Skip to content
Toronto Parks Atlas
Back to map
Othercluster ·Underperforming / Leftover Spaces (enclosure-leaning)confidence low

Milani Boulevard Soccer Facility

Other, near the bottom of the city overall (score 16, rank ~1th percentile). Strongest: amenity diversity; weakest: connectivity.

Milani Boulevard Soccer Facility scores 16.4 / 100. Strongest dimensions: natural comfort and enclosure / eyes on park. Weakest: edge activation (0). Border-vacuum risk is elevated (100). This score is a transparent reading of Jane Jacobs-style vitality factors, not a definitive judgment.

Best forvaries (see metrics)

Area · 2.05 ha

What's here

Recreation
Sports field
Vitality Score
16/100

Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 49%

Data Confidence
16.4 / 100
Citywide
1st
of all 3,788 parks
Among Other
3rd
same primary typology
Expected for similar parks
30
median in medium Other (n=181)
Performance gap
-13
raw − expected · context confidence high
strong underperformer

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.

Boundary: OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).

Explain this score

Where did the 16 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 · p61
-12.5
Connectivity8 · p2
-8.5
Amenity Diversity12 · p66
-7.6
Border Vacuum Risk100 (risk)
-5.0
Natural Comfort50 · p63
+0.0
Enclosure / Eyes on Park50 · p22
+0.0

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

Milani Boulevard Soccer Facility works because its amenity diversity score (12) is middle of the pack and its natural comfort (50) is also above-average.

What limits this park

Milani Boulevard Soccer Facility is held back by connectivity (8, bottom quartile); border-vacuum risk is also elevated (100).

Most distinctive characteristic

Most distinctive feature: exceptionally low connectivity (8, bottom quartile).

Jacobs reading

Milani Boulevard Soccer Facility is currently underperforming on both axes: neither integrated into the city nor offering deep natural respite. A candidate for design intervention.

Tradeoffs

  • Natural comfort (50) significantly outpaces connectivity (8): restorative but hard to reach for daily use.

Performance in context

  • Strong underperformer relative to its cohort: raw 16 vs an expected 30 (gap -13).

Typology classification

confidence 30%
Other

Classified as Other: does not meet any specific typology threshold (2.0 ha, 1 amenity types, frontage 0.0/100m)

Edge Activation

25% weightpartial 60%
0.0 / 100

Within 100 m of the park edge: 5 active uses (restaurant, transit_stop, retail) and 15 dead/hostile uses (highway, 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% weightpartial 45%
7.5 / 100

Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 0 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 0 street intersections within 100 m; 3 transit stops within a 400 m walk; 0 estimated access points across ~699 m of perimeter. low edge density, significant superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: transit_osm.

Streets within 25 m0
Intersections within 100 m0
Paths/walkways (50 m)0
Sidewalk segments (50 m)0
Transit stops (400 m)3
Estimated entrances0
Edge connections / 100 m perimeter0.00
Park perimeter699 m

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

Amenity Diversity

20% weightmeasured 75%
11.9 / 100

1 distinct amenity types in the park (sports_field). 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 15%
50.0 / 100

Natural Comfort requires inputs not yet loaded for this park (Treed Area / Ravine / Waterbodies / Street Trees). Score is held at a neutral 50 with low confidence. Read with caution.

Canopy coverage0.0%
Canopy area0.00 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 polygon0
Tree density0.0 / ha
Cover diversity (Shannon, 0 to 100)0.0
Sample points used141

Source: Treed Area / Ravine / Waterbodies / Street Trees

Enclosure / Eyes on Park

10% weightinferred 20%
50.0 / 100

No buildings within 50 m of this park edge, typical of ravines, watercourses, and hydro corridors. Enclosure is held at a neutral 50 with low confidence; for natural areas, this metric is essentially not applicable.

Buildings within 25 m0
Buildings within 50 m0
Avg edge height0.0 m (~0 floors)
Tallest edge building0.0 m
Mid-rise (3 to 7 floors)0
Low-rise (< 3 floors)0
Towers (≥ 13 floors)0
Frontage density0.00 per 100 m perimeter
Mid-rise share of edge0%
Tower share of edge0%
Blank-edge share (proxy)100%
Park perimeter699 m

Source: Toronto 3D Massing (no nearby buildings detected)

Border Vacuum Risk

10% weightpartial 60%
100.0 risk

Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: Highway 27, Highway 27, parking_lot, Highway 27, Highway 27, 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 (1 types · 1 records)

  • sports field

Nearby active-edge features (49)

  • parking lot0 m
  • highway: Highway 2723 m
  • highway: Highway 2729 m
  • highway: Highway 2735 m
  • highway: Highway 2737 m
  • parking lot48 m
  • parking lot52 m
  • parking lot52 m
  • transit stop: Medallion Boulevard / Highway 2755 m
  • highway: Highway 2755 m
  • parking lot59 m
  • parking lot60 m
  • parking lot75 m
  • parking lot75 m
  • parking lot78 m
  • parking lot96 m
  • retail: easyfinancial96 m
  • restaurant: Booster Juice97 m
  • restaurant: Subway99 m
  • restaurant: Hero Certified Burgers99 m
  • retail: Pretty Little Cupcakes102 m
  • retail: Nice One Nails104 m
  • parking lot105 m
  • retail: EB Games109 m
  • restaurant: Sunset Grill112 m
  • retail: First Choice Haircutters113 m
  • highway: Highway 27114 m
  • highway: Highway 27117 m
  • retail: Rogers118 m
  • restaurant: Hakka Urban Bistro119 m
  • highway: Highway 27122 m
  • retail: Hasty Market125 m
  • transit stop: Medallion Boulevard / Morning Star Drive127 m
  • retail: The Dollar Store and More130 m
  • parking lot139 m
  • parking lot140 m
  • parking lot148 m
  • parking lot153 m
  • parking lot163 m
  • retail170 m
  • parking lot172 m
  • parking lot181 m
  • parking lot181 m
  • restaurant: Pizza Hut182 m
  • parking lot187 m
  • retail: Great Clips187 m
  • transit stop: Morning Star Drive / Medallion Boulevard187 m
  • parking lot189 m
  • retail: Herc's Hutrition191 m

Park profile

Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.

Edge ActivationConnectivityAmenity DiversityNatural ComfortEnclosureMilani Boulevard Soccer Facility
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
    1th
  • Edge activation
    61th
  • Connectivity
    2th
  • Amenity diversity
    66th
  • Natural comfort
    63th
  • Enclosure
    22th

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.

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 Milani Boulevard Soccer Facilitymatters. 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.