Othercluster ·Underperforming / Leftover Spaces (ravine-leaning)Downsview-Roding-CFB (26)confidence moderatereal Toronto data

Downsview Subway Station Green

Other, below average overall (score 28, rank ~20th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: enclosure.

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

Downsview Subway Station Green scores 27.5 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and edge activation. 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:varies — see metrics

Area · 0.78 ha

Vitality Score

28/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 51%

Data Confidence

27.5 / 100

Citywide

20th

of all 3,273 parks

Among Other

60th

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

median in small Other (n=41)

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 28 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

Amenity Diversity0 · p9

-10.0

Connectivity20 · p8

-6.1

Edge Activation31 · p87

-4.7

Natural Comfort25 · p6

-3.8

Border Vacuum Risk12 (risk)

+3.8

Enclosure / Eyes on Park33 · p5

-1.7

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

Downsview Subway Station Green works because its edge activation score (31) is in the top tier.

What limits this park

Downsview Subway Station Green is held back by enclosure (33, bottom quartile)— no mid-rise frontage to provide eyes on the park.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally low enclosure (33, bottom quartile).

Jacobs reading

Downsview Subway Station Green is currently underperforming on both axes — neither integrated into the city nor offering deep natural respite. A candidate for design intervention.

Performance in context

Although its citywide rank is low (20th), it ranks highly among similar others (60th) — strong for what it is, even if the absolute score is moderate.

Typology classification

confidence 30%

Other

Classified as Other: does not meet any specific typology threshold (0.8 ha, 0 amenity types, frontage 0.8/100m)

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%

31.4 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 15 active uses (transit_stop) and 5 dead/hostile uses (parking_lot, rail, 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% weightpartial 65%

19.6 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 1 mapped paths/walkways and 0 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 0 street intersections within 100 m; 27 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~365 m of perimeter. low edge density — significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m0

Intersections within 100 m0

Paths/walkways (50 m)1

Sidewalk segments (50 m)0

Transit stops (400 m)27

Estimated entrances0

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.00

Park perimeter365 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% weightinferred 30%

24.6 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~627 m. Reading: exposed. Source coverage: waterbodies. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).

Canopy coverage0.0%

Canopy area0.00 ha

Inside ravine system0.0%

Water surface inside park0.0%

Nearest water (if outside park)627 m

Estimated green100.0%

City-mapped trees inside polygon0

Tree density0.0 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0–100)0.0

Sample points used55

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightpartial 60%

32.6 / 100

3 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (0 mid-rise, 3 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 5.3 m (~2 floors); 0.8 buildings per 100 m of 365 m perimeter — thin frontage — significant blank-edge share; 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 m3

Buildings within 50 m3

Avg edge height5.3 m (~2 floors)

Tallest edge building6.5 m

Mid-rise (3–7 floors)0

Low-rise (< 3 floors)3

Towers (≥ 13 floors)0

Frontage density0.82 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge0%

Tower share of edge0%

Blank-edge share (proxy)73%

Park perimeter365 m

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

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%

12.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: Passenger pick up/drop off. 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 (36)

transit stop — Sheppard West Station26 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station27 m
parking lot — Passenger pick up/drop off33 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station39 m
transit stop — Sheppard West52 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station53 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station53 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station58 m
transit stop — Sheppard West60 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station60 m
transit stop — Passenger PU/DO71 m
rail71 m
rail73 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station75 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station75 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station88 m
parking lot — Sheppard West Station Parking88 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station91 m
highway — Allen Road98 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station100 m
highway — Allen Road102 m
transit stop — Sheppard West Station102 m
highway — Allen Road105 m
transit stop — Sheppard West - South Entrance105 m
highway — Allen Road117 m
parking lot136 m
highway — Allen Road145 m
transit stop — Allen Road at Sheppard Avenue161 m
parking lot164 m
transit stop — Allen Road at Sheppard Avenue South Side165 m
highway — Allen Road165 m
transit stop — Sheppard Ave W at Banting Ave170 m
highway — Allen Road179 m
transit stop — Sheppard Avenue at Dufferin Street183 m
transit stop — Sheppard West - North Side187 m
retail — Menorah198 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

Overall vitality
20th
Edge activation
87th
Connectivity
8th
Amenity diversity
9th
Natural comfort
6th
Enclosure
5th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

City Wide Open SpaceOther32
Etobicoke Hydro Green SpaceOther25
Etobicoke Hydro Green SpaceOther30
Etobicoke Hydro Green SpaceOther30
City Wide Open SpaceRavine / Naturalized Park32

Most opposite parks

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

High ParkRavine / Naturalized Park47
Ramsden ParkRavine / Naturalized Park43
Trinity Bellwoods ParkNeighbourhood Park63
Kew GardensNeighbourhood Park71
Christie Pits ParkRavine / Naturalized Park44

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 Downsview Subway Station Greenmatters. 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.
Increase canopy and reduce paved area. Shade and water features extend usable hours and seasons.
Encourage mid-rise, windowed frontages around the park so residents have direct sightlines onto it.

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.