Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Asquith Green Park, site photograph
Back to map
Urban PlazaType:Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Park (enclosure-leaning)Rosedale-Moore Park

Asquith Green Park

Urban Plaza, one of the city's strongest overall (score 62, rank ~99th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: natural comfort.

Photo by ExEng via Google Places · cached 5/9/2026

Data updated

Asquith Green Park scores 62.3 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: natural comfort (32.7). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best fordaily passing-throughpocket meetings

Area · 0.09 ha

What's here

Recreation
Garden
Facilities
Drinking waterBenchesPublic art

Getting around

Paths

61 m of mapped path. Too little surface tagging to say how much is paved.

Too little path mapped to check for steps.

Seating

Typically 10 m to the nearest bench, and 13 m at the far end.

Arrival

Nearest parking 92 m away. None of the 3 nearby lots records whether it has accessible spaces.

Path, seating and parking data comes from OpenStreetMap and reflects what volunteers have mapped, not a survey. Absence here means nobody has recorded it. This section does not assess wheelchair access: the relevant OpenStreetMap tag is present on well under 1% of Toronto paths.

Vitality Score
62/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 66%

Data Confidence
62.3 / 100

Data confidence: moderate

Citywide
99th
of all 3,753 parks
Among Urban Plaza
98th
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
38
median in pocket Urban Plaza (n=352)
Performance gap
+24
raw − expected · context confidence high
strong overperformer

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. Connectivity, transit, and edge conditions read at a glance.
Asquith Green Park, aerial top-down view
Top-down view. City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px. Reads the park’s footprint, paths, treed area, and edge conditions from above. City of Toronto Orthophoto · cot_ortho most-current MapServer · cached 5/9/2026.

Public art in this park

Numbers match the pins on the map. Works near the park are within 30 m of its edge.

Explain this score

Where did the 62 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
Connectivity76 · p96
+5.1
Border Vacuum Risk0 (risk)
+5.0
Edge Activation68 · p99
+4.5
Enclosure / Eyes on Park80 · p84
+3.0
Amenity Diversity36 · p88
-2.8
Natural Comfort33 · p17
-2.6

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

Asquith Green Park works because its edge activation score (68) is one of the city's strongest and its connectivity (76) is also top decile (its perimeter is lined with active uses).

What limits this park

Asquith Green Park is held back by natural comfort (33, bottom quartile): only 0% canopy means little summer shade.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high edge activation (68, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Asquith Green Park sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat: moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Tradeoffs

  • Connectivity (76) significantly outpaces natural comfort (33): well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.
  • 21 nearby towers cast wind and shadow without contributing canopy: passive surveillance is plentiful but human-scale comfort is not.

Performance in context

  • This park is a strong overperformer for its cohort: raw 62 versus an expected 38 for similar parks (pocket Urban Plaza) (gap +24).

Typology classification

confidence 70%
Urban Plaza

Classified as Urban Plaza: 900 m², paved (0% canopy), 44.8 buildings/100 m

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
68.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 19 active uses (restaurant, retail, cafe) and 1 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: OpenStreetMap: cafes, restaurants, shops, schools, community centres, transit, parking, highways, rail. All data sources.

Connectivity

20% weightmeasured 85%
75.7 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 7 mapped paths/walkways and 27 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 14 street intersections within 100 m; 1 subway or GO station, 6 bus stops within a 400 m walk; 4 estimated access points across ~141 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m10
Intersections within 100 m14
Paths/walkways (50 m)7
Sidewalk segments (50 m)27
Transit stops (400 m)7 (1 subway/GO, 0 streetcar/LRT, 6 bus)
Estimated entrances4
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter7.11
Park perimeter141 m

Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops. All data sources.

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
35.9 / 100

4 distinct amenity types in the park (bench, drinking_water, garden, art). Diversity drives the score, so a park with many distinct activity types can outrank a larger park that repeats the same use. 1 public artwork in the park adds a bonus for the number of works.

Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags. All data sources.

Natural Comfort

15% weightinferred 36%
32.7 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~963 m; 1 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (1.0/ha). Reading: exposed. Source coverage: waterbodies, 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)963 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon1
Tree density1.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used14

Source: Toronto Treed Area + Ravine + Waterbodies + Street Tree Inventory. All data sources.

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
80.3 / 100

63 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (27 mid-rise, 15 low-rise, 21 tower); avg edge height 31.0 m (~10 floors); 44.8 buildings per 100 m of 141 m perimeter (strong frontage density); edges lean tall but still framed; 21 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 27 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m63
Buildings within 50 m63
Avg edge height31.0 m (~10 floors)
Tallest edge building123.4 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)27
Low-rise (< 3 floors)15
Towers (≥ 13 floors)21
Frontage density44.78 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge43%
Tower share of edge33%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter141 m

Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights). All data sources.

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%
0.0 risk

Park edges face the city. No significant border vacuum detected.

Source: OpenStreetMap: highways, rail, parking. All data sources.

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: Not loaded yet: Toronto Neighbourhood Profiles. All data sources.

Amenities (4 types · 7 records)

  • bench
  • drinking water
  • garden
  • art

Nearby active-edge features (70)

  • retail: Rabba20 m
  • restaurant: Villa Madina47 m
  • restaurant: Thaï Express48 m
  • restaurant: A&W54 m
  • restaurant: Pizza Hut Express55 m
  • restaurant: Subway59 m
  • restaurant: Manchu Wok61 m
  • retail70 m
  • restaurant: Booster Juice72 m
  • cafe: Tim Hortons76 m
  • restaurant: The Bagel Stop76 m
  • retail: INS Market77 m
  • restaurant: Salad Days79 m
  • restaurant: La Prep80 m
  • restaurant: Sunset Grill90 m
  • parking lot92 m
  • restaurant: Mad Radish93 m
  • restaurant: Yuzuki93 m
  • cafe: Le Gourmand Café96 m
  • retail: Longo's99 m
  • restaurant: El Gourmet100 m
  • cafe: Starbucks101 m
  • rail108 m
  • rail108 m
  • retail: Dollarama110 m
  • retail: The Printing House111 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East112 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East112 m
  • retail: Print Pros114 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East115 m
  • parking lot117 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East119 m
  • restaurant: PI CO.120 m
  • transit stop: Bloor St East Entrance126 m
  • retail: LCBO129 m
  • restaurant: Chipotle130 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East130 m
  • retail: Fido132 m
  • retail: Circle K134 m
  • retail: MN Nail Salon137 m
  • cafe: Presse Café142 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East145 m
  • retail: Stylessence Fine Jewellery147 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East155 m
  • parking lot155 m
  • cafe: Tim Hortons157 m
  • transit stop: Bloor-Yonge159 m
  • transit stop: Bloor-Yonge162 m
  • retail: Nutrition House164 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East166 m
  • restaurant: Sushi Shop167 m
  • transit stop: Bloor-Yonge171 m
  • retail: INS Market172 m
  • retail: The Eye Exam Place173 m
  • restaurant: Freshii176 m
  • transit stop: Bloor-Yonge177 m
  • cafe: Hale Coffee178 m
  • retail: LensCrafters178 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East179 m
  • retail: Salon Riccardo179 m
  • restaurant: Cafe Landwer182 m
  • transit stop: 20 Bloor Street Entrance183 m
  • cafe: Crema Coffee Co.184 m
  • transit stop: 33 Bloor Street Entrance185 m
  • restaurant: Tahini's186 m
  • retail: Tucci186 m
  • retail: Vivid Cleaners & Alterations187 m
  • restaurant: Burgers n' Fries Forever193 m
  • retail: Obsessions197 m
  • highway: Bloor Street East199 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureAsquith Green Park
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
    99th
  • Edge activation
    99th
  • Connectivity
    96th
  • Amenity diversity
    88th
  • Natural comfort
    17th
  • Enclosure
    84th

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.

Visitor signals

Public attention measured by Google Places aggregates. This proxies attention, not occupancy. Aggregate-only: no usernames, no review text, no extra photos beyond the cached hero.

Visitor signal score40 / 100
40.3 / 100

p43 citywide · p33 within Urban Plaza

Volume (saturated)5
Density / ha75
Rating contribution53
Match dampener×1.00
Average rating
★ 3.1
out of 5
Ratings collected
27
total reviews
Photos uploaded
10
total contributors

Source: Google Places API · match unverified (0.00 composite confidence) · last refreshed 5/9/2026. Privacy contract. Measures public attention, not occupancy.

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 Asquith Green Park matters. 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.

  • 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: Green Spaces
    Polygon boundaries, official names, land classes. 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.
  • OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)
    Cafés, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking, highways, rail.