I'm not sure. I live in London, 51 degrees north. We have a lot of parks in London, but the bus stops near them still have deep grooves of melted asphalt from recent heatwaves.
Perhaps it would be even worse without the parks? This article suggests that variation in temperature across the city does correlate with vegetation cover:
> the Kilburn and South Hampstead area, with 38% vegetation cover, experienced heat over 7°C hotter than Regent’s Park, with 89% vegetation cover, a short distance away.
Is more like a proven fact. Temperatures measured on hard landscape of modern parks based on stone is consistently higher than on old fashioned parks with big trees and fallen leaves.
Sadly, cities still love this sun scorched inhospitable parks with passion because:
1) civil responsibility. A branch can kill a person and politicians hate this possibility
2) they are much easier to tidy up and much cheaper to maintain. Cheaper in the sense of "people will pay for their air conditioner, not us".
3) Vehicles can pass easily over stone surfaces (Also cleaning vehicles). Is not so easy to clean and drive over gravel
I used to live in Chicago, and they managed this by putting a concrete pad at the bus stops that were high-frequency enough to get the grooves. The concrete pads are not bus-sized! They are only placed where the bus wheels are when the bus comes to a stop, with a little bit of a buffer since the bus doesn't stop in exactly the same place every time.
