Well I was wrong...though I've never understood shadow impacts. Some parks are more important than others?
Last part first..........yes, actually. Sun-protected parks are specifically listed, not all parks are listed.
****
Let's look at the actual sun/shadow study:
Shadow impacts in June are negligible:
September:
Overall, the impacts here aren't severe, particularly due to the time of day.
A great deal of the shadow falls on buildings (Armory/Arena-Community Centre)
Mid-morning is generally a period of low activity.
I think the argument for limiting shadows here would hinge on precedent, if one thinks this could create a wall of similar height all the way along Queen to Jarvis, then this would have to be opposed, the resulting height cap though might be something as low as 7s.
If one believes most of the rest of the block is safe from significant height, this one is not a big difference maker.
***
UT currently records no other applications along Queen west to Jarvis. A quick glance by me suggests, that while possible, development opportunities are constrained from here to George by heritage facades that would be protected and by lot depth limits at only 34M.
The s/e corner of Jarvis/Queen is more interesting.
However, it's in public/non-profit ownership as a shelter.
I think the site to watch for height/shadow issues here will be the block that includes the Petro Canada on Richmond. If assembled with its immediate neighbours, it's a ~30,000ft2 site.
.
