Woodbine Racetrack
Athletic / Recreation Park, below average overall (score 28, rank ~23th percentile). Strongest: connectivity; weakest: enclosure.
No photograph yet. If you have one of Woodbine Racetrack, we would like to use it.
Submit a photoData updated
Woodbine Racetrack scores 28.3 / 100. Strongest dimensions: connectivity 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.
Area · 163.33 ha
What's here
Getting around
1.2 km of mapped path, 100% paved.
No steps mapped on the path network.
No seating mapped in OpenStreetMap.
Parking inside the park. None of the 35 nearby lots records whether it has accessible spaces.
Path, seating and parking data comes from OpenStreetMap and reflects what volunteers have mapped, not a survey. Absence here means nobody has recorded it. This section does not assess wheelchair access: the relevant OpenStreetMap tag is present on well under 1% of Toronto paths.
Weighted across six dimensions · confidence 72%
Data confidence: moderate
Scores are not bell-curved. Percentiles and expected scores provide context without changing the underlying model.
Loading map…
The parks map is loading.Boundary: OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).
Near the park
1Visions from an Iron Age
Curtis Talwst Santiago, 2022
Sculpture · CorTen steel
Imagining the people who will experience and interact with the space and sculpture, I assume they are from all walks of life. Some come to enjoy a show or the horse races, or just a sunset stroll. What they all have in common is an ancestry that predates borders and nationalities. These early ancestors created the earliest images of artistic expression. The flames of their fires created the charcoal that sparked their imagination. This is where my idea begins. At first glance the sculpture looks like a giant fire kissing the sky. When the viewer looks deeper into the flames, they begin to make out the images of horses and possibly other animals. As they walk into the center of flames, their gaze is drawn upwards. As the steel smoke swirls upward, more silhouettes are visible and appear to be dancing with the clouds. Recently scientists have said that due to the lack of oxygen in some of these caves, the cave painters would have actually been hallucinating. Another theory holds that in the caves, flames flickering from a campfire or torch could make the horses move; the shadows and the curvature of the rock walls enhance the feeling of movement. The shadows that my sculpture will cast on the surroundings during various points of the day will add an additional layer of experience for the viewer. I've chosen CorTen steel that weathers and changes colour. The orange patina makes reference to orange and red pigments often found in the cave paintings. The sculpture is a way to celebrate the horse culture that has existed at Woodbine but is also a deeper core of human existence; our love for art, and our need to express or wonder at the beauty of these powerful animals.
Photo: City of Toronto. Source: City of Toronto Public Art
Numbers match the pins on the map. Works near the park are within 30 m of its edge.
Explain this score
Where did the 28 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
Woodbine Racetrack works because its connectivity score (70) is in the top tier and its amenity diversity (29) is also top quartile (12 transit stops sit within a 400 m walk; 27 intersections fall within 100 m of the edge).
What limits this park
Woodbine Racetrack is held back by enclosure (36, bottom quartile); border-vacuum risk is also elevated (100).
Most distinctive characteristic
Most distinctive feature: exceptionally low enclosure (36, bottom quartile).
Jacobs reading
Woodbine Racetrack is currently underperforming on both axes: neither integrated into the city nor offering deep natural respite. A candidate for design intervention.
Tradeoffs
- Connectivity (70) significantly outpaces natural comfort (32): well placed in the city but offers little shade or ecological respite.
- High connectivity coexists with high border-vacuum risk (100): much of that connectivity is to highways, rail, or parking lots, not to neighbourhoods.
Performance in context
- Reads as a modest underperformer relative to comparable parks (gap -8; cohort: Athletic / Recreation Park).
Typology classification
Classified as Athletic / Recreation Park: 67% of amenity types are athletic (tennis, track). Secondary read: Waterfront Park (nearest waterbody within ~0 m).
Edge Activation
Within 100 m of the park edge: 9 active uses (restaurant, transit_stop, cafe) and 63 dead/hostile uses (highway, 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: OpenStreetMap: cafes, restaurants, shops, schools, community centres, transit, parking, highways, rail. All data sources.
Connectivity
Connectivity blends paths, intersections, transit, entrances, and edge density. This park has 0 mapped paths/walkways and 56 sidewalk segments within 50 m; 27 street intersections within 100 m; 12 bus stops within a 400 m walk; 11 estimated access points across ~5,730 m of perimeter. moderate edge density, small superblock penalty applied. Source coverage: centreline, pedestrian_network, transit_osm.
Source: Toronto Centreline V2 + Pedestrian Network + OSM transit stops. All data sources.
Amenity Diversity
3 distinct amenity types in the park (other_sport, tennis, track). Diversity drives the score, so a park with many distinct activity types can outrank a larger park that repeats the same use. 1 public artwork near the park adds a bonus for the number of works.
Source: Toronto Parks & Recreation Facilities + OSM amenity tags. All data sources.
Natural Comfort
Natural-comfort components for this park: 0.1% estimated tree canopy; 1.5% water surface; 137 city-mapped trees inside the polygon (0.8/ha). Reading: water-cooled. Source coverage: treed_area, waterbodies, street_trees. Impervious surface is approximated (Toronto's authoritative layer ships only as a raster GeoTIFF).
Source: Toronto Treed Area + Ravine + Waterbodies + Street Tree Inventory. All data sources.
Enclosure / Eyes on Park
73 buildings within 25 m of the park edge (3 mid-rise, 70 low-rise, 0 tower); avg edge height 4.4 m (~1 floors); 1.3 buildings per 100 m of 5,730 m perimeter (thin frontage with significant blank-edge share); edges are barely there or single-storey; no towers immediately adjacent. "Eyes on the park" come strongest from the 3 mid-rise edge buildings.
Source: Toronto 3D Massing (building footprints + heights). All data sources.
Border Vacuum Risk
Border-vacuum factors within 50 m of the park: Highway 427, Highway 427, Highway 427, Highway 427, Highway 427, Weston Subdivision, parking_lot, parking_lot, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, parking_lot, GO Transit - Weston Subdivision, rail, rail, Union Pearson Express, Union Pearson Express, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, rail, rail, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, Union Pearson Express, rail, rail, rail, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, GO Transit Weston Subdivision, Weston Subdivision, Woodbine Racetrack, Woodbine Racetrack, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, GO Transit Weston Subdivision, GO Transit Weston Subdivision, GO Transit Weston Subdivision, GO Transit Weston Subdivision, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, parking_lot, 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: OpenStreetMap: highways, rail, parking. All data sources.
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: Not loaded yet: Toronto Neighbourhood Profiles. All data sources.
Amenities (3 types · 10 records)
- other sport
- tennis
- track
Nearby active-edge features (80)
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- restaurant0 m
- cafe: Tim Hortons0 m
- transit stop: Woodbine Race Track Loop0 m
- parking lot: Woodbine Racetrack0 m
- parking lot: Woodbine Racetrack0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- parking lot0 m
- rail17 m
- rail18 m
- highway: Highway 42718 m
- rail18 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision18 m
- rail20 m
- rail21 m
- rail21 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision22 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision22 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision22 m
- rail24 m
- highway: Highway 42725 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision25 m
- rail: Union Pearson Express25 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision26 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision26 m
- highway: Highway 42726 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision26 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision27 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision28 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision28 m
- rail: GO Transit - Weston Subdivision29 m
- rail: Union Pearson Express30 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision30 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision30 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision30 m
- rail: Weston Subdivision30 m
- rail: Union Pearson Express31 m
- rail: GO Transit Weston Subdivision32 m
- rail: GO Transit Weston Subdivision36 m
- rail: GO Transit Weston Subdivision41 m
- transit stop: Rexdale Boulevard At Woodbine Centre43 m
- rail: GO Transit Weston Subdivision45 m
- highway: Highway 42747 m
- rail: GO Transit Weston Subdivision49 m
- highway: Highway 42749 m
- highway: Highway 42753 m
- rail: Pearson Subdivision61 m
- parking lot63 m
- rail: Pearson Subdivision67 m
- cafe: Tim Hortons69 m
- rail: GO Transit Weston Subdivision76 m
- transit stop: Queen's Plate Drive at Rexdale Boulevard80 m
- restaurant: Noodlebox82 m
- restaurant: Pizzaiolo91 m
- transit stop: Queen's Plate Dr at Rexdale Blvd92 m
- highway: Highway 42795 m
- transit stop: Rexdale Boulevard At Woodbine Centre101 m
- restaurant: Big Smoke Burger101 m
- transit stop102 m
- highway: Highway 27108 m
- highway: Highway 27110 m
- restaurant: MB Chicken Express110 m
- highway: Highway 27111 m
- highway: Highway 27111 m
Park profile
Five-axis radar across the structural dimensions.
Citywide percentile ranks
Across all Toronto parks in the dataset.
- Overall vitality23th
- Edge activation60th
- Connectivity92th
- Amenity diversity83th
- Natural comfort17th
- Enclosure7th
Most similar parks
Closest in metric space across the five structural dimensions.
- Downsview ParkCorridor / Linear Park31
- Leslie Barns ParkCorridor / Linear Park27
- Ashbridge'S Bay Sports HubAthletic / Recreation Park33
- Toronto Inukshuk ParkWaterfront Park28
- David R. Miller CarhouseOther24
Most opposite parks
Furthest in metric space. Useful for recognising what kind of park this isn’t.
- Shaw ParkParkette70
- Market Lane ParkUrban Plaza68
- Manor Community GreenUrban Plaza64
- Leslie Grove ParkParkette73
- Arnell PlazaCivic Square50
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 Woodbine Racetrack matters. 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.
- Encourage mid-rise, windowed frontages around the park so residents have direct sightlines onto it.
- 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
- City of Toronto Open Data: Green SpacesPolygon boundaries, official names, land classes. Boundaries are reconciled against OpenStreetMap (ODbL) for new and updated parks.
- 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.
- OpenStreetMap (Overpass API)Cafés, restaurants, retail, transit stops, parking, highways, rail.