Waterfront Parkcluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (large-scale)Kennedy Park (124)confidence moderatereal Toronto data

Pine Hills Cemetery

Waterfront Park, below average overall (score 29, rank ~28th percentile). Strongest: connectivity; weakest: enclosure.

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

Pine Hills Cemetery scores 29.4 / 100. Strongest dimensions: connectivity and enclosure / eyes on park. Weakest: amenity diversity (0). Border-vacuum risk is elevated (100). This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors — not a definitive judgment.

Best for:waterfront recreationlong walks

Area · 65.94 ha

Vitality Score

29/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 63%

Data Confidence

29.4 / 100

Citywide

28th

of all 3,273 parks

Among Waterfront Park

40th

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

median in very large Waterfront Park waterfront (n=44)

Performance gap

-5

raw − expected · context confidence high

modest underperformer

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

Explain this score

Where did the 29 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

Edge Activation0 · p52

-12.5

Amenity Diversity0 · p57

-10.0

Border Vacuum Risk100 (risk)

-5.0

Connectivity72 · p92

+4.3

Natural Comfort59 · p73

+1.3

Enclosure / Eyes on Park62 · p47

+1.2

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

Pine Hills Cemetery works because its connectivity score (72) is in the top tier and its natural comfort (59) is also above-average (37 transit stops sit within a 400 m walk; 20 intersections fall within 100 m of the edge).

What limits this park

Pine Hills Cemetery's edges are fronted by border-vacuum land uses (highways, rail, parking, blank institutional) — risk score 100.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high connectivity (72, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Pine Hills Cemetery sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat — moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Tradeoffs

The park is enclosed by buildings (62) but the surrounding streets are quiet (edge activation 0) — frame without animation.
High connectivity coexists with high border-vacuum risk (100) — much of that connectivity is to highways, rail, or parking lots, not to neighbourhoods.

Performance in context

Reads as a modest underperformer relative to comparable parks (gap -5; cohort: very large Waterfront Park waterfront).

Typology classification

confidence 55%

Waterfront Park

Classified as Waterfront Park: nearest waterbody within ~0 m

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%

0.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 32 active uses (transit_stop, retail, restaurant) and 16 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%

71.6 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 1 mapped paths/walkways and 54 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 20 street intersections within 100 m; 37 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 4 estimated access points across ~3,254 m of perimeter. moderate edge density — small superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m23

Intersections within 100 m20

Paths/walkways (50 m)1

Sidewalk segments (50 m)54

Transit stops (400 m)37

Estimated entrances4

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.71

Park perimeter3,254 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% weightmeasured 75%

58.9 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 12.9% estimated tree canopy; 37.1% inside the ravine system; 1.2% water surface; 89 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (1.4/ha). Reading: ravine-cooled. Source coverage: treed_area, ravine, waterbodies, street_trees. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).

Canopy coverage12.9%

Canopy area8.52 ha

Inside ravine system37.1%

Water surface inside park1.2%

Nearest water (if outside park)0 m (inside)

Estimated green98.8%

City-mapped trees inside polygon89

Tree density1.4 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0–100)74.8

Sample points used735

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%

62.3 / 100

298 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (9 mid-rise, 289 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 5.1 m (~2 floors); 9.2 buildings per 100 m of 3,254 m perimeter — strong frontage density; edges are barely there or single-storey; no towers immediately adjacent. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 9 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m298

Buildings within 50 m298

Avg edge height5.1 m (~2 floors)

Tallest edge building29.7 m

Mid-rise (3–7 floors)9

Low-rise (< 3 floors)289

Towers (≥ 13 floors)0

Frontage density9.16 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge3%

Tower share of edge0%

Blank-edge share (proxy)0%

Park perimeter3,254 m

Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights)

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%

100.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, 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

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 (80)

parking lot0 m
parking lot0 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Marsh Road1 m
transit stop — Kennedy Road at St. Clair Avenue1 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at North Woodrow Boulevard3 m
transit stop3 m
transit stop — Birchmount Road at St. Clair Avenue East North Side4 m
transit stop — Birchmount Road at Anaconda Avenue5 m
transit stop — 519 Kennedy Road8 m
parking lot13 m
transit stop — Birchmount Road at Anaconda Avenue20 m
parking lot23 m
transit stop24 m
transit stop26 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Cotton Avenue27 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Kennedy Road28 m
transit stop — Kennedy Road at St. Clair Avenue31 m
parking lot32 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at North Woodrow Boulevard34 m
parking lot34 m
parking lot35 m
parking lot38 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Birchmount Road East Side40 m
parking lot40 m
parking lot41 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Kennedy Road46 m
parking lot53 m
transit stop — Birchmount Road at Foxridge Drive South Side53 m
transit stop56 m
transit stop — Birchmount Road at Foxridge Drive58 m
retail60 m
parking lot62 m
restaurant — Wimpy's Diner64 m
restaurant — Roti Lady66 m
restaurant — Dilli Walla Street66 m
restaurant — Taste of Greek67 m
transit stop — Birchmount Road at St. Clair Avenue East South Side69 m
parking lot76 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Birchmount Road West Side76 m
restaurant — Butter Chicken Roti80 m
retail — Xpress Mart80 m
parking lot85 m
retail — Dollar Variety Smoke & Gift87 m
retail — Norton Cleaners92 m
retail — Fantasy Fashion Boutique Lingerie & Intimate Apparel96 m
restaurant — Mr. Sub96 m
parking lot98 m
parking lot99 m
retail — Say it with a Rose101 m
restaurant — Westbank Restaurant & Bar104 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Danforth Road107 m
retail — Daisy Mart108 m
parking lot108 m
parking lot109 m
retail112 m
rail — Line 2 Bloor-Danforth116 m
rail — Line 2 Bloor-Danforth119 m
parking lot121 m
parking lot121 m
parking lot122 m
parking lot127 m
transit stop133 m
transit stop — Danforth Road at St. Clair Avenue East139 m
parking lot141 m
restaurant — Mac N Wings144 m
parking lot147 m
parking lot149 m
retail152 m
parking lot157 m
parking lot157 m
retail159 m
parking lot168 m
retail171 m
transit stop — Corvette Avenue171 m
parking lot171 m
parking lot176 m
transit stop — Danforth Road at St. Clair Avenue North Side183 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Danforth Road185 m
transit stop — St. Clair Avenue at Elfreda Boulevard186 m
parking lot188 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

Overall vitality
28th
Edge activation
52th
Connectivity
92th
Amenity diversity
57th
Natural comfort
73th
Enclosure
47th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

Park Lawn CemeteryOther30
Don Mills TrailCorridor / Linear Park29
Newtonbrook ParkRavine / Naturalized Park34
Browns Line-Lakeshore ParketteCorridor / Linear Park29
York Mills ParkWaterfront Park31

Most opposite parks

Furthest in metric space — useful for recognising what kind of park this isn’t.

Joseph Burr Tyrrell ParkUrban Plaza50
Leslie Grove ParkParkette68
Bernard Avenue Road AllowanceUrban Plaza54
Queen'S Quay Traffic IslandWaterfront Park49
Market Lane ParkUrban Plaza63

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 Pine Hills Cemeterymatters. 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.
Mitigate border vacuums (highways, rail, parking) with active programming on the still-permeable edges and treat the hostile edge as a design challenge.

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.