Neighbourhood Parkcluster ·Underperforming / Leftover Spaces (enclosure-leaning)Westminster-Branson (35)confidence moderate

Beth Tzedec Memorial Park

Neighbourhood Park, middle of the pack overall (score 32, rank ~40th percentile). Strongest: connectivity; weakest: edge activation.

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

Beth Tzedec Memorial Park scores 32.3 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: edge activation (0). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best fordaily urban life

Area · 13.96 ha

What's here

Facilities

Benches

Vitality Score

32/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 72%

Data Confidence

32.3 / 100

Citywide

41st

of all 3,788 parks

Among Neighbourhood Park

20th

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

median in large Neighbourhood Park (n=71)

Performance gap

-7

raw − expected · context confidence high

modest underperformer

Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.

Loading map…

Street context. Park polygon highlighted on the citywide map.

Explain this score

Where did the 32 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 · p7

-12.5

Amenity Diversity12 · p53

-7.6

Border Vacuum Risk24 (risk)

+2.6

Natural Comfort41 · p38

-1.3

Enclosure / Eyes on Park61 · p42

+1.1

Connectivity51 · p60

+0.1

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

Beth Tzedec Memorial Park works because its connectivity score (51) is middle of the pack (16 transit stops sit within a 400 m walk).

What limits this park

Beth Tzedec Memorial Park is held back by edge activation (0, bottom quartile): the surrounding streets carry too few active uses to spill into the park.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally low edge activation (0, bottom quartile).

Jacobs reading

Beth Tzedec Memorial Park 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 (61) but the surrounding streets are quiet (edge activation 0): frame without animation.
5 nearby towers cast wind and shadow without contributing canopy: passive surveillance is plentiful but human-scale comfort is not.

Performance in context

Reads as a modest underperformer relative to comparable parks (gap -7; cohort: large Neighbourhood Park).
Citywide rank is high (41st) but typology rank is more modest (20th): the strength likely comes from the dataset average pulling lower than this typology’s baseline.

Typology classification

confidence 70%

Neighbourhood Parkalso reads as Waterfront Park

Classified as Neighbourhood Park: 14.0 ha, framed by 16 mid-rise vs 5 towers. Secondary read: Waterfront Park (nearest waterbody within ~80 m).

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%

0.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 6 active uses (transit_stop, retail) and 7 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%

50.6 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 4 mapped paths/walkways and 17 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 6 street intersections within 100 m; 16 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~1,924 m of perimeter. low edge density, significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m4

Intersections within 100 m6

Paths/walkways (50 m)4

Sidewalk segments (50 m)17

Transit stops (400 m)16

Estimated entrances0

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.21

Park perimeter1,924 m

Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%

11.9 / 100

1 distinct amenity types in the park (bench). Diversity, not raw count, drives the score so a park with many distinct activity types can outrank a larger park that repeats the same use.

Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags

Natural Comfort

15% weightmeasured 75%

41.1 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 3.3% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~80 m. Reading: water-cooled. Source coverage: treed_area, waterbodies. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).

Canopy coverage3.3%

Canopy area0.46 ha

Inside ravine system0.0%

Water surface inside park0.0%

Nearest water (if outside park)80 m

Estimated green100.0%

City-mapped trees inside polygon0

Tree density0.0 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)21.0

Sample points used181

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%

60.5 / 100

37 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (16 mid-rise, 16 low-rise, 5 tower); avg edge height 20.2 m (~7 floors); 1.9 buildings per 100 m of 1,924 m perimeter (moderate frontage density); edges are at a Jacobs-scale walkable mid-rise (3 to 7 floors); 5 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 16 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m37

Buildings within 50 m37

Avg edge height20.2 m (~7 floors)

Tallest edge building71.1 m

Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)16

Low-rise (< 3 floors)16

Towers (≥ 13 floors)5

Frontage density1.92 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge43%

Tower share of edge14%

Blank-edge share (proxy)36%

Park perimeter1,924 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" that 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 (1 types · 1 records)

bench

Nearby active-edge features (31)

transit stop: 5720 Bathurst Street7 m
parking lot43 m
transit stop: Opposite 5720 Bathurst Street45 m
parking lot45 m
parking lot57 m
retail73 m
parking lot74 m
parking lot75 m
retail75 m
parking lot80 m
parking lot91 m
retail: Autopro Bathurst Car Care93 m
transit stop: Drewry Avenue Opposite 100 Antibes Drive96 m
retail: 'Convenience Store'112 m
parking lot112 m
retail117 m
parking lot129 m
parking lot132 m
parking lot141 m
transit stop: Antibes Drive at Candle Liteway148 m
parking lot151 m
parking lot153 m
parking lot163 m
parking lot168 m
transit stop: Antibes Drive at Torresdale Ave179 m
transit stop: Bathurst Street at Drewry Avenue184 m
parking lot189 m
parking lot189 m
transit stop: Opposite 4981 Bathurst Street195 m
transit stop: Antibes Drive at Bathurst Street195 m
cafe: Tim Hortons195 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge activation, connectivity, amenity diversity, natural comfort, and enclosure, each 0 to 100.

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

Overall vitality
40th
Edge activation
7th
Connectivity
60th
Amenity diversity
53th
Natural comfort
38th
Enclosure
42th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

Owen ParkNeighbourhood Park34
Chater Court ParkParkette35
Woodrow ParkCorridor / Linear Park31
Wayne ParketteParkette34
Crocus ParkParkette36

Most opposite parks

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

Leslie Grove ParkParkette73
Kew GardensNeighbourhood Park75
Bellevue Square ParkCivic Square73
Shaw ParkParkette69
Market Lane ParkUrban Plaza67

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 Beth Tzedec Memorial Parkmatters. 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

real Toronto data

City of Toronto Open Data: Parks (Green Space)
Polygon boundaries, official names, types. Boundaries are reconciled against OpenStreetMap (ODbL) for new and updated parks.
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.