About 200 people showed up at a public hearing to testify on the BRT issue.

In the opening statement of his article, Mr. Quinn states “We need the Bus Rapid Transit not to improve traffic, but to improve quality of life.”

He is correct that the BRT will not improve traffic. On roadways where the dedicated BRT will run, lanes and parking spaces will be stolen from taxpaying motorists. Elimination of up to 3 lanes for motorists equals more congestion and road rage. The elimination of nearby, on-street parking on main thoroughfares such as Kapiolani Boulevard will greatly impact residents and businesses who have traditionally relied on those parking spaces in order to maintain the quality of their lives.

“Experts seem to be in agreement that traffic is going to get worse in Honolulu with or without BRT. Doing nothing now will seem an irrational decision in the hindsight of the near future,” he says.

The city is already addressing transit issues with the addition of more busses and express routes to the present system. Expansion of TheBus or allowing private transportation companies to operate smaller capacity vehicles such as vans and jitneys are better and cheaper alternatives to the BRT.

“There is more congestion on our streets because we are driving our fewer cars more miles and driving more often in our day-to-day lives,” he says.

Hello? We purchased cars to use them, to make our lives more efficient and convenient. No form of mass transit will substitute for the individual convenience and efficiency automobiles have brought to our lives. Do I have to mention the fact that parents with small children rely on their vehicles to pick them up, take them to ball games, and to the grocery store to do some shopping before going home. It is much more convenient to do this with a personal vehicle over using public transportation.

“Making our city even more car friendly only encourages the pattern of car dependency, and actually reduces the quality of life for all of us,” he says.

Car dependency is already here. People will not change their daily routines. BRT will only frustrate motorists and add to congestion. Businesses face the possibility of less revenue if motorists are impeded from patronizing them because of left turn restrictions and less public parking that will come as a result of the BRT.

Most businesses are set up to serve the motoring public. Every shopping center and big box retailer have parking for customers who use these spaces whenever they shop. It is more practical to use your own car whenever you go shopping because you can load that vehicle up with all the items you bought and go to another store to do it all over again within the same trip. You can’t do that with mass transit, since you are limited to only what you can carry on your person whenever you ride the bus. Discouraging the use of automobiles is bad for business.

Mr. Quinn suggests: “Having a convenient alternative to the car is essential to creating a livable city.”

All public transit systems put the individual at the mercy of their schedules and routes. Waiting for a bus is not an efficient use of time.

It is definitely not convenient. Mass transit is also not convenient if you have to stand up in a crowded vehicle and then be pushed to the back of the vehicle once you get on, and then having to push your way to the door in order to get off.

Need I also mention that you have to share your personal space with undesirable people at times in a crowded bus situation. Walking several blocks to and from the public transit stop from your home or business is also not convenient, especially if you have to carry several items or if it is raining.

“Should the car driving taxpayer subsidize the BRT system for a minority of users? Absolutely. We all benefit with a transit alternative, whether we use it or not. ...” Mr. Quinn continues.

Taxpayers are already subsidizing numerous government programs that benefit only a few. BRT will put increased pressure on the city to raise our property, vehicle registration and gasoline taxes to fund a system that only 10 percent of the population will use.

Our vehicle registration and fuel taxes can be better spent on improvements and maintenance of our roadways. The current state of Honolulu’s city streets are quite pitiful, especially when viewed in light of high profile and questionable capitol improvement projects that the mayor and City Council have approved in recent years.

“Spendable income of the marginally employed increases when the expense of a car can be avoided. Minimum wages go farther, and businesses benefit from that. I'll pay more in taxes for rapid transit, but benefits come back to me whether I use it or not,” Quinn says.

What Mr. Quinn is saying is that mass transit is for the poor and that cash filled and fully employed motorists have to bear the burden to subsidize the BRT. Users of public transit would think differently if they had to bear the full cost of riding the bus if they had to pay for more of their share. The motoring public pays its share in registration fees and gasoline taxes and shouldn’t be penalized for it by taking away their fair share of the roadway.

“Will BRT make traffic congestion worse on a few selective streets? Most certainly. Since congestion is going to get worse with or without BRT, I suggest that those businesses that are concerned about congestion move their location to a spot closer to a BRT terminal and enjoy increased pedestrian access,” he says.

BRT or not, Mr. Quinn is probably right that traffic congestion will grow worse. Drivers are willing to sit in the comfort of their cars, alone or with a passenger(s) of their choice. They can do all the errands people do normally in their vehicles without having to suffer the indignities of being stuck on a crowded, cramped vehicle, more than likely standing up instead of comfortably sitting down as they are guaranteed to be in their own car.

As for relocating businesses, I would hope that Mr. Quinn will be the first person in line to pay for the new leases, moving expenses and other related costs in order to have them move to a nearby BRT terminal to enjoy the perceived increase in foot traffic. Get real.

“Knowing that you have to face heavy traffic and parking problems has been an inhibition to urban excursions, and bad for local business. A trip into Waikiki or to a downtown event will seem more attractive with a convenient alternative to the car,” Mr. Quinn says.

The Bus already provides the public with an alternative. The BRT will only be a fancy and expensive bus that will not add to the services TheBus already provides to Waikiki and downtown Honolulu.

What is more likely is that the BRT will further erode private transportation services that target the visitor market by emphasizing a route that will benefit tourists.

“Our current bus system is good, but it's not rapid transit, and that's what we need to break through the psychological and practical barriers to transit use,” Quinn says.

The BRT is not rapid transit either. It won’t improve the quality of our lives as Mr. Quinn claims. What the BRT will do is divide our city even further, cause great economic hardship for businesses that are impacted by its route structure, increase road rage among motorists, be a financial burden on the city as well as the taxpayers and in the end, be another huge public relations and practical headache even greater than that of the ill-fated traffic camera program.

It is not too late for the city to rethink this issue. It’s time to stop the BRT from rolling forward.

'''Melvin Ah Ching is a Honolulu resident, Macintosh consultant and independent Web publisher. Copyright 2002 Melvin Ah Ching Productions. Used with permission.'''

Guest Commentary...