Othercluster ·Underperforming / Leftover Spaces (enclosure-leaning)Eringate-Centennial-West Deane (11)confidence moderatereal Toronto data

City Wide Open Space

Other, near the bottom of the city overall (score 21, rank ~4th percentile). Strongest: connectivity; weakest: natural comfort.

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

City Wide Open Space scores 20.6 / 100. Strongest dimensions: connectivity and enclosure / eyes on park. Weakest: amenity diversity (0). Border-vacuum risk is elevated (100). This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors — not a definitive judgment.

Best for:varies — see metrics

Area · 1.69 ha

Vitality Score

21/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 51%

Data Confidence

20.6 / 100

Citywide

4th

of all 3,273 parks

Among Other

26th

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

median in medium Other (n=60)

Performance gap

-8

raw − expected · context confidence high

modest underperformer

Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.

Explain this score

Where did the 21 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 · p16

-12.5

Amenity Diversity0 · p23

-10.0

Border Vacuum Risk100 (risk)

-5.0

Natural Comfort23 · p1

-4.1

Connectivity61 · p75

+2.2

Enclosure / Eyes on Park50 · p14

+0.0

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

City Wide Open Space works because its connectivity score (61) is above average (16 transit stops sit within a 400 m walk; 11 intersections fall within 100 m of the edge).

What limits this park

City Wide Open Space is held back by natural comfort (23, bottom quartile)— only 0% canopy means little summer shade; border-vacuum risk is also elevated (100).

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally low natural comfort (23, bottom quartile).

Jacobs reading

City Wide Open Space is currently underperforming on both axes — neither integrated into the city nor offering deep natural respite. A candidate for design intervention.

Tradeoffs

Connectivity (61) significantly outpaces natural comfort (23) — well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.
High connectivity coexists with high border-vacuum risk (100) — much of that connectivity is to highways, rail, or parking lots, not to neighbourhoods.

Performance in context

Reads as a modest underperformer relative to comparable parks (gap -8; cohort: medium Other).
Although its citywide rank is low (4th), it ranks highly among similar others (26th) — strong for what it is, even if the absolute score is moderate.

Typology classification

confidence 30%

Other

Classified as Other: does not meet any specific typology threshold (1.7 ha, 0 amenity types, frontage 0.0/100m)

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%

0.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 6 active uses (transit_stop) and 16 dead/hostile uses (highway). 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%

60.8 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 4 mapped paths/walkways and 18 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 11 street intersections within 100 m; 16 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~550 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy — no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m7

Intersections within 100 m11

Paths/walkways (50 m)4

Sidewalk segments (50 m)18

Transit stops (400 m)16

Estimated entrances0

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter1.27

Park perimeter550 m

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

Amenity Diversity

20% weightinferred 30%

0.0 / 100

No amenities recorded — score is 0 until inventory is loaded.

Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags

Natural Comfort

15% weightinferred 30%

22.9 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~1210 m. Reading: exposed. Source coverage: waterbodies. 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)1,210 m

Estimated green100.0%

City-mapped trees inside polygon0

Tree density0.0 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0–100)0.0

Sample points used119

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightinferred 20%

50.0 / 100

No buildings within 50 m of this park edge — typical of ravines, watercourses, and hydro corridors. Enclosure is held at a neutral 50 with low confidence; for natural areas, this metric is essentially not applicable.

Buildings within 25 m0

Buildings within 50 m0

Avg edge height0.0 m (~0 floors)

Tallest edge building0.0 m

Mid-rise (3–7 floors)0

Low-rise (< 3 floors)0

Towers (≥ 13 floors)0

Frontage density0.00 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge0%

Tower share of edge0%

Blank-edge share (proxy)100%

Park perimeter550 m

Source: Toronto 3D Massing (no nearby buildings detected)

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%

100.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West. Jacobs warned that highways, rail, parking lots and blank institutional edges act as "vacuums" — they 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 (0)

No amenities recorded for this park.

Nearby active-edge features (26)

transit stop7 m
transit stop — Eglinton Avenue at Renforth Drive8 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West14 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West14 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West14 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West15 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West16 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West18 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West23 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West28 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West30 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West30 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West31 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West34 m
transit stop — Eglinton Avenue at Renforth Drive37 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West45 m
transit stop — Renforth Drive at Eglinton Avenue61 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West79 m
transit stop92 m
transit stop — Renforth Drive at Eglinton Avenue93 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West94 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West96 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West112 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West126 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West179 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West187 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

Overall vitality
4th
Edge activation
16th
Connectivity
75th
Amenity diversity
23th
Natural comfort
1th
Enclosure
14th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

North York Hydro Green SpaceNeighbourhood Park27
City Wide Open SpaceCorridor / Linear Park20
Etobicoke Hydro Green SpaceNeighbourhood Park22
City Wide Open SpaceOther19
City Wide Open SpaceOther22

Most opposite parks

Furthest in metric space — useful for recognising what kind of park this isn’t.

Kew GardensNeighbourhood Park71
Leslie Grove ParkParkette68
Market Lane ParkUrban Plaza63
Ryerson Community ParkUrban Plaza60
Manor Community GreenUrban Plaza57

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 City Wide Open Spacematters. 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.

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.
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

City of Toronto Open Data — Parks (Green Space)
Polygon boundaries, official names, types.
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.