Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Kempton Howard Park, site photograph
Back to map
Athletic / Recreation Parkcluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (large-scale)Blake-Jones (69)confidence moderate

Kempton Howard Park

Athletic / Recreation Park, above average overall (score 43, rank ~84th percentile). Strongest: amenity diversity; weakest: natural comfort.

Photo by Michael M via Google Places · cached 5/9/2026

Kempton Howard Park scores 42.5 / 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 fororganised sportactive recreation

Area · 0.76 ha

Vitality Score
43/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 70%

Data Confidence
42.5 / 100
Citywide
84th
of all 3,273 parks
Among Athletic / Recreation Park
55th
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
42
median in Athletic / Recreation Park (n=85)
Performance gap
+1
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. Connectivity, transit, and edge conditions read at a glance.
Kempton Howard 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.

Explain this score

Where did the 43 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 · p60
-12.5
Amenity Diversity28 · p96
-4.3
Border Vacuum Risk12 (risk)
+3.8
Enclosure / Eyes on Park82 · p86
+3.2
Connectivity64 · p80
+2.7
Natural Comfort48 · p56
-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

Kempton Howard Park works because its amenity diversity score (28) is one of the city's strongest and its enclosure (82) is also top quartile.

What limits this park

Kempton Howard 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 (28, top decile).

Jacobs reading

Kempton Howard 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 (82) but the surrounding streets are quiet (edge activation 0): frame without animation.

Performance in context

  • Citywide rank is high (84th) but typology rank is more modest (55th): the strength likely comes from the dataset average pulling lower than this typology’s baseline.

Typology classification

confidence 75%
Athletic / Recreation Park

Classified as Athletic / Recreation Park: 67% of amenity types are athletic (sports_field, tennis)

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
0.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 0 active uses (none) 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%
63.5 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 3 mapped paths/walkways and 11 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 13 street intersections within 100 m; 19 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 3 estimated access points across ~583 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m12
Intersections within 100 m13
Paths/walkways (50 m)3
Sidewalk segments (50 m)11
Transit stops (400 m)19
Estimated entrances3
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter2.06
Park perimeter583 m

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

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
28.4 / 100

3 distinct amenity types in the park (playground, sports_field, 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% weightpartial 60%
48.1 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: ~11.9% effective canopy (9.3% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); 17 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (17.0/ha). Reading: exposed. Source coverage: treed_area, street_trees. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).

Canopy coverage9.3%
Canopy area0.07 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 polygon17
Tree density17.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)44.5
Sample points used54

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%
81.5 / 100

108 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (14 mid-rise, 94 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 8.1 m (~3 floors); 18.5 buildings per 100 m of 583 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 14 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m108
Buildings within 50 m108
Avg edge height8.1 m (~3 floors)
Tallest edge building39.3 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)14
Low-rise (< 3 floors)94
Towers (≥ 13 floors)0
Frontage density18.52 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge13%
Tower share of edge0%
Blank-edge share (proxy)0%
Park perimeter583 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" 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 (3 types · 3 records)

  • playground
  • sports field
  • tennis

Nearby active-edge features (9)

  • parking lot40 m
  • parking lot58 m
  • transit stop: Jones Ave at Strathcona Ave101 m
  • transit stop: Jones Ave at Baird Ave110 m
  • retail: Ram Upholstery127 m
  • parking lot138 m
  • transit stop: Jones Ave at Shundell Ave155 m
  • transit stop: Jones Ave at Shundell Ave182 m
  • restaurant: ONO Pizza197 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureKempton Howard 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
    84th
  • Edge activation
    60th
  • Connectivity
    80th
  • Amenity diversity
    96th
  • Natural comfort
    56th
  • Enclosure
    86th

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.

high-confidence match
Visitor signal score48 / 100
48.3 / 100

p62 citywide · p48 within Athletic / Recreation Park

Volume (saturated)16
Density / ha55
Rating contribution85
Match dampener×1.00
Average rating
★ 4.4
out of 5
Ratings collected
93
total reviews
Photos uploaded
10
total contributors

Source: Google Places API · match high (0.96 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 Kempton Howard 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
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.

Data sources

real Toronto data
  • 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.