Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Back to map
Urban PlazaType:Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Park (enclosure-leaning)Annex

Joseph Tough Park

Urban Plaza, in the top tier overall (score 47, rank ~89th percentile). Strongest: enclosure; weakest: natural comfort.

No photograph yet. If you have one of Joseph Tough Park, we would like to use it.

Submit a photo

Data updated

Joseph Tough Park scores 47.1 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and edge activation. 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.

Best fordaily passing-throughpocket meetings

Area · 0.06 ha

Getting around

Paths

No walking paths mapped in OpenStreetMap.

Seating

No seating mapped in OpenStreetMap.

Arrival

Nearest parking 52 m away. None of the 5 nearby lots records whether it has accessible spaces.

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
47/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 56%

Data Confidence
47.1 / 100

Data confidence: moderate

Citywide
89th
of all 3,752 parks
Among Urban Plaza
81st
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
38
median in pocket Urban Plaza (n=352)
Performance gap
+9
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.

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 Diversity0 · p16
-10.0
Border Vacuum Risk0 (risk)
+5.0
Enclosure / Eyes on Park98 · p100
+4.8
Natural Comfort22 · p0
-4.2
Edge Activation57 · p97
+1.7
Connectivity49 · p57
-0.2

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

Joseph Tough Park works because its enclosure score (98) is one of the city's strongest and its edge activation (57) is also top decile (41 mid-rise buildings frame the edge with passive surveillance).

What limits this park

Joseph Tough Park is held back by natural comfort (22, bottom quartile): only 0% canopy means little summer shade.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high enclosure (98, top decile).

Jacobs reading

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

Tradeoffs

  • Connectivity (49) significantly outpaces natural comfort (22): well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.

Performance in context

  • A modest overperformer for its urban plaza typology (+9 vs the median in pocket Urban Plaza).

Typology classification

confidence 70%
Urban Plaza

Classified as Urban Plaza: 579 m², paved (0% canopy), 57.2 buildings/100 m

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
56.7 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 16 active uses (transit_stop, retail, restaurant) 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% weightmeasured 85%
49.1 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 6 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 8 street intersections within 100 m; 20 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~105 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m6
Intersections within 100 m8
Paths/walkways (50 m)0
Sidewalk segments (50 m)6
Transit stops (400 m)20
Estimated entrances0
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter5.72
Park perimeter105 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 24%
22.2 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~1419 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)1,419 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon0
Tree density0.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used15

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
97.5 / 100

60 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (41 mid-rise, 17 low-rise, 2 tower); avg edge height 17.0 m (~6 floors); 57.2 buildings per 100 m of 105 m perimeter (strong frontage density); edges are at a Jacobs-scale walkable mid-rise (3 to 7 floors); 2 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 41 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m60
Buildings within 50 m60
Avg edge height17.0 m (~6 floors)
Tallest edge building71.5 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)41
Low-rise (< 3 floors)17
Towers (≥ 13 floors)2
Frontage density57.19 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge68%
Tower share of edge3%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter105 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 (0)

No amenities recorded for this park.

Nearby active-edge features (43)

  • retail: Tendex36 m
  • transit stop37 m
  • restaurant: Avenue Diner49 m
  • restaurant: MIMI Chinese49 m
  • parking lot52 m
  • parking lot68 m
  • transit stop: Avenue Road68 m
  • retail: Sketchley Cleaners76 m
  • transit stop: Avenue Rd at Davenport Rd78 m
  • transit stop: Avenue Road78 m
  • retail: Ends78 m
  • restaurant: Cantine Bistro + Bar80 m
  • restaurant: EVOO82 m
  • retail: Kay & Yonges Florist83 m
  • restaurant: Osteria Giulia86 m
  • retail: Yang's Flower Mart89 m
  • retail: Blanco Plus93 m
  • retail: Jong Young Food & Flower Market97 m
  • retail: Grower's Flower Market & Gifts101 m
  • retail: Pallette Gallery & Gift Shop101 m
  • transit stop: Avenue Rd at Davenport Rd103 m
  • retail: Grower's Flower Market & Gifts107 m
  • retail: Park Avenue Cleaners115 m
  • parking lot118 m
  • parking lot127 m
  • retail: The Perry Presentation Gallery130 m
  • retail131 m
  • retail: The Gracious Living Centre Kitchen & Bath139 m
  • restaurant: Sotto Sotto139 m
  • transit stop: Bedford Road140 m
  • retail: PAWfect Spa141 m
  • retail145 m
  • transit stop: Bedford Rd at Davenport Rd146 m
  • retail: Yäda Hair Salon147 m
  • retail: Leonardo Galleries157 m
  • transit stop: Bedford Rd at Davenport Rd157 m
  • retail: Orya Beauty Boutique161 m
  • cafe: Seven Grains Expresso Bar167 m
  • restaurant: Le Paradis173 m
  • parking lot173 m
  • retail: Bright Hopes Market175 m
  • retail: Studio Nude Skin & Body184 m
  • retail: DLK On Avenue198 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureJoseph Tough 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
    89th
  • Edge activation
    97th
  • Connectivity
    57th
  • Amenity diversity
    16th
  • Natural comfort
    0th
  • Enclosure
    100th

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 Joseph Tough 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.

  • 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.
  • 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: 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.