Wellesley - Magill Park
Urban Plaza, above average overall (score 40, rank ~74th percentile). Strongest: edge activation; weakest: natural comfort.
Aerial — City of Toronto orthophoto, ~8 cm/px source · cached 5/9/2026
Wellesley - Magill Park scores 39.8 / 100. Strongest dimensions: enclosure / eyes on park and edge activation. Weakest: amenity diversity (0). Border-vacuum risk is low. This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors — not a definitive judgment.
Area · 0.23 ha
Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 56%
Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.
Explain this score
Where did the 40 come from? Each weighted contribution against a neutral 50 baseline. Green = pushed up; red = pulled down.
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
What limits this park
Most distinctive characteristic
Jacobs reading
Tradeoffs
- 13 nearby towers cast wind and shadow without contributing canopy — passive surveillance is plentiful but human-scale comfort is not.
Typology classification
Classified as Urban Plaza: 2259 m², paved (0% canopy), 33.8 buildings/100 m
Edge Activation
Within 100 m of the park edge: 11 active uses (transit_stop, community, retail, restaurant, cafe) 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
Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 3 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 6 street intersections within 100 m; 13 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~195 m of perimeter. low edge density — significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.
Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops
Amenity Diversity
No amenities recorded — score is 0 until inventory is loaded.
Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags
Natural Comfort
Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.0% estimated tree canopy; nearest waterbody ~1219 m. Reading: exposed. Source coverage: waterbodies. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).
Source: Toronto Treed Area + Ravine + Waterbodies + Street Tree Inventory
Enclosure / Eyes on Park
66 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (41 mid-rise, 12 low-rise, 13 tower); avg edge height 34.3 m (~11 floors); 33.8 buildings per 100 m of 195 m perimeter — strong frontage density; edges lean tall but still framed; 13 towers ≥ 40 m within 25 m of the edge. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 41 mid-rise edge buildings.
Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights)
Border Vacuum Risk
Park edges face the city — no significant border vacuum detected.
Source: Toronto Street Centreline (highways) + rail layer + OSM landuse + building footprints
Equity Context
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 (0)
No amenities recorded for this park.
Nearby active-edge features (41)
- transit stop — Wellesley Street East53 m
- cafe — Red Rocket Coffee63 m
- retail — Platis Cleaners64 m
- parking lot65 m
- parking lot66 m
- retail — Rabba69 m
- transit stop — Sherbourne Street72 m
- restaurant — Subway75 m
- community — Wellesley Community Centre77 m
- transit stop — Sherbourne Street81 m
- transit stop — Wellesley Street East92 m
- retail — Art City97 m
- retail — PNB Rapid Remit100 m
- community — Toronto Public Library - St. James Town100 m
- retail — Sherbourne Variety & Gift104 m
- retail — Lemay Beauty Salon & Spa112 m
- restaurant — Sarvi Indian Cuisine117 m
- retail — Sweet Addictions123 m
- parking lot127 m
- parking lot137 m
- parking lot137 m
- parking lot137 m
- transit stop138 m
- transit stop — Earl Street141 m
- retail — Rosar Morrison Funeral Home & Chapel147 m
- parking lot148 m
- parking lot154 m
- parking lot155 m
- parking lot160 m
- parking lot161 m
- parking lot162 m
- parking lot167 m
- parking lot170 m
- retail — FreshCo173 m
- community — St. James Town Community Corner174 m
- parking lot175 m
- parking lot182 m
- restaurant — Mr. Jerk182 m
- parking lot183 m
- transit stop — Jarvis Street189 m
- retail — Becker's190 m
Park profile
Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.
Citywide percentile ranks
Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.
- Overall vitality74th
- Edge activation95th
- Connectivity21th
- Amenity diversity38th
- Natural comfort1th
- Enclosure83th
Most similar parks
Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.
- Wexford CemeteryUrban Plaza36
- Hto Park WestCorridor / Linear Park43
- City Wide Open SpaceCivic Square39
- City Wide Open SpaceUrban Plaza41
- Hto Park WestCorridor / Linear Park37
Most opposite parks
Furthest in metric space — useful for recognising what kind of park this isn’t.
- Trca Lands ( 26)Ravine / Naturalized Park27
- Rouge ParkRavine / Naturalized Park28
- High ParkRavine / Naturalized Park47
- Toronto Islands - Muggs Island ParkRavine / Naturalized Park25
- Rouge ParkWaterfront Park25
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.
Activity reading: pedestrian intensity 47.8/100; cycling/trail 79.7/100. The strongest signal is observed pedestrian/cycling activity. Source coverage: counters.
Does this score feel accurate?
Your read of Wellesley - Magill 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.
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.
- Add or open more entrances and improve sidewalk continuity around the park. More permeability means more spontaneous use.
- 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
- City of Toronto Open Data — Parks (Green Space)Polygon boundaries, official names, types.
- Parks & Recreation FacilitiesInventory of in-park amenities (washrooms, fields, rinks…).
- Toronto Pedestrian NetworkSidewalk segments around and through parks; estimated park entrances.
- Toronto Centreline V2Street segments + intersection nodes near park edges; trails and walkways.
- Toronto 3D MassingBuilding footprints + heights for edge-building counts, frontage density, and tower-in-the-park risk.
- Toronto Treed AreaTree canopy share inside park polygons via stratified-grid sampling.
- Toronto Waterbodies & RiversWater surface inside parks + nearest-water distance for cooling.
- Ravine & Natural Feature ProtectionRavine overlap as a cooling / natural-comfort signal.
- Toronto Street Tree InventoryTree count + density inside park polygons.
- Neighbourhood Profiles(Pending) Equity context proxy.
- OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)Cafés, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking, highways, rail.