Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Vermont Square Park — site photograph
Back to map
Civic Squarecluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (enclosure-leaning)Annex (95)confidence moderatereal Toronto data

Vermont Square Park

Civic Square, one of the city's strongest overall (score 61, rank ~100th percentile). Strongest: amenity diversity; weakest: natural comfort.

Photo by Aldo Andrade via Google Places · cached 5/9/2026

Vermont Square Park scores 60.7 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: amenity diversity (39.8). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors — not a definitive judgment.

Best for:public eventsdowntown gathering

Area · 1.53 ha

Vitality Score
61/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 72%

Data Confidence
60.7 / 100
Citywide
100th
of all 3,273 parks
Among Civic Square
98th
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
39
median in medium Civic Square (n=22)
Performance gap
+21
raw − expected · context confidence medium
strong overperformer

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

Street context

Park polygon highlighted on the citywide map. Connectivity, transit, and edge conditions read at a glance.

Top-down view

cached 5/9/2026

City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px. Reads the park’s footprint, paths, treed area, and edge conditions from above.

Vermont Square Park — aerial / top-down view

City of Toronto Orthophoto · cot_ortho most-current MapServer

Explain this score

Where did the 61 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
Connectivity75 · p95
+5.0
Border Vacuum Risk12 (risk)
+3.8
Enclosure / Eyes on Park86 · p92
+3.6
Amenity Diversity40 · p99
-2.0
Natural Comfort55 · p68
+0.7
Edge Activation49 · p96
-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

Vermont Square Park works because its amenity diversity score (40) is one of the city's strongest and its edge activation (49) is also top decile.

What limits this park

Vermont Square Park doesn't have a clear weakness — every measured dimension is at or above the middle of the pack.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high amenity diversity (40, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Vermont Square Park sits between an urban social park and an ecological retreat — moderately useful for both, exceptionally suited to neither.

Tradeoffs

  • Strong physical conditions (score 61) but weak observed activity signals (10) — the model says this should work, but events, mentions, and counters say it isn't being used at the level the urban form would predict.
  • High connectivity (75) coexists with little programming evidence — easy to reach, but no recurring civic life detected.

Performance in context

  • This park is a strong overperformer for its cohort — raw 61 versus an expected 39 for similar parks (medium Civic Square) (gap +21).

Typology classification

confidence 90%
Civic Squarealso reads as Neighbourhood Park

Classified as Civic Square: name flags as civic square + 150 buildings frame the edge. Secondary read: Neighbourhood Park (1.5 ha, framed by 34 mid-rise vs 0 towers).

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
48.7 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 11 active uses (cafe, retail, restaurant) and 2 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%
74.9 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 8 mapped paths/walkways and 21 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 28 street intersections within 100 m; 14 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 8 estimated access points across ~540 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy — no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m22
Intersections within 100 m28
Paths/walkways (50 m)8
Sidewalk segments (50 m)21
Transit stops (400 m)14
Estimated entrances8
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter4.07
Park perimeter540 m

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

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
39.8 / 100

5 distinct amenity types in the park (community_centre, dog_area, picnic, playground, tennis). 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%
54.7 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: ~21.1% effective canopy (3.7% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); nearest waterbody ~774 m; 46 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (30.1/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 coverage3.7%
Canopy area0.06 ha
Inside ravine system0.0%
Water surface inside park0.0%
Nearest water (if outside park)774 m
Estimated green100.0%
City-mapped trees inside polygon46
Tree density30.1 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0–100)23.0
Sample points used107

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
86.2 / 100

150 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (34 mid-rise, 116 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 8.0 m (~3 floors); 27.8 buildings per 100 m of 540 m perimeter — strong frontage density; edges are low-rise (mostly 2–3 floors); no towers immediately adjacent. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 34 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m150
Buildings within 50 m150
Avg edge height8.0 m (~3 floors)
Tallest edge building13.3 m
Mid-rise (3–7 floors)34
Low-rise (< 3 floors)116
Towers (≥ 13 floors)0
Frontage density27.77 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge23%
Tower share of edge0%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter540 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: 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 (5 types · 5 records)

  • community centre
  • dog area
  • picnic
  • playground
  • tennis

Nearby active-edge features (59)

  • parking lot30 m
  • parking lot81 m
  • restaurant — KOS Cafe and Restaurant91 m
  • retail — Alligator Party Rental96 m
  • retail — Minerva Cannabis97 m
  • restaurant — Gordo Ex97 m
  • retail — Transmission Auto Repair97 m
  • retail — Sonie's Creations97 m
  • retail — Toutoune Gallery & Shop98 m
  • retail — Micro Zoomiez98 m
  • cafe — Chaveta Coffee98 m
  • retail — Steven's Grocery98 m
  • retail98 m
  • retail — Mister Dupont101 m
  • transit stop — Bathurst St at Wells St103 m
  • retail — Story Planet103 m
  • retail — F.G. Chong Dry Cleaners & Alterations112 m
  • restaurant — El Pocho Antojitos Bar114 m
  • retail — Studio 976 Hair Salon115 m
  • retail — David Dunkley Fine Millinery118 m
  • parking lot118 m
  • transit stop — Palmerston Avenue122 m
  • retail — Live Art Space123 m
  • retail124 m
  • restaurant — Grapefruit Moon126 m
  • retail — Barbara Edwards Contemporary127 m
  • transit stop — Bathurst St at Wells St127 m
  • retail — Tattoo People128 m
  • retail — Mrs. Huizenga130 m
  • retail — Gussied Up130 m
  • retail — Art Market132 m
  • retail — The Showroom134 m
  • retail — John's Shoe Repair141 m
  • retail — Spring Nails & Spa142 m
  • retail — Qalat144 m
  • retail — BC-PC Technology Systems145 m
  • restaurant — Napolitan Pizzeria146 m
  • retail — Flur152 m
  • retail — Bateman's Bicycle Company153 m
  • retail — Steve's Custom Tailor & Cleaner153 m
  • transit stop — Dupont St at Bathurst St155 m
  • restaurant — Rapido156 m
  • retail — La Parete Gallery159 m
  • restaurant — Detroit Pizzeria163 m
  • parking lot165 m
  • transit stop — Bathurst Street at Dupont Street165 m
  • retail — Catherine Curtis169 m
  • restaurant — Miya Bhai173 m
  • parking lot174 m
  • restaurant — Domino's177 m
  • transit stop — Bathurst Street at Dupont Street180 m
  • retail — Auto Expert Auto Service184 m
  • retail — OK Tire185 m
  • transit stop — Dupont St at Bathurst St187 m
  • parking lot187 m
  • retail192 m
  • restaurant — Vesta Lunch193 m
  • cafe — Tim Hortons194 m
  • transit stop — Manning Avenue196 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureVermont Square Park

Citywide percentile ranks

Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.

  • Overall vitality
    100th
  • Edge activation
    96th
  • Connectivity
    95th
  • Amenity diversity
    99th
  • Natural comfort
    68th
  • Enclosure
    92th

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 score
64/ 100
63.9 / 100

p85 citywide · p52 within Civic Square

Volume (saturated)42
Density / ha70
Rating contribution88
Match dampener×1.00
Average rating
★ 4.5
out of 5
Ratings collected
357
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

Programming, social attention, temporal rhythm, and nearby pedestrian / cycling flow. An experimental aggregate layer that complements the spatial scores — partial coverage, partial confidence.

confidence 50%
Overall activity
10/ 100
9.5 / 100
Programming / events
0unknown
Social attention
16real
Temporal rhythm
13real
Pedestrian / cycling flow
8unknown
Cultural significance
29unknown

Activity reading: no inputs available. The strongest signal is public attention / mentions. Source coverage: google-places.

Does this score feel accurate?

Your read of Vermont Square 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.

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

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.

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.