Parkettecluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (enclosure-leaning)Keelesdale-Eglinton West (110)confidence moderatereal Toronto data

Regent Park - Etobicoke

Parkette, middle of the pack overall (score 34, rank ~51th percentile). Strongest: connectivity; weakest: amenity diversity.

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

Regent Park - Etobicoke scores 34.3 / 100. Strongest dimensions: connectivity and enclosure / eyes on park. Weakest: amenity diversity (0). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors — not a definitive judgment.

Best for:a quiet siteveryday neighbourhood use

Area · 0.20 ha

Vitality Score

34/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 61%

Data Confidence

34.3 / 100

Citywide

51st

of all 3,273 parks

Among Parkette

56th

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

median in pocket Parkette (n=287)

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 Activation2 · p65

-12.0

Amenity Diversity0 · p51

-10.0

Connectivity65 · p82

+3.0

Border Vacuum Risk24 (risk)

+2.6

Enclosure / Eyes on Park64 · p53

+1.4

Natural Comfort46 · p52

-0.6

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

Regent Park - Etobicoke works because its connectivity score (65) is above average and its edge activation (2) is also above-average (16 transit stops sit within a 400 m walk; 15 intersections fall within 100 m of the edge).

What limits this park

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high connectivity (65, top quartile).

Jacobs reading

Regent Park - Etobicoke 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 (64) but the surrounding streets are quiet (edge activation 2) — frame without animation.

Typology classification

confidence 70%

Parkette

Classified as Parkette: small (1971 m²) with strong building frontage (36.8 per 100 m)

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%

1.9 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 17 active uses (restaurant, retail, transit_stop) and 9 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%

64.9 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 15 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 15 street intersections within 100 m; 16 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 2 estimated access points across ~307 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy — no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m8

Intersections within 100 m15

Paths/walkways (50 m)0

Sidewalk segments (50 m)15

Transit stops (400 m)16

Estimated entrances2

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter2.60

Park perimeter307 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% weightpartial 60%

45.9 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 7.7% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~763 m; 7 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (7.0/ha). Reading: exposed. Source coverage: treed_area, waterbodies, street_trees. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).

Canopy coverage7.7%

Canopy area0.02 ha

Inside ravine system0.0%

Water surface inside park0.0%

Nearest water (if outside park)763 m

Estimated green100.0%

City-mapped trees inside polygon7

Tree density7.0 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0–100)39.1

Sample points used13

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%

63.7 / 100

113 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (0 mid-rise, 113 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 5.1 m (~2 floors); 36.8 buildings per 100 m of 307 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.

Buildings within 25 m113

Buildings within 50 m113

Avg edge height5.1 m (~2 floors)

Tallest edge building8.7 m

Mid-rise (3–7 floors)0

Low-rise (< 3 floors)113

Towers (≥ 13 floors)0

Frontage density36.76 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge0%

Tower share of edge0%

Blank-edge share (proxy)0%

Park perimeter307 m

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

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%

24.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: 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 (53)

parking lot0 m
restaurant — St. Matthews BBQ Chicken25 m
retail — Brazykuts26 m
transit stop — Rogers Rd at Scott Rd32 m
parking lot40 m
transit stop — Rogers Rd at Scott Rd50 m
retail53 m
retail — Giano Florist54 m
restaurant — Nova Tasca55 m
parking lot56 m
parking lot59 m
retail — Little Basket66 m
restaurant — Pizza Pizza67 m
parking lot67 m
restaurant — Lazeez Shawarma75 m
parking lot77 m
retail — Nova Era Bakery79 m
transit stop — Old Weston Rd at Rogers Rd80 m
retail — Home Ward82 m
transit stop — Old Weston Rd at Rogers Rd83 m
restaurant — Pizza Nova91 m
parking lot92 m
parking lot92 m
restaurant — Bar O Michelense95 m
parking lot96 m
retail — Golden Wheat Bakery Cafe98 m
restaurant — Kokyo Sushi101 m
transit stop — Keele Street120 m
retail121 m
retail128 m
parking lot129 m
retail — Mel's Beauty Lounge131 m
retail — Fade Room136 m
restaurant — Taco Bell138 m
retail — Aqua Tropics140 m
restaurant — Caloura Bar & Grill143 m
retail — Scooby Groom145 m
transit stop — Rogers Rd at Old Weston Rd147 m
restaurant — Osmow's148 m
transit stop — Rogers Road149 m
transit stop — Keele Street153 m
restaurant — A&W158 m
transit stop161 m
restaurant — Papa John's166 m
transit stop — Rogers Rd at Kane Ave172 m
parking lot173 m
retail178 m
restaurant — Subway179 m
retail — Ample Food Market184 m
transit stop — Old Weston Rd at Lavendar Rd187 m
parking lot187 m
retail — Cadillac Cleaners & Laundry187 m
parking lot193 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

Overall vitality
51th
Edge activation
65th
Connectivity
82th
Amenity diversity
51th
Natural comfort
52th
Enclosure
53th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

Cenotaph Traffic IslandCivic Square26
Public Access PropertyCorridor / Linear Park36
Humber River WatercourseWaterfront Park35
York StadiumNeighbourhood Park33
Woolenscote ParketteParkette37

Most opposite parks

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

Leslie Grove ParkParkette68
Kew GardensNeighbourhood Park71
Joseph Burr Tyrrell ParkUrban Plaza50
Market Lane ParkUrban Plaza63
Manor Community GreenUrban Plaza57

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 Regent Park - Etobicokematters. 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.

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.