St. Patricks Square
Civic Square, one of the city's strongest overall (score 55, rank ~98th percentile). Strongest: enclosure; weakest: natural comfort.
Aerial — City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px source · cached 5/9/2026
St. Patricks Square scores 54.7 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: amenity diversity (0). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors — not a definitive judgment.
Area · 0.07 ha
Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 57%
Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.
Explain this score
Where did the 55 come from? Each weighted contribution against a neutral 50 baseline. Green = pushed up; red = pulled down.
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
What limits this park
Most distinctive characteristic
Jacobs reading
Tradeoffs
- Connectivity (78) significantly outpaces natural comfort (41) — well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.
- Strong physical conditions (score 55) but weak observed activity signals (7) — the model says this should work, but events, mentions, and counters say it isn't being used at the level the urban form would predict.
- High connectivity (78) coexists with little programming evidence — easy to reach, but no recurring civic life detected.
Performance in context
- This park is a strong overperformer for its cohort — raw 55 versus an expected 37 for similar parks (pocket Civic Square) (gap +18).
Typology classification
Classified as Civic Square: name flags as civic square + 49 buildings frame the edge. Secondary read: Urban Plaza (737 m², paved (0% canopy), 39.1 buildings/100 m).
Edge Activation
Within 100 m of the park edge: 35 active uses (retail, restaurant, transit_stop, cafe) and 4 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
Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 14 mapped paths/walkways and 12 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 24 street intersections within 100 m; 18 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 6 estimated access points across ~125 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy — no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.
Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops
Amenity Diversity
No amenities recorded — score is 0 until inventory is loaded.
Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags
Natural Comfort
Natural-comfort components for this park: ~8.4% effective canopy (0.0% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); nearest waterbody ~1339 m; 12 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (12.0/ha). Reading: exposed. Source coverage: waterbodies, street_trees. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).
Source: Toronto Treed Area + Ravine + Waterbodies + Street Tree Inventory
Enclosure / Eyes on Park
49 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (32 mid-rise, 14 low-rise, 3 tower); avg edge height 17.2 m (~6 floors); 39.1 buildings per 100 m of 125 m perimeter — strong frontage density; edges are at a Jacobs-scale walkable mid-rise (3–7 floors); 3 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 32 mid-rise edge buildings.
Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights)
Border Vacuum Risk
Park edges face the city — no significant border vacuum detected.
Source: Toronto Street Centreline (highways) + rail layer + OSM landuse + building footprints
Equity Context
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 (80)
- retail — Umbra35 m
- retail — New Tribe Tattooing and Piercings37 m
- retail — Get Me Fly39 m
- restaurant — Salad King40 m
- retail — Ye Perfect Nail & Spa40 m
- restaurant — Naan Kabob41 m
- retail — Queen Dry Cleaners41 m
- restaurant — Queen Street Warehouse42 m
- restaurant — Oh My Gyro!43 m
- retail — June Hairdresser On Fire45 m
- restaurant — Alpha’s Shawarma46 m
- retail — Dragon Vape47 m
- retail — BMV Books49 m
- restaurant — German Doner Kebab51 m
- retail — Tribal Rhythm52 m
- retail — New You Spa53 m
- retail — Aux Merveilleux54 m
- cafe — Nord Lyon Cafe56 m
- transit stop — John Street63 m
- cafe — Thor Espresso64 m
- transit stop — Stephanie Street65 m
- cafe — Tuck Shop Provisions67 m
- parking lot72 m
- retail — Star Vape72 m
- parking lot77 m
- retail — Gardenview Convenience78 m
- retail — OD82 m
- restaurant — Yakiniku Legend82 m
- transit stop — John Street85 m
- restaurant — Holy Cow Steakhouse86 m
- retail — Stag Shop86 m
- parking lot — MuchMusic/CTV Parking89 m
- retail — Civello Aveda90 m
- retail — Opteaq Eyecare91 m
- cafe — Mizzica Cafe92 m
- parking lot93 m
- restaurant — Korean Grill House94 m
- retail — Rendez Vous95 m
- retail — Scarpino97 m
- restaurant — Subway105 m
- restaurant — Aristos108 m
- restaurant — Queen Mother Cafe109 m
- retail — Man Stop Barber111 m
- retail — OCAD U Copy & Print Services112 m
- retail — Clearly112 m
- restaurant — Touhenboku Ramen113 m
- restaurant — Rudy115 m
- parking lot116 m
- restaurant — The Friar and Firkin116 m
- retail — Change117 m
- restaurant — Niuda117 m
- retail — Toni & Guy118 m
- restaurant — The Bombay119 m
- restaurant — Shah’s Halal Food121 m
- retail — The Hunny Pot122 m
- restaurant — Atomy124 m
- retail — St. Patrick's Mini Market124 m
- cafe — Tim Hortons124 m
- restaurant — Ikkousha Ramen124 m
- restaurant — Chipotle127 m
- restaurant — Little India128 m
- restaurant — Daily Press Juicery129 m
- restaurant — Ema-Tei Authentic Japanese Food130 m
- retail — So Hip131 m
- retail — Groovy132 m
- retail133 m
- restaurant — Sushi Time134 m
- retail — Hunny Pot Cannabis135 m
- restaurant — Ikkousha Ramen140 m
- restaurant — The Sandwich Table140 m
- retail — Kintaro Tattoo144 m
- restaurant — Chick Queen144 m
- retail — Cori145 m
- cafe — HotBlack Coffee147 m
- cafe — Wonder Pet Cafe152 m
- parking lot157 m
- retail — LCBO157 m
- restaurant — Carlotta Bar158 m
- restaurant — The Fifth Gastropub161 m
- restaurant — The Rex Jazz & Blues Bar161 m
Park profile
Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.
Citywide percentile ranks
Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.
- Overall vitality98th
- Edge activation97th
- Connectivity98th
- Amenity diversity41th
- Natural comfort39th
- Enclosure99th
Most similar parks
Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.
- Anniversary ParkUrban Plaza56
- Hubbard ParkParkette50
- Jesse Ketchum ParkUrban Plaza51
- Massey Harris ParkUrban Plaza57
- Cathedral Church Of St. JamesParkette47
Most opposite parks
Furthest in metric space — useful for recognising what kind of park this isn’t.
- Toronto Islands - Muggs Island ParkRavine / Naturalized Park25
- Trca Lands ( 26)Ravine / Naturalized Park27
- Rouge ParkWaterfront Park25
- Rouge ParkRavine / Naturalized Park28
- Rouge ParkRavine / Naturalized Park21
Human activity signals
Programming, social attention, temporal rhythm, and nearby pedestrian / cycling flow. An experimental aggregate layer that complements the spatial scores — partial coverage, partial confidence.
Activity reading: no inputs available. The strongest signal is consistent rhythm across the day. Source coverage: google-places.
Does this score feel accurate?
Your read of St. Patricks Squarematters. 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.
- 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
- City of Toronto Open Data — Parks (Green Space)Polygon boundaries, official names, types.
- Parks & Recreation FacilitiesInventory of in-park amenities (washrooms, fields, rinks…).
- Toronto Pedestrian NetworkSidewalk segments around and through parks; estimated park entrances.
- Toronto Centreline V2Street segments + intersection nodes near park edges; trails and walkways.
- Toronto 3D MassingBuilding footprints + heights for edge-building counts, frontage density, and tower-in-the-park risk.
- Toronto Treed AreaTree canopy share inside park polygons via stratified-grid sampling.
- Toronto Waterbodies & RiversWater surface inside parks + nearest-water distance for cooling.
- Ravine & Natural Feature ProtectionRavine overlap as a cooling / natural-comfort signal.
- Toronto Street Tree InventoryTree count + density inside park polygons.
- Neighbourhood Profiles(Pending) Equity context proxy.
- OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)Cafés, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking, highways, rail.