Dane Parkette
Urban Plaza, above average overall (score 42, rank ~83th percentile). Strongest: enclosure; weakest: natural comfort.
Photo by Flaviu Purcarin via Google Places · cached 5/9/2026
Dane Parkette scores 42.2 / 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 · 0.21 ha
Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 56%
Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.
Street context
Park polygon highlighted on the citywide map. Connectivity, transit, and edge conditions read at a glance.
Top-down view
City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px. Reads the park’s footprint, paths, treed area, and edge conditions from above.
City of Toronto Orthophoto · cot_ortho most-current MapServer
Explain this score
Where did the 42 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 (53) significantly outpaces natural comfort (22) — well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.
- 12 nearby towers cast wind and shadow without contributing canopy — passive surveillance is plentiful but human-scale comfort is not.
- Strong physical conditions (score 42) but weak observed activity signals (8) — 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.
Performance in context
- A modest overperformer for its urban plaza typology (+6 vs the median in pocket Urban Plaza).
Typology classification
Classified as Urban Plaza: 2112 m², paved (0% canopy), 22.7 buildings/100 m
Edge Activation
Within 100 m of the park edge: 10 active uses (transit_stop, restaurant, retail) 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
Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 6 mapped paths/walkways and 6 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 7 street intersections within 100 m; 15 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~269 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: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~1403 m. Reading: exposed. Source coverage: waterbodies. 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
61 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (24 mid-rise, 25 low-rise, 12 tower); avg edge height 19.5 m (~7 floors); 22.7 buildings per 100 m of 269 m perimeter — strong frontage density; edges are at a Jacobs-scale walkable mid-rise (3–7 floors); 12 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 24 mid-rise edge buildings.
Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights)
Border Vacuum Risk
Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: parking_lot, parking_lot. 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
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 (29)
- parking lot5 m
- retail — Toronto Cabinetry23 m
- retail — Variety Plus23 m
- retail — Cash Money23 m
- parking lot32 m
- transit stop — Dane Avenue36 m
- restaurant — Subway36 m
- restaurant — Willy's Jerk53 m
- retail — Elegant Spa58 m
- transit stop — Apex Road62 m
- retail — Tantasia62 m
- retail — 180 Smoke Vape Store65 m
- parking lot100 m
- parking lot107 m
- retail — Studio L109 m
- retail — Century Nails122 m
- parking lot133 m
- restaurant — Mirra's Place135 m
- retail — F&S Collectibles142 m
- transit stop — Lawrence Avenue West150 m
- parking lot154 m
- retail — INS Market158 m
- transit stop — Lawrence Avenue West167 m
- parking lot175 m
- restaurant — Swiss Chalet175 m
- parking lot176 m
- transit stop — Dufferin Street181 m
- cafe — Tim Hortons183 m
- transit stop — Via Bagnato199 m
Park profile
Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.
Citywide percentile ranks
Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.
- Overall vitality83th
- Edge activation95th
- Connectivity61th
- Amenity diversity0th
- Natural comfort0th
- Enclosure96th
Most similar parks
Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.
- City Wide Open SpaceUrban Plaza40
- QUEEN STREET PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH GROUNDS - Building GroundsUrban Plaza44
- City Wide Open SpaceUrban Plaza47
- Boswell ParketteUrban Plaza48
- Ed And Anne Mirvish ParketteUrban Plaza45
Most opposite parks
Furthest in metric space — useful for recognising what kind of park this isn’t.
- Trca Lands ( 26)Ravine / Naturalized Park27
- Toronto Islands - Muggs Island ParkRavine / Naturalized Park25
- Rouge ParkRavine / Naturalized Park28
- Rouge ParkWaterfront Park25
- Rouge ParkRavine / Naturalized Park26
Visitor signals
Public attention measured by Google Places aggregates. This proxies attention, not occupancy. Aggregate-only — no usernames, no review text, no extra photos beyond the cached hero.
p58 citywide · p55 within Urban Plaza
Source: Google Places API · match high (0.79 composite confidence) · last refreshed 5/9/2026. Privacy contract. Measures public attention, not occupancy.
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 Dane Parkettematters. 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.
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.