Raise the Hammer

Alright, so having consulted the city's website, I'm confused as to how staff could, in good conscience, make this recommendation without significant explanation.

In addition to the Metrolinx Study above, some previous quotes:

March 2010 rapid transit newsletter: "Based on the results of numerous studies undertaken to date, and the Metrolinx BCA results, the Rapid Transit Team is recommending two-way rapid transit on King Street with the introduction of two-way traffic within the same corridor. Several key factors support this alternative to run rapid transit two-way on King Street, including safety, conveninence for commuters to get on and off the rapid transit sysem within one corridor, less impact on traffic flow and a greater opportunity for economic uplift."

Spring 2010 FAQ: "Why are we recommending two-way traffic on King Street?
In conjunction with the recommendations of the Downtown Transportation Master Plan, once it was determined that two-way transit was the preferred configuration for rapid transit, a review of the one-way/two-way operation of Main Street and King Street was also undertaken. By maintaining one-way traffic, within the same ROW corridor as two-way transit, contra-flow operation between traffic and transit would be introduced. Primarily, from a safety perspective, this is not desired. In addition, contra-flow operations would not be desired as the location of the two-way transit operation would result in a curbside transitway. As mentioned previously, curbside transitways restrict access to all driveways and cross-streets on the side of the curbside transit corridor."
...

"The Downtown Transportation Master Plan supports two-way traffic, identifying King Street and York Boulevard as two-way pairs, and Main Street and Cannon Street as one-way pairs."

How can they do a 180 now, and discard their concers for safety, convenience, impact on traffic flow, economic uplift, and convenience for transit users? Are they no longer concerned about curbside transitway restricting access to all driveways and cross-streets?

This is a major departure from their stated position and needs to be communicated, explained, and opened to significant public feedback ASAP! Not in January when their "Draft B-line" proposal is unveiled, but now, before their draft is "finalized" and it's too late to do anything about it.