Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Symington Avenue Playground, site photograph
Back to map
Parkettecluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (large-scale)Dovercourt-Wallace Emerson-Junction (93)confidence moderate

Symington Avenue Playground

Parkette, middle of the pack overall (score 39, rank ~67th percentile). Strongest: amenity diversity; weakest: natural comfort.

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

Symington Avenue Playground scores 38.7 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: edge activation (9.1). Border-vacuum risk is elevated (66). This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best fora quiet siteveryday neighbourhood use

Area · 0.64 ha

What's here

Recreation
Sports fieldTennisFitnessGardenTable tennis
Facilities
Drinking waterPicnic areaBenches
Vitality Score
39/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 66%

Data Confidence
38.7 / 100
Citywide
67th
of all 3,788 parks
Among Parkette
74th
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
37
median in small Parkette (n=247)
Performance gap
+2
raw − expected · context confidence high
typical

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

Loading map…

The parks map is loading.
Street context. Park polygon highlighted on the citywide map.

Boundary: OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).

Explain this score

Where did the 39 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 Activation9 · p69
-10.2
Enclosure / Eyes on Park66 · p64
+1.6
Border Vacuum Risk66 (risk)
-1.6
Natural Comfort43 · p41
-1.1
Connectivity52 · p62
+0.3
Amenity Diversity49 · p97
-0.3

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

Symington Avenue Playground works because its amenity diversity score (49) is one of the city's strongest and its edge activation (9) is also above-average (8 distinct amenity types support different kinds of use).

What limits this park

Symington Avenue Playground's edges are fronted by border-vacuum land uses (highways, rail, parking, blank institutional), risk score 66.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high amenity diversity (49, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Symington Avenue Playground 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 (66) but the surrounding streets are quiet (edge activation 9): frame without animation.

Typology classification

confidence 70%
Parkette

Classified as Parkette: small (6446 m²) with strong building frontage (12.0 per 100 m)

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
9.1 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 8 active uses (retail, transit_stop, restaurant) and 6 dead/hostile uses (rail, 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%
51.6 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 7 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 14 street intersections within 100 m; 14 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~332 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m8
Intersections within 100 m14
Paths/walkways (50 m)0
Sidewalk segments (50 m)7
Transit stops (400 m)14
Estimated entrances0
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter2.41
Park perimeter332 m

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

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
48.5 / 100

8 distinct amenity types in the park (fitness, sports_field, tennis, bench, drinking_water, garden, …). 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% weightinferred 30%
42.5 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: ~10.5% effective canopy (0.0% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); 15 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (15.0/ha). Reading: exposed. Source coverage: street_trees. 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)1,500 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon15
Tree density15.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used46

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
66.4 / 100

40 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (1 mid-rise, 39 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 6.3 m (~2 floors); 12.0 buildings per 100 m of 332 m perimeter (strong frontage density); edges are low-rise (mostly 2 to 3 floors); no towers immediately adjacent. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 1 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m40
Buildings within 50 m40
Avg edge height6.3 m (~2 floors)
Tallest edge building9.0 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)1
Low-rise (< 3 floors)39
Towers (≥ 13 floors)0
Frontage density12.05 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge3%
Tower share of edge0%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter332 m

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

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%
66.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: North Toronto Subdivision, North Toronto Subdivision, parking_lot, rail. 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 (8 types · 21 records)

  • fitness
  • sports field
  • tennis
  • bench
  • drinking water
  • garden
  • picnic
  • table tennis

Nearby active-edge features (46)

  • rail: North Toronto Subdivision13 m
  • rail: North Toronto Subdivision15 m
  • rail23 m
  • retail: Caldense Bakery33 m
  • parking lot48 m
  • retail: The Beer Store51 m
  • transit stop: Symington Ave at Dupont St73 m
  • restaurant: Gus Tacos80 m
  • transit stop: Dupont St at Symington Ave85 m
  • transit stop: Symington Ave at Adrian Ave93 m
  • retail: 100% SILK Shop + Gallery96 m
  • transit stop: Dupont St at Symington Ave97 m
  • parking lot99 m
  • parking lot100 m
  • rail: North Toronto Subdivision101 m
  • retail103 m
  • transit stop: Dupont Street106 m
  • transit stop: Dupont St at Perth Ave112 m
  • parking lot113 m
  • restaurant: Taqueria Vegana121 m
  • restaurant: Souvlaki Emporium121 m
  • retail: Stay Home Furnishings122 m
  • restaurant: Domino's123 m
  • retail: The Boho Lab124 m
  • restaurant: Thai Lime124 m
  • restaurant: Columbian Street Food125 m
  • restaurant: Koji Sushi126 m
  • retail: Friends Salon Nail & Spa127 m
  • restaurant: Gaivota Sports Bar128 m
  • retail: Casa Blanca Hairstyling For Men & Women129 m
  • parking lot136 m
  • retail: HIQ Cannabis137 m
  • restaurant: Defina Wood Fired140 m
  • restaurant: Enoteca Rossio146 m
  • transit stop: Symington Ave at Kingsley St156 m
  • parking lot156 m
  • restaurant: Dotty's157 m
  • retail: Salon Araujo158 m
  • transit stop: Dupont St at Franklin Ave161 m
  • community: Junction Triangle164 m
  • rail165 m
  • parking lot168 m
  • parking lot171 m
  • parking lot173 m
  • cafe: Hale Coffee181 m
  • restaurant: Lucia197 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureSymington Avenue Playground
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
    67th
  • Edge activation
    69th
  • Connectivity
    62th
  • Amenity diversity
    97th
  • Natural comfort
    41th
  • Enclosure
    64th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

Most opposite parks

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

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 Symington Avenue Playgroundmatters. 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.

Rate this park on as many dimensions as you have an opinion about. 1 = not at all, 5 = strongly. Skip the ones you don't feel sure about. Aggregated only, no comments stored at the row level.

feels socially active
feels comfortable
feels safe
feels connected
feels welcoming
feels ecological / natural
feels good for lingering
feels family-friendly
feels culturally important
70%

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

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.