Parkettecluster ·Active-edged · exposed parksWest Humber-Clairville (1)confidence moderatereal Toronto data

Etobicoke Hydro Green Space

Parkette, in the top tier overall (score 44, rank ~86th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: natural comfort.

Aerial — City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px source · cached 5/9/2026

Etobicoke Hydro Green Space scores 43.7 / 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.

Best for:a quiet siteveryday neighbourhood use

Area · 0.64 ha

Vitality Score

44/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 56%

Data Confidence

43.7 / 100

Citywide

87th

of all 3,273 parks

Among Parkette

89th

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

median in small Parkette (n=218)

Performance gap

raw − expected · context confidence high

modest overperformer

Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.

Explain this score

Where did the 44 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 · p21

-10.0

Border Vacuum Risk0 (risk)

+5.0

Natural Comfort24 · p5

-3.8

Connectivity57 · p68

+1.3

Enclosure / Eyes on Park62 · p44

+1.2

Edge Activation50 · p96

+0.0

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

Etobicoke Hydro Green Space works because its edge activation score (50) is one of the city's strongest and its connectivity (57) is also above-average (its perimeter is lined with active uses).

What limits this park

Etobicoke Hydro Green Space is held back by natural comfort (24, bottom quartile)— only 0% canopy means little summer shade.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high edge activation (50, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Etobicoke Hydro Green Space sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat — moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Tradeoffs

Connectivity (57) significantly outpaces natural comfort (24) — well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.

Performance in context

A modest overperformer for its parkette typology (+8 vs the median in small Parkette).

Typology classification

confidence 70%

Parkette

Classified as Parkette: small (6368 m²) with strong building frontage (18.6 per 100 m)

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%

50.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 6 active uses (transit_stop, retail) and 0 dead/hostile uses (none). 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%

56.7 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 4 mapped paths/walkways and 15 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 7 street intersections within 100 m; 29 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~349 m of perimeter. moderate edge density — small superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m2

Intersections within 100 m7

Paths/walkways (50 m)4

Sidewalk segments (50 m)15

Transit stops (400 m)29

Estimated entrances0

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.57

Park perimeter349 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 30%

24.4 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~705 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)705 m

Estimated green100.0%

City-mapped trees inside polygon0

Tree density0.0 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0–100)0.0

Sample points used44

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%

61.9 / 100

65 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (0 mid-rise, 65 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 5.0 m (~2 floors); 18.6 buildings per 100 m of 349 m perimeter — strong frontage density; edges are barely there or single-storey; no towers immediately adjacent. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 0 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m65

Buildings within 50 m65

Avg edge height5.0 m (~2 floors)

Tallest edge building7.4 m

Mid-rise (3–7 floors)0

Low-rise (< 3 floors)65

Towers (≥ 13 floors)0

Frontage density18.61 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge0%

Tower share of edge0%

Blank-edge share (proxy)0%

Park perimeter349 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 (14)

transit stop — Finch Avenue at Kiskadee Drive24 m
retail — Master Mechanic63 m
retail — Meineke69 m
transit stop — Westmore72 m
transit stop — Finch Avenue at Damascus Drive75 m
transit stop — Finch Avenue At Kiskadee Drive100 m
transit stop — Finch Avenue at Westmore Drive112 m
transit stop — Finch Avenue At Westmore Drive117 m
transit stop — Westmore122 m
parking lot144 m
transit stop — Westmore Drive at Finch Avenue161 m
transit stop — Westmore Drive at Finch Avenue North Side162 m
transit stop173 m
transit stop — Finch Avenue at Westmore Drive177 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

Overall vitality
86th
Edge activation
96th
Connectivity
68th
Amenity diversity
21th
Natural comfort
5th
Enclosure
44th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

Scarborough Hydro Green SpaceNeighbourhood Park43
Scarborough Hydro Green SpaceNeighbourhood Park45
GIBSON HOUSE - Building GroundsTower-Community Green Space40
Scarborough Hydro Green SpaceNeighbourhood Park46
Tabor Hill Memorial ParkCivic Square44

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 ParkRavine / Naturalized Park26
Rouge ParkWaterfront Park25

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 Etobicoke Hydro Green Spacematters. 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 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.