Ravine / Naturalized Parkcluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (large-scale)Edenbridge-Humber Valley (9)confidence moderatereal Toronto data

Scarlett Mills Park

Ravine / Naturalized Park, middle of the pack overall (score 34, rank ~49th percentile). Strongest: connectivity; weakest: enclosure.

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

Scarlett Mills Park scores 33.9 / 100. Strongest dimensions: connectivity and enclosure / eyes on park. Weakest: edge activation (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:escape into nature

Area · 31.29 ha

Vitality Score

34/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 72%

Data Confidence

33.9 / 100

Citywide

49th

of all 3,273 parks

Among Ravine / Naturalized Park

53rd

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

median in very large Ravine / Naturalized Park ravine (n=31)

Performance gap

raw − expected · context confidence high

typical

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

Explain this score

Where did the 34 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 · p46

-12.5

Amenity Diversity21 · p90

-5.8

Border Vacuum Risk100 (risk)

-5.0

Connectivity74 · p95

+4.8

Natural Comfort59 · p74

+1.4

Enclosure / Eyes on Park60 · p33

+1.0

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

Scarlett Mills Park works because its connectivity score (74) is in the top tier and its amenity diversity (21) is also top quartile (17 transit stops sit within a 400 m walk; 28 intersections fall within 100 m of the edge).

What limits this park

Scarlett Mills Park is held back by enclosure (60, below-average); border-vacuum risk is also elevated (100).

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high connectivity (74, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Scarlett Mills Park sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat — moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Tradeoffs

High connectivity coexists with high border-vacuum risk (100) — much of that connectivity is to highways, rail, or parking lots, not to neighbourhoods.

Typology classification

confidence 75%

Ravine / Naturalized Parkalso reads as Waterfront Park

Classified as Ravine / Naturalized Park: 93% ravine overlap, 15% canopy. Secondary read: Waterfront Park (nearest waterbody within ~0 m).

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%

0.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 12 active uses (transit_stop, retail, cafe) and 20 dead/hostile uses (parking_lot, highway). 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%

74.0 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 68 mapped paths/walkways and 74 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 28 street intersections within 100 m; 17 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 21 estimated access points across ~6,268 m of perimeter. low edge density — significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m27

Intersections within 100 m28

Paths/walkways (50 m)68

Sidewalk segments (50 m)74

Transit stops (400 m)17

Estimated entrances21

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.43

Park perimeter6,268 m

Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%

21.0 / 100

2 distinct amenity types in the park (picnic, tennis). Diversity, not raw count, drives the score so a park with many distinct activity types can outrank a larger park that repeats the same use.

Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags

Natural Comfort

15% weightmeasured 75%

59.3 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 15.3% estimated tree canopy; 93.4% inside the ravine system; 0.3% water surface; 141 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (4.5/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 coverage15.3%

Canopy area4.78 ha

Inside ravine system93.4%

Water surface inside park0.3%

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

Estimated green99.7%

City-mapped trees inside polygon141

Tree density4.5 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0–100)38.5

Sample points used347

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%

59.6 / 100

134 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (9 mid-rise, 110 low-rise, 15 tower); avg edge height 11.7 m (~4 floors); 2.1 buildings per 100 m of 6,268 m perimeter — moderate frontage density; edges are at a Jacobs-scale walkable mid-rise (3–7 floors); 15 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 9 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m134

Buildings within 50 m134

Avg edge height11.7 m (~4 floors)

Tallest edge building60.0 m

Mid-rise (3–7 floors)9

Low-rise (< 3 floors)110

Towers (≥ 13 floors)15

Frontage density2.14 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge7%

Tower share of edge11%

Blank-edge share (proxy)29%

Park perimeter6,268 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, Eglinton Avenue West, parking_lot, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, Eglinton Avenue West, parking_lot, parking_lot, Eglinton Avenue West, 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 (2 types · 2 records)

picnic
tennis

Nearby active-edge features (53)

parking lot0 m
parking lot0 m
parking lot0 m
transit stop — Edenbridge Drive0 m
transit stop — Edenbridge Drive1 m
transit stop — Eglinton Avenue West4 m
transit stop — Fontenay Court22 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West24 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West28 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West33 m
cafe — Tim Hortons35 m
retail — Circle K35 m
parking lot36 m
retail — Elite Vision Centre37 m
cafe — Bevo Espresso & Gelato Bar40 m
retail — Scarlett O'Hair41 m
parking lot43 m
parking lot43 m
transit stop — Scarlett Road43 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West47 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West49 m
parking lot49 m
transit stop — Scarlett Road53 m
parking lot57 m
parking lot — Tenant parking63 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West65 m
parking lot68 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West72 m
transit stop — Eglinton Avenue West77 m
parking lot78 m
parking lot80 m
parking lot97 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West107 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West114 m
retail — Royal Variety117 m
parking lot119 m
retail — Mario's House of Beauty121 m
parking lot121 m
restaurant — Jadranka Cafe & Pastries125 m
retail — Dalilah Hair Salon125 m
retail — Lambton Cleaners126 m
transit stop — East Drive126 m
parking lot133 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West135 m
transit stop — East Drive167 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West170 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West171 m
highway — Eglinton Avenue West172 m
transit stop — 20/30 Fontenay Crt182 m
parking lot184 m
parking lot185 m
parking lot185 m
transit stop — Eglinton Avenue West at Walkway to Emmett Avenue192 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

Overall vitality
49th
Edge activation
46th
Connectivity
95th
Amenity diversity
90th
Natural comfort
74th
Enclosure
33th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

Elm Park - North YorkNeighbourhood Park39
Mccowan District ParkOther34
North ParkRavine / Naturalized Park41
Audrelane ParkCorridor / Linear Park43
Rexdale ParkWaterfront Park45

Most opposite parks

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

Joseph Burr Tyrrell ParkUrban Plaza50
Bernard Avenue Road AllowanceUrban Plaza54
Queen'S Quay Traffic IslandWaterfront Park49
Manor Community GreenUrban Plaza57
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 Scarlett Mills 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.

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.