Person driving at freeway speeds on I-90 Trail raises serious trail security concerns

Erik Josberger was on a light rail train crossing I-90 when he saw someone driving a white sedan in the biking and walking path going even faster than the train. As someone who has been biking in the area for a long time, it was a terrifying thing to see. He took out his phone and started recording, then called the police.

Josberger posted two short video clips to the Seattle Cyclists Discord a few hours after it happened September 10, and then they were quickly posted across social media. The first clips show the driver going faster than the train and the traffic in the general lanes. The train's standard operating speed on the bridge is 55 mph. The second clips shows that, thankfully, the driver did slow down once they encountered a person walking. The clip shows a person walking in front of the car as it follows her. Bluesky user Olraca posted it with the text: Props to this hero."

Josberger said that the driver eventually got past the person walking, and that the driver looked relaxed and unconcerned about the whole situation. It's not entirely clear what happened next, but since there are luckily no reports of injuries it's likely the driver was able to exit onto Seattle city streets.

Seattle Police took Josberger's call and sent out an alert over radio before handing the call over to Washington State Patrol, who have jurisdiction over the I-90 Bridge. SPD did not create a report about the incident, according to an SPD spokesperson.

Because of the speed the person was driving, by the time Washington State Patrol even received the call the driver was very likely on Seattle city streets. WSP are now investigating based on Josberger's video, but did not have a report or any other major leads as of Sunday.

We did get reports on this but by the time the troopers got to the area the vehicle could not be located," said a WSP spokesperson. I was sent the video but could not see a license plate. If anyone witnessed this and has identifying information we would love to speak with them."

The video reveals a couple concerning gaps in our trail safety systems. For one, it's concerning that the incident seemed to fall through the cracks between police jurisdictions. A person committing a potentially deadly crime was headed to Seattle, and the ball seems to have gotten dropped between SPD and WSP. The second clip shows that the driver did thankfully slow down for a person walking, but when looking at the first clip there is no way to know that they were not on a murderous rampage as we've seen in other vehicle ramming mass casualty attacks across the world in recent years. Cars are deadly weapons capable of mass violence, and the danger to the public here is not meaningfully different from a person standing on the I-90 Trail and firing a gun.

But police are a last resort for trail safety, and the bigger question is how someone was even able to drive onto the trail. Unfortunately, this person has not been found, and we do not know yet how they gained access or why they did it. Were they intoxicated? Confused? Malicious? Uncaring? We can only hypothesize. Many trail entrances around the region have anti-car measures like bollards and boulders spaces so people can bike and walk through but not drive a car, but they do not all have such protections or these protections are easily bypassed. On some level, it may be impossible or impractical to prevent incursion by someone determined to do so, but it is definitely worth revisiting these entrances to make sure they are reasonably secured and properly designed.

The busiest access point from Mercer Island would be from W Mercer Way. The trail does not have bollards, but it does have a traffic island with a crosswalk that could not reasonably be confused with a street since the actual freeway ramp entrance is right next to it and very big and obvious. Even if there were a bollard in the middle of the path, someone could easily just drive across the grass or drive through the nearby park if they really wanted to get onto the trail. Securing the trail would require basically lining a significant area with a fence (please no) or boulders. These solutions trade some level of aesthetics and general pleasantness for security, and there are surely good arguments against lining all our trails with boulders. So this entrance is not secured against malicious attack, but it is designed in such a way that there is no confusing the trail entrance with the freeway entrance.

I suspect that the driver accessed the trail via 60th Ave SE instead. There is a trail connection that climbs up the hill and does one switchback before connecting to the trail, and Google Street View shows that bollards previously at that entrance were removed sometime between August 2011 and July 2018. It still is clearly a trail and not a road, but perhaps a very confused or intoxicated person might somehow mistake it for an I-90 ramp. On certain maps it might appear that it connects to the freeway since it does connect to the bridge path. Once someone is on the trail connection, they are walled-in on the path side of the freeway bridge.

I am not excusing this person's actions, especially the extremely dangerous decision to drive at high speed down the path. But here's one possible scenario: Perhaps a person not in a proper mental or physical state to drive was headed west on SE 24th Street on Mercer Island and missed the right turn on W Mercer Way to get to the freeway ramps (map). Upon reaching the end of the street at 60th Ave SE, they turned right to go under the freeway expecting a common cloverleaf kind of ramp, and the trail entrance was near where they expected such a ramp. They followed it up, ignoring many obvious clues that it was not a freeway ramp, then ended up on the bridge on the wrong side of the barrier. Then, like that woman who drove on the tracks up to Mount Baker Station a few months ago, they just kept going forward even though it clearly wasn't the right way. What I can't figure out is why even a confused person would floor it and drive at freeway speeds with nothing between them and Lake Washington but a relatively flimsy fence and handrail (it may be worth checking the rail condition since it looks like there was possible brief contact at the 0:15 mark of the video). One small steering error in either direction, and they could have easily ended up in the lake. Even a confused person should have sensed the danger to themselves and gone slow. If they were intoxicated then maybe Jesus really did take the wheel because there is hardly any room for error on that path at that speed.

So why were the bollards that guarded the trail entrance at least as recently as 2011 removed? The backstory is deep and consequential. Mercer Island settled a lawsuit in 2015 after Susan Camicia crashed into a wooden bollard in the I-90 Trail and was paralyzed from her injury. The settlement came after a landmark decision against the city's attempt to shield themselves from liability by claiming recreational immunity," basically that the city doesn't have a legal responsibility to design and maintain city trails for safe use just like the state does not have to keep rock faces safe for climbers, etc. The WA Supreme Court sided against Mercer Island, stating, The majority restricts application of the recreational use immunity statute to land that the landowner or possessor opens to the public solely for outdoor recreational use" (emphasis theirs). Because this trail and many other across the state have a clear transportation purpose, they cannot be neglected under the guise that they are merely recreational facilities. Mercer Island settled their case with Camicia shortly afterwards, and at some point around that time also removed the other wooden bollards around the city including the ones at 60th Ave SE. A No Motor Vehicles" sign is also missing, though it's unclear if that was a purposeful removal or not. I have not had a chance to visit the site since the trail driving incident, but the Aug 2024 image shows no significant changes from 2018. If you go by there, let us know in the comments if the conditions have changed.

Because of the settlement, the question of the wooden bollard design was never officially resolved, but the allegation was that the wooden posts did not meet safety standards. They were square in shape rather than round and also fairly wide. The reflectors only covered a portion of the bollard face and did not extend to the edges. They were installed by WSDOT in the 1980s before responsibility for many trail sections was handed to Mercer Island, and they likely would not meet modern design standards. It's not immediately clear if responsibility for this spot falls to Mercer Island or WSDOT. It would make sense that Mercer Island and WSDOT would both remove any similar bollards following the lawsuit. But this latest incident suggests Mercer Island and WSDOT may need to take further action to secure or redesign their trail entrance points. While the old wooden bollards might have been hazards, there are standards for installing reasonably safe bollards. There are also other design options available to make sure trail entrances cannot be confused for driving space.

Bollards do pose potential hazards to trail users, so they are not a panacea as they may seem to be at first glance. Especially when there are lots of other people on the trail, a rider may not be able to see a bollard if their view is blocked by other trail users. In group rides, it is commonly encouraged for riders to yell or at least point to warn those behind them of a bollard for this exact reason. Trail designs that merge users around the bollard can help mitigate the danger, but any stationary object in the middle of a trail is going to be a potential hazard. However, there are certainly locations where the need to secure the trail from motor vehicle incursion outweighs concerns about bollard hazards. Different situations call for different solutions. Lower-traffic access points to long and enclosed trail sections like this one on 60th Ave SE seem like a good use case for physical barriers to motor vehicle access or at least some design changes to remove all possible confusion.