); avg edge height 35.6 m (~12 floors); 5.6 buildings per 100 m of 410 m perimeter (strong frontage density); edges lean tall but still framed; 9 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 11 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m23
Buildings within 50 m23
Avg edge height35.6 m (~12 floors)
Tallest edge building52.0 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)11
Low-rise (< 3 floors)3
Towers (≥ 13 floors)9
Frontage density5.61 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge48%
Tower share of edge39%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter410 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 · 9 records)

  • garden

Nearby active-edge features (21)

  • transit stop: Yonge56 m
  • parking lot74 m
  • parking lot82 m
  • transit stop102 m
  • parking lot110 m
  • transit stop119 m
  • retail: Art Hub 27136 m
  • restaurant: NBA Courtside Restaurant142 m
  • parking lot151 m
  • transit stop: Jack Layton Ferry Terminal152 m
  • transit stop: Freeland Street163 m
  • restaurant: Mizzen - Westin Harbour Castle164 m
  • restaurant: Don Alfonso 1890167 m
  • transit stop: Jack Layton Ferry Terminal169 m
  • restaurant: Stefra’s Snack Bar170 m
  • restaurant: Alexandros182 m
  • transit stop: Freeland Street182 m
  • transit stop: Yonge Street183 m
  • transit stop: Jack Layton Ferry Terminal187 m
  • restaurant: Freshii194 m
  • retail: INS Market198 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosurePier 27 Promenade 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
    32th
  • Edge activation
    28th
  • Connectivity
    14th
  • Amenity diversity
    60th
  • Natural comfort
    72th
  • Enclosure
    52th

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 Pier 27 Promenade Park 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.

  • 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.

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.
  • Neighbourhood Profiles
    (Pending) Equity context proxy.
  • OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)
    Cafés, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking, highways, rail.