Ravine / Naturalized Parkcluster ·Ravine SliversWoburn (137)confidence moderatereal Toronto data

Scarboro Golf And Country Club

Ravine / Naturalized Park, near the bottom of the city overall (score 24, rank ~10th percentile). Strongest: natural comfort; weakest: edge activation.

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

Scarboro Golf And Country Club scores 24 / 100. Strongest dimensions: natural comfort 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:escape into natureshaded summer use

Area · 30.83 ha

Vitality Score

24/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 63%

Data Confidence

24.0 / 100

Citywide

10th

of all 3,273 parks

Among Ravine / Naturalized Park

9th

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

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

Performance gap

-10

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 24 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 · p17

-12.5

Amenity Diversity0 · p26

-10.0

Border Vacuum Risk100 (risk)

-5.0

Natural Comfort74 · p86

+3.5

Connectivity37 · p30

-2.5

Enclosure / Eyes on Park55 · p19

+0.5

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

Scarboro Golf And Country Club works because its natural comfort score (74) is in the top tier (33% tree canopy provides real shade; it sits inside the ravine system).

What limits this park

Scarboro Golf And Country Club is held back by edge activation (0, bottom quartile)— the surrounding streets carry too few active uses to spill into the park; border-vacuum risk is also elevated (100).

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high natural comfort (74, top quartile).

Jacobs reading

Scarboro Golf And Country Club sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat — moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Tradeoffs

Natural comfort (74) significantly outpaces connectivity (37) — restorative but hard to reach for daily use.

Performance in context

Reads as a modest underperformer relative to comparable parks (gap -10; cohort: very large Ravine / Naturalized Park ravine).

Typology classification

confidence 75%

Ravine / Naturalized Parkalso reads as Waterfront Park

Classified as Ravine / Naturalized Park: 76% ravine overlap, 33% 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: 0 active uses (none) and 10 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%

37.4 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 9 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 9 street intersections within 100 m; 4 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~2,936 m of perimeter. low edge density — significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m3

Intersections within 100 m9

Paths/walkways (50 m)0

Sidewalk segments (50 m)9

Transit stops (400 m)4

Estimated entrances0

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.10

Park perimeter2,936 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%

73.5 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 33.2% estimated tree canopy; 75.5% inside the ravine system; 4.7% water surface. Reading: ravine-cooled. Source coverage: treed_area, ravine, waterbodies. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).

Canopy coverage33.2%

Canopy area10.25 ha

Inside ravine system75.5%

Water surface inside park4.7%

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

Estimated green95.3%

City-mapped trees inside polygon0

Tree density0.0 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0–100)69.3

Sample points used343

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%

54.6 / 100

83 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (8 mid-rise, 75 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 5.5 m (~2 floors); 2.8 buildings per 100 m of 2,936 m perimeter — moderate frontage density; edges are barely there or single-storey; no towers immediately adjacent. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 8 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m83

Buildings within 50 m83

Avg edge height5.5 m (~2 floors)

Tallest edge building39.8 m

Mid-rise (3–7 floors)8

Low-rise (< 3 floors)75

Towers (≥ 13 floors)0

Frontage density2.83 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge10%

Tower share of edge0%

Blank-edge share (proxy)6%

Park perimeter2,936 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: Markham Road, Markham Road, 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 (30)

parking lot4 m
parking lot14 m
highway — Markham Road18 m
highway — Markham Road20 m
parking lot30 m
parking lot31 m
parking lot61 m
parking lot63 m
highway — Markham Road65 m
parking lot84 m
retail — Markham Variety100 m
parking lot112 m
highway — Markham Road124 m
parking lot131 m
transit stop — Markham Road at Blakemanor Boulevard139 m
highway — Markham Road144 m
highway — Markham Road154 m
highway — Markham Road154 m
highway — Markham Road155 m
restaurant — Prague Restaurant156 m
highway — Markham Road158 m
highway — Markham Road164 m
rail — Kingston Subdivision165 m
parking lot166 m
transit stop — Markham Road at Blakemanor Boulevard South Side167 m
rail — Kingston Subdivision168 m
rail — Kingston Subdivision171 m
highway — Markham Road173 m
highway — Markham Road183 m
transit stop — Markham Road at Eastpark Boulevard192 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

Overall vitality
10th
Edge activation
17th
Connectivity
30th
Amenity diversity
26th
Natural comfort
86th
Enclosure
19th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

MORRISH ROAD - Open Green SpaceParkette29
Scarboro Golf And Country ClubRavine / Naturalized Park33
City Wide Open SpaceCorridor / Linear Park30
Cathedral Bluffs ParkRavine / Naturalized Park32
City Wide Open SpaceParkette35

Most opposite parks

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

Leslie Grove ParkParkette68
ALEX WILSON COMMUNITY GARDEN - Open Green SpaceUrban Plaza59
Bellevue Square ParkCivic Square66
Sonya'S ParkUrban Plaza60
Kew GardensNeighbourhood Park71

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 Scarboro Golf And Country Clubmatters. 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.
Add or open more entrances and improve sidewalk continuity around the park. More permeability means more spontaneous use.
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.