Article content continued

“While past BRT discussions have been all-or-nothing . . . this process has broken transit into a list of potential projects. This project approach will let Londoners more easily identify improvements they want and to reject those they do not,” the update says.

But the letter makes clear what won’t qualify, including roadwork or upgrading bridges that benefit car traffic.

So, what’s left?

It could mean chunks of the BRT plan, like the “smart” traffic signal system, the successor to synchronized lights, for which Londoners have been asking for decades.

It could mean one leg of BRT carved out of the 24-kilometre network, such as the east route proposed to run between downtown and Fanshawe College, Helmer suggested.

“Based on the opinions on council, breaking (BRT) into its component parts is probably the way to go,” he said, saying council has to “be realistic about what’s ready.”

“For example, I’ve heard very few people who are against the east corridor that goes through my ward.”

Both Holder and Helmer insist other transit projects, outside the realm of BRT, are on the table too, but examples are scarce.

And whatever the project, it has to have the financial numbers to back it up – “more than the back of the napkin” budget to submit to provincial and federal number-crunchers, Helmer says.

The much-lauded Adelaide Street underpass, a $60 million venture, is one possible place to land senior government funding. An environmental assessment has already been done and the project is “costed.”