GEORGE SYME COMMUNITY SCHOOL - Building Grounds
Neighbourhood Park, above average overall (score 42, rank ~83th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: natural comfort.
Aerial, City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px source · cached 5/9/2026
GEORGE SYME COMMUNITY SCHOOL - Building Grounds scores 42.2 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: amenity diversity (0). Border-vacuum risk is elevated (36). This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.
Area · 1.86 ha
Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 59%
Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.
Loading map…
The parks map is loading.Explain this score
Where did the 42 come from? Each weighted contribution against a neutral 50 baseline. Green = pushed up; red = pulled down.
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
GEORGE SYME COMMUNITY SCHOOL - Building Grounds works because its edge activation score (47) is one of the city's strongest and its connectivity (59) is also above-average.
What limits this park
GEORGE SYME COMMUNITY SCHOOL - Building Grounds's edges are fronted by border-vacuum land uses (highways, rail, parking, blank institutional), risk score 36.
Most distinctive characteristic
Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high edge activation (47, top decile).
Jacobs reading
GEORGE SYME COMMUNITY SCHOOL - Building Grounds sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat: moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.
Typology classification
Classified as Neighbourhood Park: 1.9 ha, framed by 0 mid-rise vs 0 towers
Edge Activation
Within 100 m of the park edge: 22 active uses (transit_stop, retail, restaurant) and 4 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
Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 12 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 17 street intersections within 100 m; 30 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~611 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.
Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops
Amenity Diversity
No amenities recorded. Score is 0 until inventory is loaded.
Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags
Natural Comfort
Natural-comfort components for this park: ~5.3% effective canopy (0.0% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); nearest waterbody ~734 m; 14 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (7.5/ha). Reading: exposed. Source coverage: waterbodies, street_trees. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).
Source: Toronto Treed Area + Ravine + Waterbodies + Street Tree Inventory
Enclosure / Eyes on Park
170 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (0 mid-rise, 170 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 5.1 m (~2 floors); 27.8 buildings per 100 m of 611 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.
Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights)
Border Vacuum Risk
Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot. Jacobs warned that highways, rail, parking lots and blank institutional edges act as "vacuums" that suppress foot traffic and isolate the park from its neighbourhood.
Source: Toronto Street Centreline (highways) + rail layer + OSM landuse + building footprints
Equity Context
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 (66)
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot14 m
- retail: Esso25 m
- retail: Châu Lingeries31 m
- transit stop: St. Clair Avenue W at Mariposa Ave46 m
- transit stop: Pritchard Ave at Jane St48 m
- restaurant: New Generation Pizza50 m
- retail: Hotspot Auto Parts58 m
- transit stop: Jane Street58 m
- retail: Nicol’s Beauty Center60 m
- transit stop: St. Clair Avenue W at Jane St64 m
- transit stop: St. Clair Avenue West67 m
- transit stop: Pritchard Ave at Jane St69 m
- retail: S and A Variety Store69 m
- transit stop: Pritchard Avenue70 m
- transit stop: St. Clair Avenue W at Mariposa Ave72 m
- transit stop77 m
- retail: Pedi N Nails77 m
- restaurant: Denny's82 m
- parking lot83 m
- transit stop: St. Clair Avenue West88 m
- transit stop: Pritchard Avenue92 m
- retail: Cindy Vu Hair Design95 m
- retail: Manntel96 m
- restaurant97 m
- parking lot105 m
- retail: Empire Collision Inc.107 m
- parking lot108 m
- retail: Redwood Sheds109 m
- parking lot113 m
- transit stop: Pritchard Ave at Batavia Ave116 m
- parking lot117 m
- restaurant: Wendy's125 m
- restaurant: BarBurrito127 m
- restaurant: D Spot Desserts130 m
- rail133 m
- restaurant: Pizza Hut134 m
- retail: easyfinancial134 m
- rail137 m
- parking lot137 m
- parking lot138 m
- rail140 m
- retail: Prestige Car Sales143 m
- rail147 m
- retail: Plato's Closet147 m
- parking lot149 m
- retail: Consumer Auto Parts Inc.150 m
- rail151 m
- rail154 m
- retail: Ontario Auto Trim Ltd.157 m
- parking lot157 m
- rail157 m
- restaurant: Osmow's158 m
- cafe: Tim Hortons161 m
- rail: Galt Subdivision161 m
- rail: Galt Subdivision165 m
- cafe: Starbucks165 m
- retail: Diaper & Gift Outlet166 m
- restaurant: Subway168 m
- rail168 m
- rail: Galt Subdivision169 m
- retail: Towtal173 m
- parking lot177 m
- retail: Dulux Paints180 m
- rail197 m
Park profile
Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.
Citywide percentile ranks
Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.
- Overall vitality83th
- Edge activation95th
- Connectivity73th
- Amenity diversity42th
- Natural comfort36th
- Enclosure51th
Most similar parks
Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.
- Tabor Hill Memorial ParkCivic Square44
- North York Hydro Green SpaceNeighbourhood Park47
- Etobicoke Hydro Green SpaceNeighbourhood Park44
- Riverside CemeteryNeighbourhood Park40
- City Wide Open SpaceCorridor / Linear Park46
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 GEORGE SYME COMMUNITY SCHOOL - Building Groundsmatters. 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.
- Increase canopy and reduce paved area. Shade and water features extend usable hours and seasons.
- 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 FacilitiesInventory of in-park amenities (washrooms, fields, rinks…).
- Toronto Pedestrian NetworkSidewalk segments around and through parks; estimated park entrances.
- Toronto Centreline V2Street segments + intersection nodes near park edges; trails and walkways.
- Toronto 3D MassingBuilding footprints + heights for edge-building counts, frontage density, and tower-in-the-park risk.
- Toronto Treed AreaTree canopy share inside park polygons via stratified-grid sampling.
- Toronto Waterbodies & RiversWater surface inside parks + nearest-water distance for cooling.
- Ravine & Natural Feature ProtectionRavine overlap as a cooling / natural-comfort signal.
- Toronto Street Tree InventoryTree count + density inside park polygons.
- Neighbourhood Profiles(Pending) Equity context proxy.
- OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)Cafés, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking, highways, rail.