References

The intellectual lineage and data sources behind the model. Where a metric in this project descends from a particular tradition, we name it explicitly. None of these references endorse this work; we owe them all the framing.

Urbanism — Jacobs and the eyes-on-the-park tradition

The framework that gives this project its name. Most of the urban-form metrics descend directly or indirectly from these readings.

The Death and Life of Great American Cities

Jane Jacobs, 1961

The source for active edges, mid-rise frontage, eyes on the street/park, and the diagnosis of border vacuums.

The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces

William H. Whyte, 1980

The methodological ancestor of any data-driven reading of how people use public space. The pluses-and-minuses framework.

How to Turn a Place Around

Project for Public Spaces (PPS), 2000

The placemaking lineage. Sociability, uses & activities, comfort & image, access & linkages.

Urban form — space syntax and CPTED

Quantitative urban-design traditions. Less central to this project but adjacent.

Space Syntax (β-integration, choice, and the underlying network theory)

Bill Hillier & Julienne Hanson, 1984

Connectivity is the metric in this project most directly indebted to Space Syntax thinking.

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)

C. Ray Jeffery, 1971; Oscar Newman's Defensible Space, 1972

Source of the surveillance/eyes-on-park argument. We deliberately do not use crime statistics as inputs; CPTED here is conceptual scaffolding only.

Park equity and access

We do not yet operationalise equity context, but these are the references shaping the upcoming work.

Parks for All? Toronto's parkland equity report

Park People

Per-capita parkland by neighbourhood, equity gaps, programming distribution.

Trust for Public Land — ParkScore

TPL, ongoing

A US-focused benchmark; comparable framework but different methodology.

Environmental urbanism

Sources informing the natural-comfort layer.

Heat Vulnerability Index — Toronto Public Health

City of Toronto, 2017

Why canopy + paved % matter beyond aesthetics.

i-Tree (USDA Forest Service)

USDA, ongoing

Conventional methodology for canopy → ecosystem-services translation.

Toronto Open Data — primary source layers

The data this project reads. All licensed under the Open Government Licence — Toronto.

City Green Spaces (Parks)

Toronto Open Data, 2018 snapshot used in this build

Parks & Recreation Facilities

Toronto Open Data

Toronto Centreline V2

Toronto Open Data

Pedestrian Network

Toronto Open Data, 2019 snapshot

Topographic Mapping — Treed Area

Toronto Open Data

Ravine & Natural Feature Protection Area

Toronto Open Data

Topographic Mapping — Waterbodies & Rivers

Toronto Open Data

Street Tree Inventory

Toronto Open Data — 689,013 trees in this build

3D Massing (latest year shapefile)

Toronto Open Data — 428,184 building polygons

Toronto Neighbourhoods

Toronto Open Data — 140 polygons

OpenStreetMap

Volunteer-mapped POIs and infrastructure used for edge activation, transit, and border-vacuum signals.

OpenStreetMap Toronto extract via Overpass API

OpenStreetMap contributors, ODbL

Cafes, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking lots, highways, rail. ~67k features classified.

A note on credit

The model in this project is opinionated. Where it draws on Jacobs (most of the urban-form metrics), Whyte (the ethic of close observation, even if we’re proxying it), Hillier (the structure of connectivity), and the placemaking tradition more broadly, we try to say so. The framework is theirs; the misapplications are ours. See methodology →