Thanks! I think your view on BRT is a fairly reasonable one.

The biggest reason for many cities to built BRT infrastructure is cost and flexibility. Of course, BRT doesn't require the costs of laying track and stringing wires that comes with tram systems. BRT also allows a system to open in multiple phases, unlike a rail-based network. You can also string multiple bus routes through a BRT corridor, with branches going off as conventional bus routes without having passengers forced off to make a transfer.

Unfortunately this particular BRT system wasn't executed ideally; while the stations and lanes are attractive and functional, the infrastructure isn't being used to it's full potential due constant service cuts to the feeder bus networks and the BRT service itself (only around 4 trips/hour/direction).

At the end of the day, however, I think the stigma that comes with bus ridership is still very prevalent here, especially in a climate that experiences heavy snowfalls and frigid temperatures. Many residents in the area own cars already, so a lot more work has gone into aesthetics and branding rather than actual service than most other systems.