I read in the West Seattle Herald (May 16) that the comment period for the bike plan ends this Friday, May 18th. That's strange, I sent e-mail several months ago with comments that was replied, "We already had our planning meetings" and implied "we don't need your input."

Well, I can seriously say you do need my input. Or, you can give me your input to a few simple questions.

1. How do you plan on getting bicycle traffic onto the Admiral hill "climbing lane" from Avalon Place, Spokane Street and Harbor Avenue? (I have an inexpensive idea!)

2. Why are we routing bicycle traffic over the highest point in Seattle along 35th Avenue Southwest (Holden Street Southwest and Sylvan Way have easier grades and Sylvan Way already has a separated path that could be improved upon.)

3. Why are center turn lanes and used car sales such a priority to available road space when they benefit so few road users? (Center turn lanes statistically and "really" cause major confusion to drivers. Center turn lanes are used a tiny percentage of road use time. Center turn lanes get used more for illegal passing, cutting ahead to the next left hand turn medians, and for passing courteous motorist that stop for crosswalk pedestrians putting the pedestrians at a huge risk!)

4. Why were the public meetings held mostly in the north end of Seattle and sparsely publicized through Cascade Bicycle Club, which represents a small fraction of the cycling public?

5. Why were area bicycle shops and local promoters of bicycle transportation not consulted during the "planning phase?" (We ride the various districts of Seattle daily and that gives us unique perspectives that are valuable).

All is not negative in my view but I am not resigned to miss opportunities. I am glad that much needed improvements are on the way.

However this does not bode well for what has been going on for the past two decades. I was involved with planning 20 years ago until I sat through too many bike advisory council meetings without acknowledged input, discussing the type of flowers to be planted along the McGilvra Trail. I am sorry to say that with that experience I had to take my energies to local information and advice for my customers.

I have always been a proponent of on lane facilities and am glad to see a real move in that direction. I also discuss daily the problems facing the newest members of the bicycle commuter community. This is where I have grave concerns for the bike plan as it applies to people who are trying to do a good thing for themselves and others.

A lot of new commuters have little or no experience in riding with rush hour traffic. Lane separations or bike lanes would increase the confidence and sense of well being of the bicycle commuter and I believe would decrease tremendously possible bike, car conflicts.

The width of the bicycle lane is imperative. Narrow lanes cause cyclist to need to leave the lane for obstacles, debris and left over hazards from previous use. This is where car driver, cyclist conflicts happen the most when a cyclist needs to leave the bike lane to use the "car lane" which the car driver normally assumes is restricted to bikes.

Alaska Way from Spokane St. north to downtown is a prime example of poorly planned on lane facilities, or bike lanes. West Seattle bicycle commuters rely on this section of road more than any other and they tell me they feel like they have been relegated to the gutter.

In Eugene, Ore., bike lanes are 70 to 80 inches wide. This would be a great model to follow. Eugene's bike plan also states, "Eliminate sidewalk conflicts wherever possible." Seattle's bike plan calls for sidewalk use, which is unsafe to pedestrians and should not be encouraged.

I would also recommend incorporating all general resurfacing and re-stripping projects to accommodate on lane facilities or bike lanes whenever possible based upon available space.

In general the bike plan helps experienced riders with climbing lanes being emphasized however, the many new members of the bicycle commuting community want to feel comfortable at speed and in traffic. The plan should be one that encourages and facilitates the many new riders. There are many areas of West Seattle that have dangerous conditions, unfortunately too many to list.

Over the period of a 10-year plan all of these problems can be addressed and resolved. A few public meetings cannot do what outreach and communication with people in the trenches can provide.

Stu Hennessey

Alki Bike and Board

Admiral