Graham Park
Urban Plaza, one of the city's strongest overall (score 54, rank ~98th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: natural comfort.
Photo by Dimitrios Nikolaou via Google Places · cached 5/9/2026
Graham Park scores 53.7 / 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.
Area · 0.05 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 54 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 (62) significantly outpaces natural comfort (24) — well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.
- Strong physical conditions (score 54) but weak observed activity signals (9) — 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
- This park is a strong overperformer for its cohort — raw 54 versus an expected 36 for similar parks (pocket Urban Plaza) (gap +17).
Typology classification
Classified as Urban Plaza: 547 m², paved (0% canopy), 68.1 buildings/100 m
Edge Activation
Within 100 m of the park edge: 37 active uses (restaurant, retail, cafe, transit_stop) and 1 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 4 mapped paths/walkways and 7 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 11 street intersections within 100 m; 9 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 2 estimated access points across ~126 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 ~930 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
86 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (5 mid-rise, 81 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 6.8 m (~2 floors); 68.1 buildings per 100 m of 126 m perimeter — strong frontage density; edges are low-rise (mostly 2–3 floors); no towers immediately adjacent. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 5 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 (68)
- restaurant — Nodo37 m
- retail — St. Clair Fruit Market37 m
- retail38 m
- retail — Rome Travel Agency38 m
- retail — Delta Dawn Floral38 m
- retail — Marcelleria Atlas38 m
- retail — Modern Edge Salon38 m
- retail — Roast Fine Foods38 m
- restaurant — Emma's Country Kitchen39 m
- retail — Suotu E-Scooter & E-Bike41 m
- restaurant — The Gym42 m
- retail46 m
- restaurant — Tapworks Pub46 m
- restaurant — Pukka49 m
- restaurant — Hungry Jack's Italian Mediterranean Grill51 m
- transit stop — Arlington Avenue54 m
- retail — Arlington Super Variety55 m
- retail59 m
- cafe — De Mello Coffee x Chocolat de Kat72 m
- restaurant — Zini Pizza76 m
- retail76 m
- cafe — Krave Coffee77 m
- retail — Optical77 m
- restaurant — Aviv Immigrant Kitchen79 m
- restaurant — FK80 m
- restaurant — Mi Tierra80 m
- retail — Planet Jewellery84 m
- retail — The Spirit of St. Clair86 m
- parking lot87 m
- cafe — Zaza Expresso Bar87 m
- restaurant — Black Tulip Restaurant88 m
- retail88 m
- restaurant — Chai Pochana91 m
- retail — Menalon Bakery93 m
- retail — Ecoexistance93 m
- restaurant — Sushi Kozoku96 m
- retail — Skinprovement Medi Spa & Laser Clinic98 m
- restaurant — Savera99 m
- retail — Gypsy100 m
- retail101 m
- restaurant — Wings N Dip102 m
- retail105 m
- restaurant — Ferro109 m
- restaurant — Dragon Delight Chinese Cuisine109 m
- restaurant — Riz110 m
- transit stop — Arlington Avenue116 m
- retail — Acapella125 m
- restaurant — Nama Sushi130 m
- restaurant — What A Bagel135 m
- retail — St. Clair Delicatessen136 m
- retail — Mabel's Bakery142 m
- retail — Poppyseed Creative Living144 m
- retail — Nino’s Hairstyling144 m
- restaurant — Romi's148 m
- parking lot161 m
- transit stop — Winona163 m
- parking lot167 m
- parking lot168 m
- retail — The Pretty Rugged169 m
- retail — Spectacular Sounds171 m
- restaurant — The Rushton174 m
- parking lot179 m
- retail — Pain Perdu186 m
- retail — Winona Hearing Aid Centre190 m
- parking lot192 m
- retail197 m
- transit stop — Winona Drive198 m
- retail198 m
Park profile
Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.
Citywide percentile ranks
Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.
- Overall vitality98th
- Edge activation100th
- Connectivity77th
- Amenity diversity7th
- Natural comfort3th
- Enclosure88th
Most similar parks
Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.
- St. Mary Street ParketteUrban Plaza51
- Pape Avenue CemeteryUrban Plaza50
- Earlscourt ParkUrban Plaza51
- OLD CITY HALL - Building GroundsCivic Square53
- Toronto Sculpture GardenUrban Plaza52
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.
p76 citywide · p86 within Urban Plaza
Source: Google Places API · match unverified (0.00 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 public attention / mentions. Source coverage: google-places.
Does this score feel accurate?
Your read of Graham Parkmatters. 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.