Urban Plazacluster ·Walkable Mid-Rise Neighbourhood Parks (large-scale)Yonge-Eglinton (100)confidence moderate

Fiona Nelson Parkette

Urban Plaza, middle of the pack overall (score 35, rank ~52th percentile). Strongest: enclosure; weakest: natural comfort.

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

Fiona Nelson Parkette scores 34.7 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and connectivity. Weakest: edge activation (10.7). Border-vacuum risk is elevated (84). This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best fordaily passing-throughpocket meetings

Area · 0.13 ha

What's here

Recreation

Garden

Facilities

Picnic areaBenches

Vitality Score

35/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 66%

Data Confidence

34.7 / 100

Citywide

52nd

of all 3,788 parks

Among Urban Plaza

32nd

same primary typology

Expected for similar parks

median in pocket Urban Plaza (n=360)

Performance gap

-3

raw − expected · context confidence high

typical

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

Loading map…

Street context. Park polygon highlighted on the citywide map.

Boundary: OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).

Explain this score

Where did the 35 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 Activation11 · p70

-9.8

Amenity Diversity28 · p82

-4.3

Border Vacuum Risk84 (risk)

-3.4

Enclosure / Eyes on Park81 · p86

+3.1

Natural Comfort41 · p38

-1.4

Connectivity52 · p63

+0.4

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

Fiona Nelson Parkette works because its enclosure score (81) is in the top tier and its amenity diversity (28) is also top quartile (6 mid-rise buildings frame the edge with passive surveillance).

What limits this park

Fiona Nelson Parkette's edges are fronted by border-vacuum land uses (highways, rail, parking, blank institutional), risk score 84.

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally high enclosure (81, top quartile).

Jacobs reading

Fiona Nelson Parkette 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 (81) but the surrounding streets are quiet (edge activation 11): frame without animation.

Performance in context

Citywide rank is high (52nd) but typology rank is more modest (32nd): the strength likely comes from the dataset average pulling lower than this typology’s baseline.

Typology classification

confidence 70%

Urban Plaza

Classified as Urban Plaza: 1271 m², paved (0% canopy), 28.9 buildings/100 m

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%

10.7 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 12 active uses (retail, transit_stop, restaurant) and 7 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%

52.2 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 12 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 4 street intersections within 100 m; 25 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~201 m of perimeter. edge density is healthy, no superblock penalty. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m4

Intersections within 100 m4

Paths/walkways (50 m)0

Sidewalk segments (50 m)12

Transit stops (400 m)25

Estimated entrances0

Edge connections / 100 m perimeter2.00

Park perimeter201 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 (bench, garden, picnic). 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 36%

41.0 / 100

Natural-comfort components for this park: ~7.7% effective canopy (0.0% from contiguous tree polygons + scattered tree density); nearest waterbody ~1078 m; 11 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (11.0/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)1,078 m

Estimated green100.0%

City-mapped trees inside polygon11

Tree density11.0 / ha

Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0

Sample points used15

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

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightmeasured 80%

81.2 / 100

58 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (6 mid-rise, 52 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 7.1 m (~2 floors); 28.9 buildings per 100 m of 201 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 6 mid-rise edge buildings.

Buildings within 25 m58

Buildings within 50 m58

Avg edge height7.1 m (~2 floors)

Tallest edge building22.0 m

Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)6

Low-rise (< 3 floors)52

Towers (≥ 13 floors)0

Frontage density28.93 per 100 m perimeter

Mid-rise share of edge10%

Tower share of edge0%

Blank-edge share (proxy)0%

Park perimeter201 m

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

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%

84.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: rail, parking_lot, rail, rail, 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 (3 types · 7 records)

bench
garden
picnic

Nearby active-edge features (80)

rail9 m
rail10 m
rail12 m
rail13 m
parking lot48 m
transit stop: Duplex Avenue69 m
parking lot78 m
transit stop: Davisville Centre Entrance85 m
retail: Bliss Wellness Holistic Massage86 m
retail87 m
transit stop: Duplex Avenue87 m
rail89 m
retail: Berry Blush Flowers91 m
retail: First Class Dry Cleaners92 m
retail: Expedia Cruises93 m
retail93 m
restaurant: Celtic Irish Pub95 m
retail: New You97 m
retail: Rossa Linda99 m
cafe: Tim Hortons100 m
retail: Ritchie Frame101 m
restaurant: Pizza Shab102 m
restaurant: Subway103 m
retail: Flow Tattoo105 m
retail: Sightech106 m
rail106 m
rail107 m
retail: Gateway Newsstands110 m
highway: Yonge Street111 m
transit stop: Davisville112 m
restaurant: Sushi Zone113 m
rail: Line 1 Yonge-University113 m
highway: Yonge Street114 m
parking lot: TTC employee parking116 m
rail: Line 1 Yonge-University116 m
retail: Epoca Hair Group117 m
highway: Yonge Street119 m
transit stop: Chaplin Crescent119 m
transit stop: 1900 Yonge St Entrance120 m
highway: Yonge Street122 m
transit stop: Colin Avenue122 m
transit stop: Davisville125 m
rail127 m
transit stop: Davisville128 m
transit stop: Davisville Station128 m
transit stop: Belsize Drive129 m
transit stop: Davisville Avenue133 m
cafe: 18feet Espresso Bar & The Cheong134 m
rail134 m
rail134 m
retail: Connect World of Hearing135 m
retail: COBS Bread136 m
retail: LCBO137 m
transit stop: Belsize Drive139 m
retail: Circles & Squares Bakery140 m
transit stop: Davisville Station144 m
retail: men-i-cure145 m
highway: Yonge Street147 m
rail149 m
transit stop: Davisville Station150 m
retail: Structube153 m
highway: Yonge Street154 m
retail: Fresh Buy Market155 m
retail: Rogers156 m
parking lot: Spoiled Baby customer parking159 m
restaurant: Khau Gully161 m
transit stop: Yonge Street East Side163 m
restaurant: Cowboy’s Grill164 m
transit stop: Davisville Station165 m
retail168 m
retail: Davisville Home Healthcare170 m
restaurant: Pasta Pantry171 m
parking lot174 m
retail: Steppin' Out175 m
retail: The UPS Store178 m
transit stop: Yonge Street179 m
retail: Ms. Potato's Market180 m
highway: Yonge Street181 m
cafe: J.J's Deli & Cafe181 m
retail: Nancy Manipedi Spa184 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

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
52th
Edge activation
70th
Connectivity
63th
Amenity diversity
82th
Natural comfort
38th
Enclosure
86th

Most similar parks

Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.

Skeens Lane ParketteUrban Plaza44
Dunfield ParkUrban Plaza40
Mossgrove ParkOther40
Pessoa ParkUrban Plaza32
Glen Cedar ParkUrban Plaza39

Most opposite parks

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

Trca Lands ( 26)Ravine / Naturalized Park27
Toronto Islands - Muggs Island ParkRavine / Naturalized Park25
Rouge ParkRavine / Naturalized Park28
Rouge ParkWaterfront Park25
Rouge ParkRavine / Naturalized Park26

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 Fiona Nelson Parkettematters. 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.

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.