Outdoor routines community signal
Parks and play across Calgary communities
Relative reach to mapped park land, mapped playground sites and equipment, and active sport surfaces.
This page compares one public-data signal at a time. It is a shortlist tool rather than an overall ranking, and every leading record links to a full community profile with the underlying evidence and local context.
- Compare these communitiesPlace the community examples side by side with the same score lens selected.
- Find communities with this signalApply an explicit signal threshold without creating an overall ranking.
- Browse all community signalsMove between all 87 transparent comparison lenses.
Published formula
Park access 40%, playground assets 40%, and sport surfaces 20%. The playground component uses mapped-site density 40%, mapped-site count 25%, current-equipment density 20%, represented age classes 10%, and inclusive-equipment density 5%.
Park reach is a straight-line geometry measure from sampled points to active City park polygons. Playground sites are deduplicated by City asset code. Counts and distances do not establish walking routes, entrance locations, attendance, condition, accessibility, supervision, programming or seasonal availability.
Evidence used
This is a direct comparison. The current ingredients include park-area share, total mapped park area, park-site density, mapped park-site count, City playground equipment, deduplicated playground sites, sport surfaces.
Communities with stronger measured support
Beddington Heights: 72/100; Park reach: 100% of 108 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 0 m from the community point; 90% reach 121 m Dover: 77/100; Park reach: 100% of 131 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 24 m from the community point; 90% reach 234 m Hawkwood: 73/100; Park reach: 100% of 117 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 0 m from the community point; 90% reach 149 m Huntington Hills: 77/100; Park reach: 100% of 137 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 18 m from the community point; 90% reach 166 m Marlborough: 72/100; Park reach: 99.4% of 174 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 7 m from the community point; 90% reach 181 m Martindale: 74/100; Park reach: 100% of 173 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 19 m from the community point; 90% reach 183 m Montgomery: 78/100; Park reach: 100% of 114 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 158 m from the community point; 90% reach 173 m Parkhill: 76/100; Park reach: 100% of 125 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 0 m from the community point; 90% reach 163 m Rundle: 74/100; Park reach: 100% of 196 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 26 m from the community point; 90% reach 160 m Temple: 77/100; Park reach: 100% of 196 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 0 m from the community point; 90% reach 169 m
These examples come from the stronger end of the measured-support range and are shown alphabetically. The score applies only to this named lens and is not an overall neighbourhood ranking.
- Beddington Heights: 72/100Park reach: 100% of 108 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 0 m from the community point; 90% reach 121 m | Mapped parks: 2 mapped park sites covering approximately 24.6 acres (3.1% of the reporting boundary)
- Dover: 77/100Park reach: 100% of 131 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 24 m from the community point; 90% reach 234 m | Mapped parks: 8 mapped park sites covering approximately 115.8 acres (11.3% of the reporting boundary)
- Hawkwood: 73/100Park reach: 100% of 117 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 0 m from the community point; 90% reach 149 m | Mapped parks: 3 mapped park sites covering approximately 58.3 acres (7.4% of the reporting boundary)
- Huntington Hills: 77/100Park reach: 100% of 137 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 18 m from the community point; 90% reach 166 m | Mapped parks: 7 mapped park sites covering approximately 121.6 acres (10.3% of the reporting boundary)
- Marlborough: 72/100Park reach: 99.4% of 174 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 7 m from the community point; 90% reach 181 m | Mapped parks: 4 mapped park sites covering approximately 48.9 acres (7.4% of the reporting boundary)
- Martindale: 74/100Park reach: 100% of 173 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 19 m from the community point; 90% reach 183 m | Mapped parks: 4 mapped park sites covering approximately 91.6 acres (13.8% of the reporting boundary)
- Montgomery: 78/100Park reach: 100% of 114 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 158 m from the community point; 90% reach 173 m | Mapped parks: 9 mapped park sites covering approximately 174.3 acres (23.9% of the reporting boundary)
- Parkhill: 76/100Park reach: 100% of 125 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 0 m from the community point; 90% reach 163 m | Mapped parks: 5 mapped park sites covering approximately 44.5 acres (27.4% of the reporting boundary)
- Rundle: 74/100Park reach: 100% of 196 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 26 m from the community point; 90% reach 160 m | Mapped parks: 4 mapped park sites covering approximately 49.2 acres (7.5% of the reporting boundary)
- Temple: 77/100Park reach: 100% of 196 boundary samples within 400 m; nearest mapped park 0 m from the community point; 90% reach 169 m | Mapped parks: 4 mapped park sites covering approximately 55.1 acres (8.5% of the reporting boundary)