Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Final Draft

June 2014
Burlington County
Bicycle Master Plan
Prepared by:
Cross County Connection
Transportation Management
Association
Burlington County
Bicycle Master Plan
June 2014
Prepared by:
Cross County Connection
Transportation Management
Association
4a Eves Drive
Suite 114, Marlton, NJ 08053
www.driveless.com
CCCTMA@driveless.com
856.596.8228
Cross County Connection Transportation Management Association was formally incorporated in 1989
WKURXJKWKHHIIRUWVRIDJURXSRIVRXWKHUQ1HZ-HUVH\EXVLQHVVOHDGHUVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWRIFLDOVDQG
representatives from the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) and New Jersey Transit
Corporation (NJ TRANSIT) to address mobility issues in the region and reduce the number of vehicles
RQVWDWHDQGORFDOURDGZD\V7RGD\&URVV&RXQW\&RQQHFWLRQLVDQRQSURWRUJDQL]DWLRQSDUWQHULQJ
with NJDOT, NJ TRANSIT, Federal Highway Administration, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning
&RPPLVVLRQ6RXWK-HUVH\7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ3ODQQLQJ2UJDQL]DWLRQ1RUWK-HUVH\7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ3ODQQLQJ
Authority and its members to provide solutions to complex transportation problems for counties,
municipalities, employers and commuters in Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland,
Gloucester and Salem counties.
Prepared for:
The Burlington County Board
of Chosen Freeholders
Funding Provided By:

The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commision
through the Federal Highway Administration
Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan
June 2014
Contents
Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................. 1
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ ....5
The Plan ................................................................................................................................................5
The Setting ............................................................................................................................................5
2 Methods ........................................................................................................................................ ....9
The Planning Process .............................................................................................................................9
Stakeholder Outreach and Public Involvement ......................................................................................9
Vision, Goals and Objectives ...............................................................................................................11
Relationship to Existing Plans and Policies ..........................................................................................12
State and Regional Bicycle-Related Plans and Policies ...................................................................12
Local Plans ...................................................................................................................................17
3 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................................... ..19
Current Levels of Bicycling..................................................................................................................19
Bicycle Crashes ...................................................................................................................................20
Crash Location ............................................................................................................................20
Crash Circumstances ...................................................................................................................22
Bicycles and Transit .............................................................................................................................23
Current Service ............................................................................................................................23
Bicycles and Light Rail ................................................................................................................24
Bicycles and Bus ..........................................................................................................................25
Bicycles at Transit Stations and Park and Ride Locations .............................................................25
Existing Bikeways ................................................................................................................................25
Multi-use Trails .............................................................................................................................27
Bike Lanes ....................................................................................................................................28
Bike Routes ..................................................................................................................................29
4 Needs Analysis .............................................................................................................................. ..31
Public Input ........................................................................................................................................31
Desired Bikeway Corridors ..........................................................................................................31
Identified Barriers ........................................................................................................................33
Countywide Concerns ..................................................................................................................33
Trip Generators ...................................................................................................................................34
June 2014
Physical Barriers ..................................................................................................................................41

Road Barriers ................................................................................................................................41
Geographic Barriers ......................................................................................................................42
5 Network Recommendations .......................................................................................................... ..45
Network Development Criteria ...........................................................................................................45
Proposed Network ...............................................................................................................................46
Primary Corridors.........................................................................................................................48
Secondary Corridors .....................................................................................................................51
6 The Implementation Plan ............................................................................................................. ..53
Prioritization Criteria ..........................................................................................................................53
Utility Criteria ..............................................................................................................................53
Feasibility Criteria ........................................................................................................................53
Prioritization Scoring Results........................................................................................................55
The Phasing Plan .................................................................................................................................57
The Immediate Plan .....................................................................................................................57
The Short-Term Plan ....................................................................................................................59
The Medium-Term Plan ...............................................................................................................61
The Long-Term Plan.....................................................................................................................63
7 Bicycle Facility Design Toolkit .............................................................................................................65
The Toolkits Content & Purpose ........................................................................................................65
Bikeway Facility Selection and the Four Types of Cyclists .............................................................65
Toolkit Contents and Terms .........................................................................................................67
On-Road Bikeways..............................................................................................................................69
Shared Roads ................................................................................................................................70
Bike Lanes ....................................................................................................................................71
Protected Bike Lanes (Cycle-tracks) ..............................................................................................72
Intersections ........................................................................................................................................73
Intersection Treatments.................................................................................................................74
Off-Road Bikeways .............................................................................................................................76
Shared Use Paths ..........................................................................................................................77
Supportive Infrastructure.....................................................................................................................78
Pavement Markings & Signage .....................................................................................................79
Bicycle Traffic Signals....................................................................................................................80
ii
June 2014
Bicycle Safe Sewer Grates ..............................................................................................................81

Bicycle Parking .............................................................................................................................81
8 Bicycle Supportive Programs ........................................................................................................ ..83
Educational Programs..........................................................................................................................84
Encouragement Programs ....................................................................................................................86
Enforcement Programs ........................................................................................................................92
Evaluation and Planning .....................................................................................................................93
9 Bicycle Supportive Policies and Ordinances .................................................................................. ..97
10 Funding Sources ......................................................................................................................... 105
State Funding Programs ....................................................................................................................108
Federal Funding Programs .................................................................................................................112
Other Funding Sources .....................................................................................................................115
Appendix A: Public Outreach .......................................................................................................... A-1
Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Web Based Survey ...............................................................A-1
Public Comment Form .....................................................................................................................A-7
Appendix B: Burlington County Existing Bikeway Network ........................................................... B-1
Appendix C: Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network and Project Prioritization
Criteria Ranking Results .................................................................................................................. C-1
Appendix D: Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network Map Atlas ........................................ D-1
Appendix E: Project Prioritization Criteria ...................................................................................... E-1
Appendix F: Bicycle Facility Cost Estimate Formulas ...................................................................... .F-1
Appendix G: Complete Streets Policies..............................................................................................G-1
New Jersey Department of Transportation Complete Streets Policy....................................................G-1
Township of Medford Complete Streets Policy...................................................................................G-6
Appendix H: Bicycles on Sidewalk Ordinance...................................................................................H-1
Burlington Citys Ordinance..............................................................................................................H-1
Appendix I: Provision of Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities.....................................................................I-1
Gibbsboros Subdivision Ordinance.....................................................................................................I-1
Appendix J: Bicycle Parking Ordinance..............................................................................................J-1
Pennington Borough, Mercer County..................................................................................................J-1
iii
June 2014
Tables
Table 1:
DVRPCs Priority Corridors for Bicycle Facilities (2011) ..........................................................14
Table 2:
County Road Segments Favorable for Bicycle Lane Installation (2013) .....................................15
Table 3:
Burlington County Parks Trail Types ........................................................................................16
Table 4:
Regional Bicycle Commuting Rates (2011)...............................................................................19
Table 5:
Purpose for Bicycle Trips in the Greater Philadelphia Metropolitan Area (2007)........................19
Table 6:
Burlington County Bicycle Crashes by Corridor (2008-2012) ..................................................20
Table 7:
Bicycle Parking at River LINE Stations and Park & Ride Lots ..................................................25
Table 8:
Burlington County Existing Bikeway Network .........................................................................25
Table 9:
Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network by Corridor ....................................................46
Table 10: Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network by Bikeway Type.............................................46

Table 11: Project Prioritization Criteria ....................................................................................................54
Table 12: The Four Types of Cyclists ........................................................................................................66
Table 13: Bikeway Funding Programs.....................................................................................................106
Figures
Figure 1:
Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Project Timeline ......................................................... 5
Figure 2:
Burlington County Bicycle Crashes per Year (2008-2012)........................................................20
Figure 3:
Severity of Bicyclists Injuries by Posted Speed Limit (2008-2012)...........................................22
Figure 4:
Bicycle Crashes by Time of Day (2008-2012) ..........................................................................23
Figure 5:
River LINE Bike Racks............................................................................................................24
Figure 6:
Moorestown Side-path Ending Abruptly .................................................................................28
Figure 7:
Marlton Parkway Bike Lane Ending Abruptly at Route 73 ......................................................29
Figure 8:
Bike Route Designated by Sharrow ..........................................................................................29
Figure 9:
Substandard Bike Route on Taunton Lake Boulevard in Marlton ............................................29
Figure 10: Well-Designed Bike Route in Cambridge Park ........................................................................29

Figure 11: Overgrowth Into Bike Path ......................................................................................................33
Figure 12: Hazardous Stormwater Grate within the Bike Lane .................................................................34
Figure 13: Crosswicks Creek Multi-Use Trail in Bordentown ...................................................................50
Figure 14: Rancocas Pointe Trail Segment of Rancocas Greenway in Mt. Laurel .......................................51
Figure 15: Kinkora Trail Route 130 Underpass .........................................................................................51
Figure 16: Overview of Rightsizing Roadways ........................................................................................101
iv
June 2014
Maps
Map 1:
Burlington County, New Jersey ...................................................................................................7
Map 2:
Burlington County Land Uses......................................................................................................8
Map 3:
Burlington County Crashes Involving a Bicycle (2008-2012).....................................................21
Map 4:
Burlington County Public Transportation ..................................................................................23
Map 5:
Burlington Countys Existing Bikeway Network.........................................................................26
Map 6:
Smithville Park Multi-Use Trails .................................................................................................27
Map 7:
Moorestown Side-path Network ................................................................................................27
Map 8:
Marlton Parkway Bikeway Facilities ...........................................................................................28
Map 9:
Burlington County Population Per Square Mile .........................................................................36
Map 10: Burlington County Percentage of Zero Car Households.............................................................37

Map 11: Burlington County Percentage of Bicycle Commuters ................................................................38
Map 12: Burlington County Percentage of Walking Commuters ..............................................................39
Map 13: Burlington County Percentage of Transit Commuters ................................................................40
Map 14: Physical Barriers to Bicycling in Burlington County...................................................................41
Map 15: Delaware River Crossings ...........................................................................................................42
Map 16: Rancocas Creek Crossings ..........................................................................................................43
Map 17: Assiscunk Creek Crossings .........................................................................................................43
Map 18: Blacks Creek Crossings...............................................................................................................44
Map 19: Crosswicks Creek Crossings .......................................................................................................44
Map 20: Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network .........................................................................47
Map 21: CR 537 Primary Corridor from Maple Shade to Mount Holly ..................................................48
Map 22: Primary Corridor Along County Roads in Willingboro, Westampton, and Mount Holly...........48
Map 23: Delaware River Heritage Trail Segments in Bordentown City......................................................50
Map 24: Delaware River Heritage Trail Segments in Burlington City........................................................50
Map 25: Secondary Corridors Surrounding Church Street and Church Road Intersection........................52
Map 26: Project Prioritization Scoring Results..........................................................................................56
Map 27: The Immediate Plan....................................................................................................................58
Map 28: The Short-Term Plan...................................................................................................................60
Map 29: The Medium-Term Plan..............................................................................................................62
Map 30: The Long-Term Plan...................................................................................................................64
Map 31: GIS Bikeway Prioritization Model Scoring Results (Land Values)..............................................E-6
June 2014
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
vi
June 2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan (Plan) provides the basis for Burlington County to become
one of the safest and most bicycle-friendly counties in New Jersey. The Plans purpose is to guide Burlington
County staff, and their partners, on the development of the on-road bikeways and multi-use trails that will
comprise a countywide bikeway network. The Plan takes a comprehensive approach, addressing the 5 Es of
bicycle planning: Engineering; Education; Encouragement; Enforcement; and Evaluation.
Vision & Goals

It is the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plans overall vision to encourage bicycling in Burlington County as
a means of transportation and recreation by creating a safe, convenient, comfortable and regionally connected
bikeway network. The Plans goals provide the framework to achieve this vision, informing each one of its
recommendations. The Burlington County Bicycle Master Plans goals are:
Connectivity Create a bikeway network that connects town centers, regional bikeways and
destinations for recreation and transportation
Safety - Increase the safety of roadways for bicyclists
Convenience - Make bicycling a convenient and attractive transportation option.
The Planning Process

The planning process was divided into two phases. Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Project Timeline
Phase I was focused on creating a countywide
bikeway network primarily utilizing countyProject Timeline
maintained roadways and potential off-road
PHASE 1
PHASE 2
trail projects. Phase I planning efforts began in
FALL 2012 - SPRING 2013
JULY 2013
September 2012 and were completed in June
PUBLIC
IMPLEMENTATION
PARTICIPATION
PLAN
2013. Phase II efforts began soon thereafter and
were completed in June 2014. Phase II focused

DRAFT
VISION, GOALS &
PUBLIC
BIKEWAY
on the implementation of the county bikeway
OBJECTIVES
PARTICIPATION
NETWORK
PLAN
network, addressing: project prioritization and
phasing; design standards; policy and program

EXISTING BIKEWAYS
FINAL BICYCLE
& CONDITIONS
MASTER PLAN
recommendations; and funding strategies. The
products from each phase were combined to form
this comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan.
Development of the Burlington County Master Plan has been a collaborative process. The project leadership
team consisted of Cross County Connection, the Burlington County Engineering Department, and the
Burlington County Resource Conservation Department. Various local stakeholders acted in an advisory role
through the Plan Advisory Committee (PAC) which includes representatives from Burlington Countys 40
municipalities; local bicycle clubs and advocacy groups; New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT);
NJ TRANSIT; Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC); and other state and regional
organizations.
The public were involved during both phases of the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plans development
1
June 2014
through various methods. Public outreach strategies involved a series of public meetings conducted at different
stages of the planning process. These meetings were especially critical in developing the bikeway network
recommendations contained in Phase I. Attendees engaged in mapping sessions with staff from Cross County
Connection, Burlington County Engineering and Burlington County Resource Conservation. Individuals,
unable to attend the public meetings, could provide suggestions through an interactive map housed on the
Plans website www.bikeplan.org. That site also included general project information and featured a survey
that allowed the public to identify barriers to bicycling and destinations they would like to access by bicycle.
The survey also gauged the publics attitudes toward specific bikeway types.
Existing Conditions
The existing bicycle network in Burlington County consists Burlington Countys Exisng Bikeway Network, 2012
of 154 miles of bikeways, of which 71.6 miles are on-road
Facility Type
Mileage
%
bike lanes, 33.1 miles are designated on-road bike routes
154.0
and 49.3 miles are off-road bike paths. While Burlington Total existing bikeways
Bike path
49.3
31.4%
County has some of New Jerseys most bikeable and scenic
rural roads, the countys current bikeway network falls
Bike lane
71.6
46.9%
short of creating a safe, convenient and comprehensive
Bike route
33.1
21.7%
network for bicycle travel. The following observations were Source: Cross County Connecon TMA
made based on public input and analysis of the countys
existing bikeway inventory:
Areas in the county exhibiting significantly higher bicycle use demand factors, such as high
population density, do not have significantly more dedicated bikeways (bike lanes, offroad paths), than areas exhibiting much lower demand factors; creating a spatial mismatch
between high quality bikeways and potential ridership.
Better access to, and between, town centers is needed.
NJ TRANSIT River LINE stations are important cycling destinations in the county that are
currently underserved by the bikeway network.
Employment destinations such as business parks are important cycling destinations

underserved by the current bikeway network.
Roadway barriers, especially divided state highways and the New Jersey Turnpike, are a
significant impediment to existing and future bicycling in the county.
Many of the countys urban arterials are currently unsuitable or unpleasant for biking.
Network Recommendations
Recommendations were developed to address these deficiencies and create a countywide bikeway network
that meets the plans goals of connectivity, safety and convenience. Significant attention was given to major
travel corridors that link communities and town centers within the county. The Plan is focused on creating
a countywide bikeway network primarily utilizing county-maintained roadways and available, or feasibly
available, off-road trail segments. Bikeway linkages on local or state right-of-ways were considered only if
they provided critical linkages in the county network. In these cases, Burlington County will have to seek the
2
cooperation of state and municipal partners. The Burlington

County Bicycle Master Plan proposes an additional 398 miles
of bikeways that reach every corner of the county, which would
increase the countys network mileage roughly 258%.
June 2014
Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network
by Corridor
Corridor
Primary
Mileage
152
38.1%
Secondary
246
61.9%
Proposed bikeways were divided into two categories: Primary
Corridors and Secondary Corridors. A bikeways corridor
Total
398
100%
classification denotes its function within the countys bikeway
network. Primary corridors, totaling approximately 152 miles of proposed bikeways, are major continuous
bicycle travel corridors that link population and commercial centers in effect, the spines of the bikeway
network. Secondary corridors, totaling approximately 246 miles of proposed bikeways, provide the important
linkages between these spines.
The Implementation Plan

Cross County Connection developed Project Prioritization Criteria, with the assistance of the PAC, to score
and rank each project comprising these 398 miles of network recommendations. Criteria were separated into
two categories Utility and Feasibility. Utility criteria measure an individual projects ability to enhance
the usefulness of the bikeway network. These criteria are dedicated largely to measuring a proposed
bikeways connectivity to people, places and things. Feasibility Criteria identify each projects relative ease of
implementation.
The Project Prioritization Criterias scoring results were taken into account to create a potential phasing plan
that will guide Burlington County with bikeway network implementation over the next ten or more years.
Each project was given a separate Utility and Feasibility score. These scores were then combined to provide a
final score that was the basis for the overall ranking and phasing of projects. All three scores are reported in
the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan to allow county staff to take a flexible implementation approach
if resources limit their ability to follow the proposed phasing plan. For instance, the Feasibility Score can be
used to identify the low hanging fruit, or projects that can be an easy win in Burlington Countys efforts to
expand bikeway network mileage. Or conversely, when a projects feasibility score is taken into account with
its utility score, Burlington County staff will also be able to identify important projects that may require a
large amount of resources to implement, but are still worth prioritizing sooner, rather than later.
The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit

Guidance on the design of bikeways and bicycle supportive infrastructure was provided through the inclusion
of The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit. The Toolkit provides a brief overview of the best practices in bicycle
facility design currently in use throughout the United States. The Toolkit provides the opportunity for the
public, Burlington County staff and elected officials to learn about innovative bikeway designs, beyond the
traditional bike lane, that are either used sparingly, or not at all, within Burlington County.
Programs & Policies

While engineering solutions help create safer and more convenient physical environment for bicyclists, a
comprehensive approach is required to leverage the benefits of bicycle infrastructure investments and increase
rates of bicycling throughout the county. The Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan addresses the remaining
3
June 2014
four Es of Bicycle Planning - Education, Encouragement, Enforcement and Evaluation - through its program
and policy recommendations. Bicycle-supportive programs can help educate motorists and bicyclists about
traffic laws, encourage bicycling as a form of transportation, and measure progress in the development of
a countywide bikeway network. Bicycle-supportive policies are important to the construction of bikeways,
bicycle safety efforts and routine accommodation of bicycle travel in transportation projects. While Burlington
County may not have the authority, or ability, to be the lead agency on many of these program and policy
initiatives, county staff should support and encourage municipalities and other project partners to pursue and
support these efforts whenever possible.
Funding
Funding for the planning, design, and construction of bikeways is available through a variety of federal,
state, regional, and local programs. Cross County Connection included a funding guide in the Plan to assist
Burlington County, its municipalities and other interested groups with identifying appropriate funding
sources for bikeway projects. The funding matrix, included as part of the funding guide, functions as an index
of these grant programs and provides general program descriptions and eligibility information to enhance the
utility of this guide. While the information provided about funding programs in this document is current in
2014, the availability of funding, application deadlines, and program eligibility requirements are subject to
change.
June 2014
1. INTRODUCTION
The Plan
The Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan (Plan) Figure 1: Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Project
provides the basis for Burlington County to become Timeline
one of the safest and most bicycle-friendly counties
Project Timeline
in New Jersey. The Plan is being divided into two
phases. Figure 1 details the project timeline for
PHASE 1
PHASE 2
both phases of the Plan.
JULY 2013
Phase I is focused on creating a countywide bikeway
network primarily utilizing county-maintained
roadways and available, or feasibly available, offroad trail segments. Phase I planning efforts began
in September 2012 and were completed in June
2013.
PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION
IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN
VISION, GOALS &

OBJECTIVES
EXISTING BIKEWAYS
& CONDITIONS
DRAFT
BIKEWAY
NETWORK
PLAN
PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION
FINAL BICYCLE
MASTER PLAN
Phase II of the Plan was completed in June 2014

and focused on the implementation of the county
bikeway network. Phase II addressed prioritization, design standards and policy recommendations. The
products from each phase were combined to form this comprehensive bicycle master plan for the county. The
final comprehensive Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan is intended to guide development of on-road
bikeways and multi-use trails by Burlington County and its project partners.
Both phases of the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan are funded by the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) through the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commissions Supportive Regional Highway
Planning Program. Burlington County provided support through in-kind services in preparing the Plan.
The Setting
Burlington County, shown in Map 1, is located in southern New Jersey. It is New Jerseys largest county,
containing 40 municipalities, encompassing 798.6 square miles stretching from the states western border,
along the Delaware River, eastward to the Great Bay on the Atlantic coast. The county is bordered by Mercer
County to its north, Monmouth and Ocean Counties to its east, Camden and Atlantic Counties to its south
and Philadelphia and Bucks Counties, located in Pennsylvania, to its west.
The countys population is 448,734 with a population density of 561.9 people per square mile.1 The general
conditions in the county are beneficial to bicycling, characterized by a relatively flat topography and a
moderate climate, lacking in grueling climbs or extreme weather conditions that would discourage all but the
most hardened cyclists.
Most of the countys urban development, shown in red on Map 2, is concentrated in the northwestern part of
the county, close to the urban centers of Philadelphia and Camden. The densest development is located along
major highways and interstates such as the New Jersey Turnpike, I-295, Route 130, Route 38 and Route 73.
1
U.S. Census Bureau. (2010) State & County QuickFacts: Burlington County, NJ. Retrieved from website http://quickfacts.
census.gov/qfd/states/34/34005.html
5
June 2014
Located to the east, Burlington Countys central and northeastern sections dedicate a considerable percentage
of land to agricultural uses. These areas are generally suburban or rural in character. The southern and eastern
portions of the county are heavily forested and rural in character. These areas are generally more sparsely
developed than the other portions of the county. Protected areas are especially prevalent in the southeastern
portion of the county which largely falls into the New Jersey Pinelands Commissions Pinelands Area outlined
on Map 2.
June 2014
Map 1: Burlington County, New Jersey

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
PALMYRA BORO
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
130
FLORENCE TWP
130
MAPLE SHADE TWP
(
'
&
%
BURLINGTON TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
295
DELRAN TWP
PIKE
URN
NJ T
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MERCER
COUNTY
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
(
'
&
%
295
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
206
38
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
73
NEW HANOVER TWP

PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
70
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
Mercer
WASHINGTON TWP
Monmouth
Philadelphia
Burlington
Ocean
m
Ca
n
de
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
Atlantic
2.5
10 Miles
4A Eves Drive, Suite 114

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
June 2014
Map 2: Burlington County Land Uses
BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
BEVERLY CITY
DELANCO TWP
PALMYRA BORO
130
BURLINGTON CITY
RIVERSIDE TWP
130
FLORENCE TWP
DELRAN TWP
295
PIKE
URN
NJ T
WILLINGBORO TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
(
'
&
%
BURLINGTON TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MERCER
COUNTY
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
206
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
(
'
&
%
38
295
HAINESPORT TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
73
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
70
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
70
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
Legend
WASHINGTON TWP
Pinelands Area
Land Use
AGRICULTURE
BARREN LAND
FOREST
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
URBAN
WATER
WETLANDS
Data Source: NJDEP
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
June 2014
2. METHODS
The Planning Process
The Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan is the product of a collaborative process. Cross County Connection
made efforts to include a broad spectrum of stakeholders including transportation professionals, government
officials, bicycling advocates and the general public. All reasonable opinions and suggestions were given the
highest consideration regardless of the sources place in the hierarchy of transportation policy decision making.
Cross County Connection sought public input to inform the contents of the Burlington County Bicycle
Master Plan to the greatest extent possible, while tasking individuals, familiar with transportation planning
and county decision making processes, with shaping these needs and desires into a coherent and functional
form through this Plan.
The project management team consisted of staff from Cross County Connection and the Burlington County
Department of Public Works, Division of Engineering, with support from the Burlington County Department
of Resource Conservation. Members of the project team at each organization reviewed findings and project
recommendations during multiple stages of Plan development. The project team met and discussed the Plans
methodology and progress throughout the planning process.
Stakeholder Outreach and Public Involvement

An initial step in stakeholder Cross County Connecon TMA Leads PAC Meeng
outreach was to identify and contact
key stakeholders to sit on the Plan
Advisory Committee (PAC). The
PAC was convened to guide the plans
development and review project
deliverables. Representatives from a
broad range of concerned interests
were invited to participate including:
Burlington County municipalities;
community representatives; bicycle
clubs and advocacy groups; transit
agencies, as well as state and regional
authorities. The PAC met numerous
times throughout the planning
process.
PAC members met during Phase Source: Cross County Connecon TMA
I to establish the Plans development framework, guiding principles and desired outcomes based on their
individual and organizational interests. Subsequent communication with the PAC regarding Plan deliverables
and Phase I network recommendations were held online, by e-mail and by phone. In addition to the PAC,
the network recommendations were sent to each municipality in Burlington County for review.
The PAC met twice during Phase II to discuss: bikeway project prioritization; bicycle friendly programs and
policies; bikeway design and funding. As with Phase I, there was also repeated communication with the PAC
9
June 2014
through e-mail and phone during Phase II.

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Website
The PAC voiced its desire to include the public as much as

possible in the planning process. Cross County Connection
sought public input through a variety of means. A website
was created as a one stop information and resource center
for the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan. Visitors to
the site could easily access the online tools, Plan materials
and maps, and submit comments. The site featured,
among other things, summaries of PAC activities, details
on upcoming public meetings, maps of the existing and
proposed county bikeway network and previous bicycle
related studies conducted within Burlington County.
The Plan website also contained interactive features which

allowed the public to express their vision for a countywide
bikeway network. Visitors were asked to take a survey with a series of questions based on the survey takers
level of cycling experience. These questions addressed issues such as safety, trip purpose and the types of
facilities they would like to see implemented. A copy of the survey is contained in Appendix A. The website
also contained an interactive Wikimap that enabled the user to physically draw where they would like new
bikeways to be constructed, identify desired destinations and identify locations in the county that presented
barriers to bicycle travel or other safety concerns.
In addition to the website, two public Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Public Meeng in
meetings were held in January 2013 where Pemberton
Burlington County residents, and other
interested stakeholders, could provide input
and voice their concerns with project staff
in person. Meeting locations were selected
to allow convenient access for most county
residents the first in Pemberton Township,
located in the center of Burlington County
near many of the countys rural communities;
and the second in Roebling, located in the
urbanized northern portion of the county.
The public were invited to comment on the
preliminary vision, goals and objectives of the
Source: Cross County Connecon TMA
plan drafted by the PAC. Attendees were also
able to interact with the Plans project team members directly in mapping sessions. Participants were able to
identify priority corridors and safety concerns. Visitors had the opportunity to fill out comment forms and
were encouraged to visit the Plan website or contact Cross County Connection staff with any other concerns
or comments that arose during or after the meetings. The comment form is contained in Appendix A. There
were approximately 55 attendees at the January public meetings. A final Public Open House was also held in
Evesham Township in June 2014 to give the public an opportunity to review the Plans final recommendations.
10
June 2014
Vision, Goals, and Objectives

The following vision, goals and objectives were established with input from the Project Advisory Committee,
stakeholders and the public. They act as the underlying foundation and guiding principles of the Burlington
County Bicycle Master Plan. The Plans goals form the basis of the proposed bikeway network, policy and
implementation recommendations it contains. The objectives outline strategies intended to achieve these goals.
Due to Burlington County governments limited jurisdiction and authority over some matters associated with
influencing the bicycling environment in the county, it will take a coordinated effort with state, municipal
and other project partners to achieve these stated goals and objectives.
Vision Statement: To encourage bicycling in Burlington County as a means of transportation and recreation
by creating a safe, convenient, comfortable and regionally connected bikeway network.
Goals & Objectives:
1. Connectivity Create a bikeway network that connects town centers, regional bikeways and
destinations for transportation and recreation.
1.1 Create connections to municipal bikeway networks.
1.2 Create connections to bikeways in neighboring counties.
1.3 Create bikeway connections between walkable town centers in Burlington County.
1.4 Construct the Delaware River Heritage Trail in Burlington County.
1.5 Provide bikeway linkages to public parks and agritourism destinations.
1.6 Perform road diets on appropriate roadways in order to accommodate all road users safely and
incorporate bikeways when feasible.
1.7 Integrate construction of the county bikeway network with road reconstruction and resurfacing
programs.
1.6 Seek public and private grant funds to pay for implementation of the bikeway network.
1.7 Coordinate municipal, regional, state and private efforts to construct bikeways.
2. Safety - Increase the safety of roadways for bicyclists through engineering and education
2.1 Establish countywide design standards for on- and off-road bikeways that create a safe and comfortable
environment for all potential users.
2.2 Consider bicyclist needs in development review and roadway construction.
2.3 Develop maintenance guidelines for bikeways and integrate into roadway and park maintenance
program.
2.4 Pursue traffic enforcement efforts that increase road safety for cyclists.
2.5 Integrate bicycle safety education in schools and other community education venues.
11
June 2014
3. Convenience - Make bicycling a convenient and attractive transportation option

3.1 Establish a one-stop resource for bicycling information in the county.
3.2 Create a countywide bicycle map.
3.3 Develop and install wayfinding signage for county bikeways.
3.4 Support events, such as organized rides and festivals, that foster a bicycle culture in the county.
3.5 Provide bicycle parking in town centers, transit stops and common destinations.
3.6 Develop model bicycle parking standards or policy guidelines for new and existing commercial,
industrial and multi-family residential development and public buildings.
Relationship to Existing Plans & Policies

Implementing the Plan will require cooperation between state, regional, county and local stakeholders. To
that end, the content of this Plan was created in consistency with the vision, goals and objectives found in
existing state, regional and local bicycle-related plans and policies.
Cross County Connection conducted a thorough review of bicycle-related plans and policies at the state,
regional and local level. These plans and policies create the context for the Burlington County Bicycle Master
Plan and informed its contents. The level of bicycle planning activity at all levels of government indicates
a shared vision of and motivation to create a truly multimodal transportation network in Burlington
County.
State, Regional and County Bicycle-Related Plans
Review of bicycle-related plans at the regional and state level provide guiding principles and helped determine
how the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan will function in influencing the current and future state of
bicycling in New Jersey and the Greater Philadelphia region.
New Jersey Department of Transportation New Jersey Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
(June 2004)
The New Jersey Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan was originally
published in 1995 and updated in 2004 by the New Jersey Department of
Transportation (NJDOT). This state-wide plan provides the framework for
building the states bicycle network and developing bicycle-supportive policies and
planning. The plan envisions New Jersey as a place where people can choose to
safely and conveniently bicycle and walk as alternatives to automotive use. The
plan provided the following five goals to achieve this vision:
1. Build the Infrastructure: Create bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure
by planning, designing, constructing and managing transportation and
recreation facilities that will accommodate and encourage use by bicyclists and
pedestrians and be responsive to their needs.
2. Improve Access: Make community destinations, transit facilities and recreation facilities accessible and
12
June 2014
convenient for use by all types and skill levels of bicyclists and pedestrians.
3. Update Policies, Ordinances and Procedures: Reform land use planning policies, ordinances and
procedures to maximize opportunities for walking and bicycling.
4. Educate and Enforce: Develop and implement education and enforcement programs that will result in
reduction of crashes and a greater sense of security and confidence for bicyclists and pedestrians.
5. Foster a Pro-Bicycling and Walking Ethic: Increase bicycling and walking by fostering a pro-bicycling
and pro-walking ethic in individuals, private sector organizations and all levels of government.
The New Jersey Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan goes on to provide a series of proposed objectives,
performance measures and critical success factors intended to guide the implementation of the plans contents
and monitor the states performance in achieving its stated goals.2
The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Connections 2040 Plan for Greater Philadelphia
(September, 2013)
Connections 2040 is the long range transportation plan for the
Greater Philadelphia region prepared by the Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission (DVRPC).3 The plan provides the framework
for long term growth and development of the region, including
Burlington County.4 It is Connections 2040 goal to establish a
modern multimodal transportation system which includes bicycling.
Connections 2040 states that it is DVRPCs commitment to create a
region where bicycling is safe, attractive, and accessible travel option
for everyone. DVRPC recognizes that bicycling is an important
component of a multimodal transportation network that will reduce the regions automobile dependence,
thus creating more livable communities. Taking steps to further legitimize bicycling as a viable transportation
option for a wider variety of trip purposes will reduce congestion, improve air quality and expand accessibility
to a wider range of users.
As with this Plan, Connections 2040 encourages taking a comprehensive approach to improve the regions
bicycling environment by addressing policy, engineering, enforcement and education. Strategies directed
toward improving Greater Philadelphias bicycling environment include:
Encouraging land use practices better suited to support bicycling. Specifically, through
investing in established centers which will lead the most efficient use of infrastructure
and create the densities needed to better support bicycling. Designated centers located in
Burlington County include Palmyra, Riverside, Burlington City, Bordentown City, Mount
Holly, Mount Laurel, Marlton, Moorestown, Pemberton Borough and Browns Mills.
Expanding The Circuit, the Greater Philadelphia regions trail network. The Circuits current
network consist of over 250 miles of walking and biking trails. There are approximately
New Jersey Department of Transportation, (2004). Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan - Phase 2. Retrieved from
website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/commuter/bike/resources.shtm
3
The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, (2013). Connection 2040: Plan for Greater Philadelphia (13042).
Retrieved from website: http://www.dvrpc.org/Connections2040/
4
DVRPC is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for Philadelphia, Bucks, Montgomery, Delaware, and Chester
Counties in Pennsylvania and Mercer, Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties in New Jersey.
13
June 2014
4.5 miles of completed Circuit trails in Burlington County. Connections 2040 hopes to
construct 140 additional miles of The Circuit within New Jersey by 2040. This should
include a number of miles located within Burlington County - specifically as part of the
Delaware River Heritage Trail (DRHT), the Rancocas Greenway and the Kinkora Trail,
which are covered in more detail later in this Plan.
Develop Complete Streets to accommodate all modes and users. NJDOT and number of
New Jerseys counties and municipalities have established Complete Streets policies that
consider the needs of all road users, including bicyclist, when evaluating road projects.
Complete Streets policies are covered in more detail later in this Plan.
Establish opportunities for multimodal connections such as those between bicycling and
public transit.
The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Shifting Gears (April 2011)
Shifting Gears was an effort by DVRPC to identify priority corridors in the Greater Philadelphia region for
bikeway development. The project held a stakeholder meeting in Burlington County and conducted an
online public survey to determine cyclist and non-cyclist preferences, and determine desired locations for
construction of future bikeways. DVRPC staff created an inventory of existing and proposed bikeways in
Burlington County based on a review of relevant bicycle, trail and open space plans including Cross County
Connections 2009 Burlington County Bicycle Facilities Inventory.5
Shifting Gears identified four corridors in the county, listed in Table 1, that should be prioritized for installation
of bicycle facilities.6 These priority locations were identified based on input from stakeholders and residents,
crash data and trip attraction locations. It should be noted that corridors entail the areas in close proximity
to the roadway and not just the specific roadway itself. This can encompass the neighboring commercial uses
and neighborhoods, in addition to the local roads accessing them. In many cases, these primary roadway
defining these corridors are unfit for the installation of bikeways in their current state. When possible, the
Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan seeks to serve these corridors through alternative routes.
Table 1: DVRPCs Priority Corridors for Bicycle Facilies in 2011
Corridor
Location
CR 537
Mount Holly Township to Maple Shade Township
CR 541
Burlington City to Shamong Township
US 130
Bordentown Township to Palmyra Borough
US 206
Bordentown Township to Shamong Township
Source: DVRPCs Shiing Gears (2011),
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Burlington County Bicycle Level of Service Study
(June 2013)
This DVRPC study evaluated the suitability of county roads for potential installation of bicycle lanes. The
study used the Bicycle Level of Service method to determine suitability. This method categorized roadways
as Unfavorable, Fair and Favorable for bicycling based on existing roadway characteristics. Major
characteristics used to determine each roadways bicycle level of service included pavement condition, speed
5
Cross County Connection Transportation Management Association, (2009). Burlington County Bicycle Facilities Inventory.
The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, (2011). Shifting Gears: Regional Bicycle Outreach and Priority Setting
(10008). Retrieved from website: http://www.dvrpc.org/asp/pubs/publicationabstract.asp?pub_id=10008
6
14
June 2014
limit and the width of the outside lane and shoulder. Access to attractions such as rail stations and walkable
town centers were also considered in the studys recommendations. The Burlington County Bike Level of
Service Studys recommendations informed the selection of certain county roads as part of the proposed
Burlington County Bikeway Network contained in Phase I of this plan.7
Nine locations were identified as being most appropriate in their current state for installation of bicycle lanes
and are detailed in Table 2.
Table 2: County Road Segments Favorable for Bicycle Lane Installaon
(2013)
Corridor
Location
CR 537
Moorestown and Maple Shade
CR 545
Bordentown Township to Bordentown City
CR 630
Beverly City and Willingboro
CR 602 & 607
Palmyra and Cinnaminson
CR 656
Burlington City
CR 613
Delran and Riverside
CR 612 & 621
Mt. Holly
CR 541 & 616
Medford
CR 607 & 616
Evesham
Source: DVRPCs Burlington County Bicycle Level of Service Study (2013)
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission NJ 73 Corridor Study, Burlington County (April
2011)
The NJ 73 Corridor Study focused on the segments of NJ 73 in the Burlington County municipalities of
Evesham, Mount Laurel, Moorestown and Maple Shade Townships. The studys objective was to improve the
performance of the highway while also enhancing the character of its adjacent land-uses. This study addressed
all modes of transportation, including bicycling in its recommendations. DVRPC targeted streets that either
intersect, or are located near Route 73 for bicycle improvements. Specific recommendations related to bicycle
travel on county roads were incorporated into Phase I of this plan.8
Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation Burlington County Parks and Open Space
Master Plan (2002)
The Burlington County Parks and Open Space Master Plan (County Parks Plan), published in 2002, provides
short- and long-term strategies to guide the acquisition of open space and the development of the county
parks system. The plan sees bicycling as a key component of its parks system. It prioritizes the development
of an extensive trail network that would serve multiple purposes providing a source of recreation for park
visitors, acting as travel corridors between the parks and creating linkages to the parks from the surrounding
community all while concurrently functioning as an alternative transportation network for county residents.
7
The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. (2013). Burlington County Bicycle Level of Service Study. Retrieved from
website: http://www.dvrpc.org/asp/pubs/publicationabstract.asp?pub_id=12020
8
The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, (2011). NJ 73 Corridor Study Burlington County. Retrieved from website:
http://www.dvrpc.org/asp/pubs/publicationabstract.asp?pub_id=10004
15
June 2014
The County Parks Plans first stated objective is to ensure that all residents have easy access to County parks.9
To satisfy this objective, a hub and spoke park system was proposed. The hubs are larger parks, located
throughout Burlington County, featuring various passive recreational opportunities (hiking, biking, canoeing,
bird watching, etc.). These hubs are linked together by spokes consisting of contiguous corridors of open
space, known as greenways, and a network of off-and on-road trails. County residents would use these spokes
to reach various hubs. The spokes would also provide an attractive means for residents to move throughout the
county via biking and walking. The intended utility of this proposed trail network scheme, beyond providing
a source of recreation, is demonstrated by the County Parks Plans suggestion that the trail network link with
public transit to create inter-modal transportation opportunities.
The Burlington County Parks and Open Space Master Plan provides details on some of the countys major park
projects; two of which are featured in this plan The Rancocas Greenway and the Delaware River Heritage
Trail. The Rancocas Greenway is proposed to be a 20 mile long interconnected predominantly off-road
trail running east to west alongside the Rancocas Creek. The Delaware River Heritage Trail is a 50 mile loop
running north to south alongside the Delaware River on both the New Jersey and Pennsylvania sides of the
river. Both greenways will feature bicycle compatible trail networks and improve public access to two of the
countys more prominent waterways. Both projects are discusses more thoroughly in Chapter 5 of this Plan.
Table 3: Burlington County Parks Trail Types
Trail Type
Category
Use
Type 1
Park/Connector
Used in situation where use

patterns dictate separate
paths for pedestrians,
bicyclists and in-line skaters
Type 2
Park/Connector
Suited to lighter use patterns
Type 3
Park
For low impact areas such as

nature preserves
The Burlington County Parks and Open

Space Master Plan provides guidance on
methods to develop the trail network.
It recommends utilizing abandoned rail
rights-of-way and utility corridors for
trail development. Where this is not
feasible, they recommend making roadway
improvements to create linkages to offroad trails.
Source: Burlington County Parks and Open Space Master Plan (2002)
The County Parks Plan breaks trails into

two overall categories, Park Trails and Connectors. Park Trails are located within the parks and are intended
to emphasize a strong relationship with the natural environment. Connector trails are intended to provide
a safe and attractive means for residents to reach the parks from neighboring communities. These two trail
categories are further classified into three trail types, based on the anticipated intensity of usage. These trail
types are highlighted in Table 3. The plan specifies that all trail types should include appropriate wayfinding
signage and maps to provide user guidance.
New Jersey Pinelands Commission Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan (1979)
The Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan (Pinelands CMP) is intended to promote orderly development
of the Pinelands so as to preserve and protect the significant and unique natural, ecological, agricultural,
archaeological, historical, scenic, cultural and recreational resources.10 Counties and municipalities with lands
within the Pinelands Area must conform their master plan and land use ordinances to the minimum standards
established in the Pinelands CMP. Burlington County has a large amount of lands, located in the southern
and eastern part of the county, which are included in the Pinelands Area. Therefore, recommendations of the
9
Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation, (2002). Burlington County Parks and Open Space Master Plan.
Retrieved from website: http://www.co.burlington.nj.us/DocumentCenter/View/1264
10
http://www.state.nj.us/pinelands/cmp/
16
June 2014
Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan, located within or affecting lands within the Pinelands Area must
conform to Pinelands CMP.
In terms of this Plan, there are a few provisions contained in the Pinelands CMP that will affect the
implementation of bikeways. First, any repaving that would widen county roads within the Pinelands area
would require development review from the Pinelands Commission. Bicycle facilities that could be provided
without roadway widening could be installed with no review necessary. Second, for off-road facilities, the
Pinelands CMP permits low intensity non-motorized recreational uses in less protected areas of the Pinelands
area, provided they follow a number of guidelines. These guideline generally entail limited use of impervious
surfaces (concrete, asphalt, etc.) and require a minimal amount of vegetation clearing. In more protected
areas of the Pinelands Area, the Pinelands CMP restricts the improvement of bicycle facilities unless they are
provided within the constraints of the existing paved surface of a roadway.
Local Plans
The Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan is primarily focused on county-maintained roadways and rightof-ways. However, local roadways provide vital connections to destinations and populations not located on
county roadways. Cross County Connection reviewed the bicycle planning efforts of local municipalities and
used information gained from this process to inform the Plan.
Generally, local municipalities address their bikeway network in one of two ways: as part of the circulation
element contained in the municipal master plan, or as a stand-alone bicycle master plan. Based on information
provided to Cross County Connection in its 2012 Burlington County Bicycle Facilities Inventory and a
subsequent review, the following municipalities have developed planning documents relevant to bicycling:
As a stand-alone plan
Chesterfield Township
Eastampton Township
Evesham Township
Medford Township
Moorestown Township
Mount Laurel Township
As a circulation element
Burlington City
Maple Shade Township (not yet adopted)
Medford Lakes Borough
Riverside Township
Wrightstown Borough
Cross County Connection TMA - Burlington County Bicycle Facilities Inventory (May 2013)
Periodically, Cross County Connection conducts bicycle facility inventories for southern New Jerseys seven
counties: Atlantic; Burlington; Camden; Cape May; Cumberland; Gloucester; and Salem. These inventories
document existing and proposed bikeways at a county-wide level and include those located on state, county
and municipal roadways. The results of the inventory are published in a report intended to prioritize future
investment in bicycle infrastructure by ensuring that organizations and governments have accurate information
on the countys existing bikeway network, and are able to identify network gaps and maximize connectivity.
Cross County Connection most recently updated the Burlington Countys Bicycle Facilities Inventory in
Fall 2012. The inventory process provided Cross County Connection an opportunity to perform a thorough
review of the existing conditions of bicycle travel in Burlington County as well as a catalyst to involve
municipal and county officials with the early stages planning process. The most recent Burlington County
Bicycle Facilities Inventory was Published in May 2013. It, and the most recent bicycle facilities inventory for
each county, can be found at www.driveless.com.
17
June 2014
The results of the Burlington County inventory can also be found in Appendix D: Burlington County
Proposed Bikeway Network Map Atlas. The map atlas shows existing and proposed bikeways that participating
municipalities provided to Cross County Connection during the inventory process. Proposed Municipal
Bikeway does not denote a proposed bikeway project resulting from this Plan, rather, they are proposals
municipal staff brought to our attention. These proposed bikeways stem from a variety of source documents
that may, or may not have, been available for review during preparation of this Plan.
18
June 2014
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
A thorough examination of the current state of bicycle travel in Burlington County is necessary to adequately
inform bikeway corridor selection and provide network recommendations. This task required evaluating
factors including: the current levels of bicycling; bicycle trip purpose; the quality of the existing bikeway
network; and barriers to bicycle travel. Burlington County is a large and geographically diverse county.
These factors can vary greatly depending on the region. The project team kept this diversity in mind when
evaluating the existing condition of the bikeway network, and the quality of the bicycling environment within
Burlington County.
Current Levels of Bicycling

Cross County Connection used available data sources to
assess the current levels of bicycling within Burlington
County. According to the 2011 American Community
Survey, collected by the U.S. Census Bureau, approximately
0.27% of Burlington Countys employed residents
commute to work via bicycle.11 This falls below the
national rate of 0.53% and the state rate of 0.32%. Rates
of bike commuting in Burlington County also rank lower
than those found in many neighboring counties, as shown
in Table 4.
Table 4: Regional Bicycle Commung Rates (2011)

County
% Commuting by
Bicycle
Philadelphia (PA)
1.6%
Mercer
0.6%
Monmouth
0.6%
Ocean
0.4%
Camden
0.3%
Burlington
0.3%
Bucks (PA)
0.2%
Source: US Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Esmates (2011)
Bicycle commuting rates alone do not give a complete

indication of the level of bicycling that is occurring within
Burlington County. On a national level, the Federal Table 5: Purpose for Bicycle Trips in the Greater
Philadelphia Metropolitan Area (2007)
Highway Administration estimates that 87% of trips made
% of All Trips
by bicycle were for purposes other than commuting.12 On a Trip Purpose
Exercise/Recreation
35%
more localized level, DVRPC estimates that approximately
71% of bicycle trips within the Greater Philadelphia region
Work Commute
29%
in 2007 were for purposes other than commuting to and
Shopping, Appointments, Errands 15%
from work. The DVRPC study also noted that while
Work-Related (On the Job)
6%
exercise and recreation are the most popular individual trip
School Commute
6%
purpose, there are still 65% of trips that are made for more
Social Visit
6%
utilitarian purposes (shopping, medical appointments, etc.)
in the Delaware Valley (refer to Table 5).13
Other
3%
Source: DVRPC , Bicycling in the Delaware Valley in 2005 (2007)
11
U. S. Census Bureau. American Community Survey 2012, Five Year Estimates 2007-2011. Retrieved from website: http://
factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml
12
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 2009 National Household Travel Survey. Retrieved from
website: http://nhts.ornl.gov. Federal Highway Administration, 2009 National Household Travel Survey
13
The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, (2007). Bicycling in the Delaware Valley in 2005: Use, safety, and
demographics (07050). Retrieved from website: http://www.dvrpc.org/asp/pubs/publicationabstract.asp?pub_id=07050.
Survey responses were received from Burlington County Residents.
19
June 2014
Bicycle Crashes
Reported bicycle crashes were examined Figure 2: Burlington County Bicycle Crashes per Year (2008 - 2012)
as part of the network planning process
for the five-year period between 2008 and
2012. The purpose of this analysis was to
determine where current conflicts between
bicyclists and motor vehicles are occurring,
and identify trends based on geographic
location or circumstance.
Between 2008 and 2012, there were 393
reported bicycle crashes in Burlington
County. The locations of the crashes are
shown on Map 3. As shown in Figure 2, 76
of those bicycle crashes occurred in 2012,
Source: Plan4Safety
which is 16 fewer than the highest total in
2008 but nine more that the five-year low
in 2010. The number of reported crashes reduced dramatically from 2009 to 2010 but rebounded slightly in
the following years, consistent with the state as a whole.
Burlington County has had a significantly lower crash rate than New Jersey as a whole in the five-year analysis
period. In 2012 there were 16.8 crashes per 100,000 residents in Burlington County, compared to 22.8
crashes per 100,000 residents in New Jersey overall. This crash rate Table 6: Burlington County Bicycle Crashes
offers limited value, however, since it does not account for actual by Corridor (2008-2012)
levels of bicycle usage among county residents. For example, if a
Corridor
Crashes
smaller percentage of county residents are riding bicycles compared
US 130
32
to the statewide rate, then it should generally follow that there would
CR 537
26
be a lower rate of crashes per resident.14
CR 541
18
A similar issue arises when analyzing the safety of specific roadways.
Data measuring the volume of cyclists on Burlington Countys
roadways is extremely rare. Determining the crash rate relative to the
volume of bicycle traffic would be a useful metric, but is impossible
due to the lack of this type of data collection. This recurring lack
of available data results in the analysis contained in this Plan to be
informative but incomplete.
Crash Location
Bicycle crashes occurred throughout the county, however they are
generally concentrated in more populous urbanized areas such as
Palmyra Borough, Maple Shade Township, Willingboro Township
and Mount Holly Township. The locations of these crashes are
shown on Map 3.
CR 607
15
NJ 38
14
CR 630
12
CR 543
CR 616
CR 620
CR 612
NJ 70
CR 674
CR 691
NJ 73
US 206
CR 545
CR 613
Source: Plan4Safety
14
In general, fewer bicyclists results in fewer crashes, however research suggests that areas with significant bicycle travel volumes
result in lower crash rates. See Jacobsen, P. L. (2003). Safety in numbers: More Walkers and Bicyclist, Safer Walking and
Bicycling. Injury Prevention, 9, 205-209.
20
June 2014
Map 3: Burlington County Crashes Involving a Bicycle (2008 - 2012)

BORDENTOWN CITY
!(
PALMYRA BORO
!(
(!!( !(
!(!( !(
!(!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
CINNAMINSON
!( TWP
(!!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
BURLINGTON CITY
(!
!(
!(
!(
(!
!( !(
!(
(!
MAPLE SHADE
TWP
!(
(!!( !((!!(!(
(!
!(
MOORESTOWN
TWP
!(
!(
!(
(!!( (! (! !(
!(
(!!( (!!(!( (! (! !(
!(
!(
!(
(
!
!( !(
!(
!(
(!
!(
(
'
&
%
!(
!(
295
CHESTERFIELD TWP !(
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
(!!( !(!(!(!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
206
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
!(
WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
!(
LUMBERTON TWP
73
(!
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( (! (!
!(
EVESHAM TWP
!(
!(
!( (!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
(!!(
SOUTHAMPTON
TWP
!(
!(
!(
!(
NEW HANOVER TWP
!(
!(
(! !(
!(
!(
(!
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
PEMBERTON BORO
!(
!(
MEDFORD
TWP
!(
!(
CAMDEN
COUNTY
!(
!(
BORDENTOWN TWP
(
'
&
%
!(
!(
!(
!((! (! !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
PIKE!(
MANSFIELD TWP
URN
NJ T
WESTAMPTON TWP !(!( !(!(
!( !(
MOUNT
LAUREL
TWP
!(
!(
(!!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
(!!(
!(
!(
!(
130!(
!(
!(38
295 !(
FLORENCE TWP
(!
!(
!(
!(
WILLINGBORO
TWP!(
!(
!(
(!!(
!(
(!
!( (!
!(
BURLINGTON TWP
!(
!(
!(
130
!(
!(
!(
!(
DELRAN
TWP
!(
!(
(!
!( (!
!( (!
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
(!!(
!(
BEVERLY CITY
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP (!
MERCER
COUNTY
(!!(
!(
PENNSYLVANIA
(!!(
!( !(
!(
!(
(!!(!(
!(
!(
PEMBERTON TWP
!(
!(
!( !(
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
70
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
206
!(
!(
(!
!(
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
!(
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
Legend
(
!
Bike Crash Locations

2008 - 2012
Data Source: Plan4Safety
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
21
June 2014
Seventeen roadways, listed in Table 6, had five or more bicycle crashes between 2008 and 2012. When
normalized by roadway mileage, US 130, CR 607 and CR 691 had significantly higher crashes per road mile
than other high-crash roadways in the county. CR 691, a comparatively short segment that serves Lumberton
and downtown Mount Holly Townships, had the highest rate at 2.14 crashes per mile during the five-year
period.
Only two intersections in the county had three or more crashes between 2008 and 2012: US 130 & Levitt
Parkway, and US 130 & County Road 545. Overall, crashes at intersections represented 52% of all incidents
in the county during the five-year period.
Crash Circumstances
Severity
Nearly 78% of reported bicycle crashes resulted in injury. However, injury rates contained in the available
data are likely an over-representation of injury rates for all bicycle crashes, since those not resulting in injury
are less likely to be reported. The severity of crashes has decreased slightly each year from 2008 to 2012, both
in the number of reported fatalities and incapacitating injuries. Of the five fatal bicycle crashes reported in the
analysis period, four occurred in 2008.
Posted Speed Limit
Bicycle crashes occurring on roads
with speed limits of 35 MPH and over
tended to result in more severe physical
consequences, as shown in Figure 3. Of the
five fatalities in the analysis period, four
occurred on roads with speed limits above
35 MPH, and two occurred on roads
with a 50 MPH speed limit. Additionally,
roads with speed limits of 35 MPH to 45
MPH had much higher proportions of
incapacitating injury. These observations
are consistent with the findings of several
studies that link the severity of bicycle
crashes with posted speed limits and
vehicle speeds.15
Figure 3: Severity of Bicyclists Injuries by Posted Speed Limit (2008 2012)
Source: Plan4Safety
Time and Date

Nearly 72% of bicycle crashes in the analysis period occurred from the months of May to October. This trend
is likely due to more bicycle travel overall in that period of good weather and longer days. Crashes were also
much more common on weekdays than weekends.
Bicycle crash volumes occurred in the greatest numbers during commute hours between 3:00 PM and 7:00
15
Klop, J. R., & Khattak, A. J. (1999). Factors Inuencing Bicycle Crash Severity on Two-lane, Undivided Roadways in North
Carolina. Transportation Research Record, (1674), 78-85. Retrieved from http://www.enhancements.org/download/trb/1674-011.
PDF; Rivara, F. P., Thompson, D. C., & Thompson, R. S. (1997). Epidemiology of Bicycle Injuries and Risk Factors for Serious
injury. Injury Prevention, 3, 110-114. Retrieved from http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/3/2/110.full.pdf
22
June 2014
PM, which is shown in Figure 4. This

four-hour period accounted for 42% of all
crashes in the analysis period.
Figure 4: Bicycle Crashes by Time of Day (2008 - 2012)
Bicycles and Transit

Transit
providers
in
Burlington
County have made significant efforts
to accommodate bicycles on transit.
Improving bicycle access to transit is a
win-win for increasing rates of bicycling
and transit use, and providing regional
bike travel opportunities. Providing these
Source: Plan4Safety
connections through construction of
bikeways and bicycle accommodations,
such as bike parking at transit stops and on-vehicle storage, increases the number of people that have access to
public transit and enhances mobility for those who do not drive.
d en
Bo r
blin
Ro e
n ce
Flo
re
MERCER
COUNTY
130
BORDENTOWN TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
130
CINNAMINSON TWP
Bu r
ling
ton
S ou
th
Bu r
li
Cen ngton
ter
Sta Town
tion
P ar
Bev
Edg erly/
ew a
te r
n co
ide
ers
Riv
Dela
on
ins
n am
Cin
Pen
Ro u n sau k
te 7 e n
3P
ark
&R
ide
Palm
yr a
Riv
erto
n
PENNSYLVANIA
tow
As shown in Map 4, the bulk of Burlington Countys public transit network is located in the developed
northwestern part of the county. The suburban and urban character of this part of the county allows for
relatively short travel distances to Map 4: Burlington County Public Transportaon
access transit options. However, even
with connection distances under a few
2
I
miles, many of these transit options
2
I
2
I
2
I
2
2I
I
2
2I
I
_
are still not within a reasonable
^
2
2 I
I
2
I
2
I
walking distance to many residential

(
'
&
%
and commercial areas in the county.
_
^
This can make transit an unrealistic

mode of travel for many trips if last
(
'
&
%
_
^
_
^
mile connections are made on foot.
The creation of an improved bicycle
network could eliminate many of the
gaps between a potential transit riders

origin/destination, and the public
Public Transportation
_
^
transit route. With a strong network
2 River LINE Station
I
BurLink Bus
of bicycle infrastructure, bicycle travel
NJ TRANSIT Bus
_ Park & Ride Lot
^
can be a viable first or last link of the
public transit trip.

0
2.5
5 Miles
I
295
DELRAN TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
PIKE
URN
NJ T
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MANSFIELD TWP
206
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
38
295
HAINESPORT TWP
MOUNT
HOLLY TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
73
LUMBERTON TWP
CAMDEN
COUNTY
NEW HANOVER TWP
70
EVESHAM TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
Data Source: NJ TRANSIT
206
TABERNACLE TWP
NOTE: The only bus service not shown on map is along

US Route 9 in Bass River Township (See map 13 on page 34)
72

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
Current Service
NJ TRANSIT is the primary transit provider in the state and in Burlington County. The agency operates nine
bus routes and the River LINE light rail line in the county. Burlington County also funds the BurLink bus
service, which operates six routes in the county, all connecting to NJ TRANSIT bus and River LINE services.
NJ TRANSITs general policy is to support and encourage bicycle access to its terminals, facilities and services
23
June 2014
by providing accommodations for customers using bicycles to the greatest extent possible.16 Bicycle access is
permitted from all NJ TRANSIT rail station platforms and NJ TRANSIT and BurLink bus stops at no extra
charge. No permits for bicycle use or parking are required on either service.
The following public transit services are available in Burlington County:
NJ TRANSIT RAIL
The River LINE Light Rail Trenton > Bordentown > Roebling > Florence Twp. > Burlington Towne Center
> Burlington South > Beverly/Edgewater Park > Delanco > Riverside > Cinnaminson > Riverton > Palmyra >
Pennsauken > Camden
NJ TRANSIT Bus Routes:
317 Route Asbury Park > Fort Dix > Mount Holly > Mount Laurel > Philadelphia
406 Route Berlin > Marlton (Evesham Twp.) > Cherry Hill > Camden > Philadelphia
407 Route Moorestown > Maple Shade > Merchantville > Camden >Philadelphia
409 Route Trenton > Burlington City > Willingboro > Camden >Philadelphia
413 Route Burlington City > Mount Holly > Mount Laurel > Moorestown > Camden
417 Route Mount Holly > Willingboro > Philadelphia Express
418 Route Trenton > Willingboro > Moorestown > Philadelphia Express
419 Route Burlington City > Cinnaminson > Route 73 Pennsauken Station > Camden
457 Route Moorestown > Mount Laurel > Cherry Hill > Haddonfield > Camden
BurLink (Burlington County):
B1 Route Beverly > Willingboro > Mount Holly > Pemberton
B2 Route Beverly > Willingboro > Edgewater Park > Westampton
B5 Route Florence Rail Station > Haines Industrial Park (Florence)
B8 Route Riverside Rail Station > Hartford Crossing (Delran)
B9 Route Palmyra Rail Station > Cinnaminson > Moorestown > Moorestown Mall
B10 Route Cinnaminson Rail Station > Taylors Lane (Cinnaminson) > Route 130 (Delran)
Bicycles and Light Rail
The River LINE, which began service in 2004, is used by commuters to access
employment locations in Trenton and Camden, and industrial and commercial clusters
along the Delaware River and Route 130 corridor. The system is popular with cyclists,
with a weekday average of 4.1 cyclists per train based on 2008 counts conducted by
the Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia.17 All boardings are at-grade, allowing
easy bicycle access for passengers with bicycles. Each car accommodates a total of six
bicycles on vertical hooks shown in Figure 5. These hooks suspend bicycles vertically
and reduce the floorspace necessary for bicycle storage. The large majority of trips are
operated with a one car train, though there are several trips operated with two car
trains which can accommodate up to 12 bicycles on-board. The River LINE runs from
Figure 5: River LINE

Bike Racks
Source: Bicycle Coalion of

Greater Philadelphia
16
NJ TRANSIT, (2013). Bike and ride. Retrieved from website: http://www.njtransit.com/rg/rg_servlet.

srv?hdnPageAction=BikeProgramTo
17
Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia (2008)
24
June 2014
approximately 5:30 AM to 10:00 PM on weekdays and Sundays and 5:30 AM to 1:00 AM on Saturdays.
Bicycles and Bus
Bicycles are permitted on NJ TRANSIT and BurLink buses operating in Burlington County at all times. The
majority of NJ TRANSIT buses in southern New Jersey and all BurLink buses are equipped with bike racks
mounted on the front of the vehicles. Each rack stores two Table 7: Bicycle Parking at River LINE Staons and
bicycles. Buses not equipped with racks may accommodate Park & Ride Lots
bicycles in the under-floor luggage compartments.
Bicycle
Location
Only standard-size bicycles are permitted on bus bike racks.

Bicycles with child carriers, three-wheeled, tandem and
recumbent bicycles are not permitted.
Bicycles at Transit Stations and Park and Ride Locations
While on-vehicle accommodations are available on light
rail and bus service in the county, secure bicycle parking is
an essential element to the viability of bicycling as a mode
of daily travel. Uncovered bike racks are available at all but
one River LINE station in Burlington County, as shown
in Table 7. These parking accommodations are appropriate
for short-term parking of approximately two hours or less.
At River LINE stations, and other locations where bicycles
are likely to be left unattended for longer periods, bicycle
parking that is covered, such as bicycle lockers, would
create additional security and is a more desirable long-term
parking option. Bicycle parking is not available at any of
the four designated park and ride locations in the county.
Parking
River LINE Stations

Beverly/Edgewater Park
Yes
Bordentown
Yes
Burlington South
Yes
Burlington Town Center
No
Cinnaminson
Yes
Delanco
Yes
Florence
Yes
Palmyra
Yes
Riverside
Yes
Riverton
Yes
Roebling
Yes
Park & Ride Lots

Red Lion Lot, Southampton
No
Willingboro Town Center, Willingboro
No
Academy Bus Terminal
No
Greyhound Bus Terminal, Mount

Laurel
No
Existing Bikeways
The existing bicycle network in Burlington County consists Table: 8 Burlington Countys Exisng Bikeway
Network, 2012
of 154 miles of bikeways, of which 71.6 miles are on-road
Mileage
%
bike lanes, 33.1 miles are designated on-road bike routes Facility Type
154.0
and 49.3 miles are off-road bike paths, as shown in Table Total existing bikeways
8. Cross County Connection performed an inventory
Bike path
49.3
31.4%
of bikeways in Burlington County, which provided the
Bike lane
71.6
46.9%
baseline data for existing bikeways in the county. The results
Bike route
33.1
21.7%
of this inventory were published as a separate document in
2013.18 Burlington Countys existing bikeways are shown
in Map 5 and detailed in Appendix B.
18
Cross County Connection Transportation Management Association, (2013). Burlington County Bicycle Facilities Report.
Retrieved from website: http://www.driveless.com/gettingaround_biking_01_1072008.htm
25
June 2014
Map 5: Burlington Countys Exisng Bikeway Network

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
PALMYRA BORO
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
130
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
130
MAPLE SHADE TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
(
'
&
%
295
DELRAN TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
PIKE
MANSFIELD TWP
URN
NJ T
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MERCER
COUNTY
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
(
'
&
%
295
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
206
38
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
73
NEW HANOVER TWP

PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
70
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
Legend
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Off-Road, Bicycle Path
On-Road, Bicycle Lane
On-Road, Bicycle Route
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
26
June 2014
Multi-use Trails
Multi-use trails are physically separated from vehicular traffic and, when properly designed, offer the highest
level of safety for cyclists of all ages and skill levels. Burlington County has 48 miles of multi-use trails of
varying design within the county.
Many multi-use trails in the county are recreation-oriented and located in parks or other green spaces. These
trails attract all types of cyclists, including children and inexperienced riders. An example is the 2.6 mile
multi-use trail located in Smithville County Park in Eastampton Township, which can be seen in Map 6. This
trails surface includes paved, crushed stone and boardwalk sections in a heavily wooded environment that
is suitable for most riders. There is minimal interaction with vehicular traffic other than two clearly marked
crossings at Smithville Road (CR 684).
Map 6: Smithville Park Mul-Use Trails
779
G
H
As is the case with most trail systems located in

Burlington Countys parks, the Smithville Park
trail is a self-contained loop that is not linked
to any larger network of trails, limiting bicycle
access for those not living in the immediate
vicinity. Reaching the trail may require riders,
located just a few miles away, to transport
their bikes to the trailhead by car. This limits
the ability for children or others looking
for trail access directly from their homes via
bicycle to safely access Smithville Park. This
Plan, along with other efforts undertaken by
Burlington County, intends to increase the
bicycle connectivity to these important trail
destinations.
AR
EASTAMPTON TWP
WR
AILR
FO R
E
O AD
DU N
Smithville
SMITH VI
LL E RD
PE
NI
NS
UL
684
G
H
Smithville
Lake
C ou
nt y
Pa
rk
Tra
il
Smithville Park
ST A
V
AV
WR
H AM
LN
AILR
O AD
AV
Existing, Off-Road, Bicycle Path
Source: Cross County Connecon TMA, 2012
LA
UR
EL
CR
EE
K
BL
VD
ND
IN
G
LA
SALE
M
RD
ORO
RD
LD
RT
O
RD
SH
EF
FIE
RD
DR
D
DR
CE
NT
E
BRID
GEB
K
IC
RD
RD
WE
ST
FIE
L
W
AN
ST
AV
CH
BIR
BA
RT
RA
M
UR
YC
T
RD
RIVE
RTO
N RD
BO
RT
ON
RD
D
NR
OW
BR
FO
RT
HA
ILL
M
TO
AL
B
RD
RD
MC
EL
WE
ER
D
CR
EE
K
SM
Y RD
LBAN
NEW A
E
HAIN
GA
RW
OO
D
RD
CO
X
RD
Side-paths are another common trail type in Burlington County. These linear trails are located parallel to the
roadway and are often separated by a landscaped barrier. Side-paths are similar to a sidewalk but often wider
to accommodate bicycle travel. As shown in Map 7, Moorestown Township contains a fairly extensive network
of these types of off-road bike paths in many of its residential areas. Moorestowns side-path network includes:
a 2.3 mile path alongside Map 7: Moorestown Side-Path Network
Borton Landing Road; a
2.1 mile path alongside
636
G
H
Hartford Road (CR
686
G
H
686); a 1.7 mile path
613
G
H
alongside Riverton Road
(CR 603); and a 1.1 mile
614
G
H
path alongside Westfield
Road (CR 614). These
paths vary in quality
between eight foot paths
295
603
G
H
to narrow four foot paths
that function as sharedY
MARNE HW
27
June 2014
use sidewalks.
Figure 6: Moorestown Side-path Ending
Side paths along Hartford and Borton Landing Roads provide Abruptly
examples of some less than ideal conditions common on these
types of bikeways throughout the county. Paths may abruptly end,
as illustrated in Figure 6, or frequently meander to opposite sides
of the roadway, presenting safety concerns for cyclists crossing
against fast-moving traffic. These conditions also hinder the ease of
travel along the trail network, thus limiting their potential usage.
These types of conditions cause more experienced cyclists to use the
roadway instead of the trail, and can discourage the inexperienced
or young rider from using the trail at all.
Bike Lanes
A bike lane is a portion of a roadway which has been designated by striping, signing and pavement markings
for the preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists. Burlington Countys largest segments of on-road bicycle
lanes are located on county-maintained roads in the southern portions of the county, in the mostly rural Pine
Barrens. The two largest segments are a 19.1 mile bikeway on County Road 563 in Woodland and Washington
Townships, and a 13.2 mile segment on County Road 532 in Tabernacle and Woodland Townships. These
bike lanes are six feet wide and striped on the shoulder of the roadway. Both roadways handle a fairly low
volume of traffic traveling at speeds commonly in excess of 50 miles per hour. These bike lanes are well
connected and provide cyclists access to a large area of the countys rural pinelands. The most common type
of riders expected to use these bike lanes are recreational cyclists that are comfortable traveling alongside high
speed motor vehicle traffic. Local residents may utilize these bikeways for more utilitarian purposes, such as
errands or getting to work, however
Map 8: Marlton Parkway Bicycle Facilies
sparse commercial development in
this part of the county limits this
demand.
COMMONWEALTH
RD
The
Dominion
WES
COT
T
MARLT
ON PK
WY
EVANS RD
SAGEM
ORE D
R
BRICK
RD
DR
73
ARDSLEY DR
Willow
Ridge
OW
LL
WI
E
DG
RI
RD
Off-Road, Bicycle Path

Existing, On-Road, Bicycle Lane
Existing, On-Road, Bicycle Route
MA
RL
TO
NP
KW
Y
TA
UN
TO
N
M
TO
N
LI
N
SO
LR
IL
LA
KE
RD
KETTLE RUN RD
Existing,
DUTCH
RD
544
G
H
D RD
S ELMWOO
The presence of bike lanes in more

densely developed portions of
the county is much smaller, often
consisting of short disconnected
segments. A 1.6 mile section of bike
lanes along the Marlton Parkway
(CR 544) in Evesham Township
provides an illustration of this
common occurrence. These bike
lanes are located between the Route
73 commercial corridor to the west
and Tomlinson Mill Road to the east,
as depicted in Map 8. This bikeway
provides the neighborhoods of
Willow Ridge and Dominion access
to the jobs, shopping and other
28
June 2014
services provided along a portion of Route 73. Unfortunately, this bikeway Figure 7: Marlton Parkway Bikelane
Ending Abruptly at Route 73
is isolated and does not connect many other nearby neighborhoods to
these amenities. Additionally, the bike lane ends abruptly at Route 73 and
does not provide bicycle access to Camden County, which can be seen in
Figure 7. In the east, the bikeway links to a signed bicycle route located on
Taunton Lake Road which lacks an adequate shoulder and mixes cyclists
with motor vehicle traffic on a high-volume county road with a posted
speed limit of 45 MPH.
Bike Routes
A bike route is a roadway that has been designated as a preferred route for bicycle use through the placement
of signage and/or pavement markings. This might include bike route wayfinding signage, Share the Road
signage and/or sharrow pavement markings (see Figure 8). With 25.7 network miles, Evesham Township
accounts for 72% of the signed bike routes in the county. These bikeways provide illustrative examples of
both adequate, and less than desirable, practices in bike route
Figure 8: Bike Route Designated by Sharrow
designation.
Source: Bicyclinginfo.org; Credit: Lyubow Zuyeva
As mentioned above, Taunton Lake Road provides an example

of a bike route with less than desirable biking conditions (see
Figure 9). Similar conditions, where bicycles share the lane with
highspeed traffic, are found on many of the designated bikeways
in Evesham Township including Tomlinson Mill and Kettle Run
Roads. In contrast, bike routes found in the Cambridge Park
section of Evesham, shown in Figure 10, provide better examples
of a designated bike route featuring wayfinding signage along
low volume, low speed residential streets.
Figure 9: Substandard Bike Route on Taunton Lake

Boulevard in Evesham Township
Figure 10: Well-Designed Bike Route in Cambridge Park,

Evesham Township
29
June 2014
30
June 2014
4. Needs Analysis
This chapter describes the current and future needs present in the county in order to achieve the plans stated
goals and vision. While Burlington County has some of New Jerseys most bikeable and scenic rural roads, the
countys current bikeway network falls short of creating an ideal, convenient and comprehensive network for
bicycle travel. The project team has noted the following observations based on public input and analysis of
existing conditions:
Areas in the county exhibiting significantly higher bicycle use demand factors, such as high
population density, do not have significantly more dedicated bikeways (bike lanes, offroad paths), than areas exhibiting much lower demand factors; creating a spatial mismatch
between high quality bikeways and potential ridership.
Better access to, and between, town centers is needed.
NJ TRANSIT River LINE stations are important cycling destinations in the county that are
currently underserved by the bikeway network.
Employment destinations such as business parks are important cycling destinations

underserved by the current bikeway network.
Roadway barriers, especially divided state highways and the New Jersey Turnpike, are a
significant impediment to existing and future bicycling in the county.
Many of the countys urban arterials are currently unsuitable or unpleasant for biking.
Public Input
The following is a summary of the public comments received by Cross County Connection during the
planning process. These comments were culled from a variety of methods that Cross County Connection
employed as part of the public participation process, including an interactive online map where users could
submit comments, two public meeting and mapping sessions, an online survey and informal communication
with public stakeholders. Comments included desired bikeway locations, network gaps, important biking
destinations, barriers to bicycling, and general concerns regarding bicycle mobility and safety in the county.
Public participation was invaluable to this planning process as it provided insight from those most familiar
with riding conditions in Burlington County.
Desired Bikeway Corridors
Community Linkages
Public comments identified linking urban and rural community centers as a desired priority of the Plan.
Burlington Countys communities are diverse in character ranging between urban, suburban and rural
offering a range of amenities and experiences for the countys bicyclists. Public participants were familiar with
the advantages this diverse character of landscapes and land uses have to offer as indicated by the number of
comments directed towards developing linkages between relatively densely populated areas and the countys
rural communities.
Walkable Downtowns
Public comments cited a desire to see bikeways implemented that link many of Burlington Countys
31
June 2014
traditional town centers located along the Delaware River. Current conditions do not allow for safe riding
between many of the walkable downtowns that are attractive to cyclists. Specifically, comments expressed a
desire to see improved bicycle access to the historic downtowns of Burlington City and Bordentown City.
Currently bicyclists must traverse US 130 to reach these destinations, which is precarious due to high traffic
volumes, high vehicle speeds and an abundance of vehicle turning movements that are difficult to negotiate.
The public also expressed interest in linking these riverfront communities to downtown Moorestown, another
walkable town center located to the southeast, which requires crossing busy highways, such as US 130 and NJ
38, for many of the countys bicyclists
Suburban Corridors
Public participants requested bikeway linkages be prioritized between the large suburban areas of the county,
especially Medford, Evesham and Mount Laurel Townships. These municipalities contain large portions of
the countys population, job centers and major commercial corridors. The important commercial corridors
identified as lacking quality bicycle linkages, in their current state, are those located along Route 130, Route
38, Route 70 and Route 73. Specific requests include, making US 130, NJ 38, NJ 70 and NJ 73 bicycle
compatible or, in the alternative, provide parallel bikeways that would provide a similar level of accessibility
to commercial areas.
Rural Communities
Public participants expressed the desire to link the populated areas in the northern and western portions of
Burlington County to the less populated agricultural and Pinelands regions located in the east and south.
Specific community destinations mentioned were the town centers of Pemberton Borough, Mansfield, Mount
Holly, Lumberton and Browns Mills in Pemberton Township. Bicyclists could then enjoy riding through the
flat terrain on bikeways rolling through farmland and agricultural amenities such as farmstands and wineries.
Comments also cited the need for connections between suburban areas in Medford and Evesham Townships
to the existing bike lanes located in Tabernacle, Woodland and Washington Townships along CR 532 and
CR 569. These linkages would allow recreational riders direct access to the scenic bikeways located in the
Pinelands National Reserve.
Desired Destinations
The public frequently mentioned that they would like to see improved connections between residential areas
and Burlington Countys parks, schools and transit stations. They noted that facilities safe enough for even
the countys youngest and most inexperienced bicyclist need to be implemented to ensure that children may
travel safely and comfortably to and from school.
Improving bicycle access to the countys parks was often mentioned. These destinations provide opportunities
for riders of all ages and abilities to bike for recreation and exercise. Comments specified that bikeway access
to parks should be safe and comfortable for all riders.
Finally, many members of the public suggested that bikeway linkages be improved between residential
areas and nearby transit stops. These comments were primarily focused on improving bicycle access to NJ
TRANSITs River LINE stations located in the communities along the Delaware River.
32
June 2014
Identified Barriers
Major Highways
The most common barriers identified were those created by the major highways in the county, including US
130, NJ 70, NJ 73, NJ 38 and portions of US 206. In particular, the New Jersey Turnpike and Interstate 295,
which run north to south through populous areas of the county, were frequently cited as a barrier for cyclists
attempting to cross their associated on-ramps and off-ramps.19 Comments cited difficulty in negotiating
highway interchanges and overpasses, where cyclists are often forced to interact with high volumes of motor
traffic traveling at a high speed.
Crossing US 130
Crossing US 130 was commonly cited as a barrier to biking in Burlington County. Intersections along this
divided highway often lack accommodations for bicycling and present considerable safety obstacles. In many
areas of the county, US 130 is divided by a concrete barrier to discourage pedestrians from crossing the
highway. Several comments were aimed at connecting the communities east of Route 130 to the walkable
town centers and transit stations on its western side. Specific recommendations regarding crossing Route 130
included: providing a bikeway along Riverton Road and Main Street linking the communities of Cinnaminson
and Riverton; and in addition, a bikeway along Cooper Street linking the communities of Willingboro and
Beverly.
Rancocas Creek
An additional barrier identified by the public was the lack of bikeways across the Rancocas Creek. This
waterway effectively cuts off the northwestern section of the county from adjacent areas to the south. Specific
barriers identified include the banning of bicycles on the Pavilion Avenue Bridge (CR 543) between Delanco
and Riverside and the lack of bikeways on the Route 130 Bridge between Willingboro and Cinnaminson,
which forces bicyclists to use a narrow and poorly maintained sidewalk.
Countywide Concerns
The public also voiced concerns regarding the state of bicycling countywide. Comments often referred to
maintenance issues, dangerous interactions with motorists and other safety
Figure 11: Overgrowth
concerns.
Into Bike Path
Maintenance
Public comments expressed the need for improved maintenance practices for
Burlington Countys bikeways. Complaints regarding the frequent presence of
debris in roadside shoulders and bike lanes were common. They also claimed that
roadside vegetation impeded the travel of bicyclist on many of these bikeways
both from overgrowth into the bikeway and by the lack of adequate headroom
caused by overhanging trees, a condition shown in Figure 11.
Stormwater Grates
Burlington County currently replaces all worn stormwater sewer grates with
bicycle-compatible grates. However, there are still many locations where grates
19
Source: Cross County

Connecon TMA
I-295 and the New Jersey Turnpike are limited access highways that do not permit non-motorized traffic.
33

Figure 12: Hazardous Stormwater Grate
within the Bike Lane
June 2014
with raised openings perpendicular to the roadway still exist that

are potential crash hazards for cyclists. Figure 12 shows a hazardous
stormwater grate within a bike lane in Evesham Township. Bicycle
safe grates are discussed in more detail in Chapter 8, under
Supportive Infrastructure.
Motorist Behavior
Public comments also frequently mentioned the need to improve

interactions between bicyclists and motorists on county roadways.
Comments did not focus on one specific aspect of this interaction,
but cited aggressive or inattentive behavior by motorists and a lack
of understanding of their responsibilities when encountering a
bicyclist. The public stated that these issues are especially pervasive at high-volume intersections and highway
interchanges.
Trip Generators
Cross County Connection used additional demographic and population measures to identify areas where
demand for bikeways is likely to be high. Factors such as population density, households without access to a
motor vehicle and commuters that already walk, bike or take transit to work correlate to a greater likelihood
that an area will support significant amounts of bicycling.
Maps 9 through 13 illustrate the distribution of these demand indicators in the county.
Map 9 shows the population density of census tracts in Burlington County. Population is concentrated in the
urbanized northwestern area of the county. The highest population concentrations are located in Willingboro,
Riverside, Maple Shade, Mount Holly and Mount Laurel Townships, with additional areas of dense population
in Burlington City and Palmyra Borough. Much of the more densely developed residential areas are located
near highly-trafficked highways such as US 130 west of Burlington City and NJ 73. The county is sparsely
populated in its southern area south of NJ 70, and eastern area east of US 206.
Map 10 depicts the percent of households without access to a vehicle by census tract in Burlington County.
The highest concentrations of zero-vehicle households are located in Burlington and Beverly Cities, and
Maple Shade and Mount Holly Townships. In these areas more than 15% of households do not have access
to a vehicle. Other areas that have relatively high rates of zero-vehicle households, between 8% and 15%,
include portions of Bordentown City, and Burlington, Riverside, Delran, Pemberton, Southampton and
Moorestown Townships. In general, these areas are located in the northern half of the county and are more
densely developed than surrounding areas.
Map 11 shows the percent of individuals that commute by bicycle in the county by census tract. Overall,
the countys rate of bicycle commuting of 0.3% is consistent with state levels, though lower than the 0.5%
national rate. The highest numbers of bicycle commuters are located at the Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst,
Bordentown City, and Maple Shade, Delanco, Mount Holly and Evesham Townships.
Map 12 illustrates the percent of workers that walk to work. The rate of walking commutes in Burlington
County at 1.3% is much lower than the state rate of 3.2%, and 2.8% national rate. Walking commute
rates are highest in at the Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, Bordentown City and Delran, Mount Holly,
34
June 2014
Palmyra, Maple Shade, Medford and Moorestown Townships.

Map 13 depicts the percent of workers in the county that commute by transit. The county is served by NJ
TRANSIT light rail and bus transportation in the northern, central and far southern portions of the county.
The highest rates of transit commuting are located in northern part of the county in areas with significant
transit access. The highest concentrations of transit commuters are located in Willingboro and Bordentown
Townships, Palmyra and Riverton Boroughs, and Burlington City.
35
June 2014
Map 9: Burlington County Populaon Per Square Mile

BORDENTOWN CITY
MERCER
COUNTY
PENNSYLVANIA
BURLINGTON CITY
BEVERLY CITY
DELANCO TWP
PALMYRA BORO
130
CINNAMINSON TWP
130
BURLINGTON TWP
(
'
&
%
BORDENTOWN TWP
295
DELRAN TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
FLORENCE TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
PIKE
URN
NJ T
206
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
(
'
&
%
38
295
NORTH HANOVER TWP
MOUNT
HOLLY TWP
HAINESPORT TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
73
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
70
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
CAMDEN
COUNTY
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Population Per Square Mile

by Census Tract
15 - 700
700 - 1,700
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
1,700 - 3,300
3,300 - 4,800
4,800 - 8,000
Data Source: US Census 2010
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
36
June 2014
Map 10: Burlington County Percentage of Zero Car Households
BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
130
DELANCO TWP
PALMYRA BORO
FLORENCE TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
130
CINNAMINSON TWP
MERCER
COUNTY
BURLINGTON TWP
(
'
&
%
BORDENTOWN TWP
295
DELRAN TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
NJ
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
E
NPIK
TUR
206
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
(
'
&
%
38
295
NORTH HANOVER TWP

HAINESPORT TWP
MOUNT
HOLLY TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
73
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
70
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
CAMDEN
COUNTY
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Percent Zero Car Households

by Census Tract
0 - 2%
2 - 4%
4 - 8%
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
8 - 15%
15 - 28%
Data Source:
US Census 2011 ACS 5-yr Estimate
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
37
June 2014
Map 11: Burlington County Percentage of Bicycle Commuters

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
PALMYRA BORO
130
FLORENCE TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
130
CINNAMINSON TWP
MERCER
COUNTY
BURLINGTON TWP
(
'
&
%
BORDENTOWN TWP
295
DELRAN TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
NJ
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
E
NPIK
TUR
206
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
(
'
&
%
38
295
SPRINGFIELD TWP
MOUNT
HOLLY TWP
HAINESPORT TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
73
LUMBERTON TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
NEW HANOVER TWP
70
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
CAMDEN
COUNTY
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Percentage of Bicycle Commuters

by Census Tract
0 - 0.01%
0.01 - 1%
1 - 3%
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
1.5 - 3%
3 - 5%
Data Source:
US Census 2011 ACS 5yr Estimate
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
38
June 2014
Map 12: Burlington County Percentage of Walking Commuters

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
130
DELANCO TWP
PALMYRA BORO
MERCER
COUNTY
FLORENCE TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
130
CINNAMINSON TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
(
'
&
%
BORDENTOWN TWP
295
DELRAN TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
PIKE
URN
NJ T
206
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
(
'
&
%
38
295
NORTH HANOVER TWP

HAINESPORT TWP
MOUNT
HOLLY TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
73
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
70
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
CAMDEN
COUNTY
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Percent of Walking Commuters

by Census Tract
0 - 0.5%
0.5 - 1.5%
1.5 - 3%
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
3 - 5%
5 - 27%
Data Source:
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
39
June 2014
Map 13: Burlington County Percentage of Transit Commuters

BORDENTOWN CITY
2
I
PENNSYLVANIA
DELANCO TWP
PALMYRA BORO
RIVERSIDE TWP
2
2I
2I
2 I
I
CINNAMINSON TWP
2
II
2
BEVERLY CITY BURLINGTON CITY
2
I
II
2
2
MERCER
COUNTY
2
I
2
I
FLORENCE TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
DELRAN TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
HAINESPORT TWP
MOUNT
HOLLY TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
CAMDEN
COUNTY
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
Legend
Bus Route
Rail Station
WASHINGTON TWP
Percent of Transit Commuters

by Census Tract
0 - 1%
1 - 3%
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
3 - 5%
5 - 8%
8 - 18%
Data Source:
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
40
June 2014
Physical Barriers
The project team identified barriers to bicycle travel that were considered in the planning of the county
bikeway network. Major barriers to the bikeway network, including roadway and geographic barriers pictured
in Map 14, exist primarily in the northern and western parts of the county.
Map 14: Physical Barriers to Bicycling in Burlington County
PALMYRA
(
'
&
%
276
BEVERLY CITY
DELANCO
BURLINGTON TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
(
'
&
%
130
295
as
oc
nc
Ra
CINNAMINSON TWP
C
Crreafts
ek
A
Crsesisc
ek unk
130
DELRAN TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BURLINGTON CITY
RIVERSIDE
eek
Blacks Cr
er
Riv
are
w
a
Del
BORDENTOWN CITY
Delaware River
NJ T
URN
k
ree
sC
ick
sw
os
Cr
PENNSYLVANIA
MERCER
COUNTY
CHESTERFIELD TWP
PIKE
MANSFIELD TWP
k
ee
Cr
MAPLE SHADE TWP

MOORESTOWN TWP
73
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
(
'
&
%
295
206
38
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
70
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
CAMDEN
COUNTY
PEMBERTON TWP
Legend
Highway Barrier
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
Water Barrier
70
Road Barriers
Prominent road barriers in Burlington County include: 2021
US Route 130
Interstate 295
Interstate 276
New Jersey Turnpike
NJ 73
NJ 38
NJ 90
NJ 70 20
NJ 206 21
The New Jersey Turnpike and Interstate 295 present a significant barrier to biking for their entire length in
the county. Overpasses are the most common type of crossing, however many of these bridges were built
20
21
The portion between the western county line to Greenbrook Drive in Evesham Township
The portion between the northern county line to Columbus Road / CR 543
41
June 2014
with limited right-of-way that does not permit construction of bikeways in their present state. Overpasses or
underpasses that do have sufficient right-of-way to construct bikeways often have on-and off-ramp vehicle
merging movements, which may create unpleasant and dangerous cycling conditions at these interchanges.
In addition to limited access roads, divided state highways present a significant safety concern for bicyclists
crossing or travelling on them. Typically these highways have posted speed limits of 50+MPH and very
high traffic volumes. Access management on these corridors is an additional safety concern for cycling. The
abundance of access points and turning movements create hazardous and unpleasant biking conditions.
These highways account for 15% of all reported bicycle crashes despite totaling approximately 5% of all road
mileage in the county
Geographic Barriers
Bodies of water are the primary geographic barrier in relatively flat Burlington County. The county is bordered
to the west by the Delaware River, and by Crosswicks Creek along a section of its northern border. Internally,
Rancocas Creek is a barrier to bicycle travel from the Delaware River in the west to Westampton Township.
The Assiscunk Creek in Burlington City and Township is an additional barrier extending from the Delaware
River to Old York Road in the east.
Crossings of these waterways are limited, and each present challenges. Crossings and adjacent municipalities
are listed below and depicted in Maps 15 through 19.
Delaware River Crossings
Tacony Palmyra Bridge (NJ 73) Palmyra, NJ and Tacony, PA
Burlington Bristol Bridge (NJ 413) Burlington City, NJ and Bristol, PA
Pennsylvania Turnpike (I-276) (motorized traffic only) Burlington Township, NJ and Bristol, PA
Map 15: Delaware River Crossings

RI
WARE
DELA
73
PENNSYLVANIA
VER
DELAW
ARE R
IVER
Tacony-Palmyra
Bridge
PALMYRA BORO
Burlington-Bristol
Bridge
276
413
BURLINGTON CITY
130
0
Pennsylvania
Turnpike
BURLINGTON TWP
The crossing locations, shown in Map 15, link Burlington County with Pennsylvania. The Tacony Palmyra
Bridge forms the southern loop of the Delaware River Heritage Trail, however, bikes must currently be
walked over the bridge. The Burlington Bristol Bridge permits bicycles only with the express permission of
the Burlington County Bridge Commission Police. The Pennsylvania Turnpike Bridge does not permit nonmotorized travel.
Rancocas Creek Crossings
Pavilion Avenue (CR 543) (bike/ped traffic prohibited on northbound side) Delanco, NJ and Riverside, NJ
River LINE Rail Bridge (no vehicle traffic permitted) - Delanco, NJ and Riverside, NJ
42
June 2014
US Route 130 Willingboro, NJ and Delran, NJ
Centerton Road/Bridge Street (CR 635) Westampton, NJ and Mount Laurel, NJ
Marne Highway (CR 537) Hainesport, NJ
NJ 38 - Hainesport, NJ
I-295 (motorized traffic only) - Westampton, NJ and Mount Laurel, NJ
New Jersey Turnpike (motorized traffic only) - Westampton, NJ and Mount Laurel, NJ
There are few crossings of the Rancocas Creek from the Delaware River to Marne Highway, which can be seen
in Map 16. Of the three crossings that permit non-motorized traffic, one is Route 130, a heavily trafficked
urban arterial. Pavilion Avenue is currently a planned segment of the Delaware River Heritage Trail and does
have a walkway on its western side. Both Pavilion Avenue and Bridge Street do not currently have bikeways
installed.
Map 16: Rancocas Creek Crossings
EDGEWATER PARK TWP
Marne Hwy
WESTAMPTON TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
295
WILLINGBORO TWP
NCO
RA
E
CAS C R
I-295
BEVERLY CITY
RA N C O
DELANCO TWP
River LINE
Rail Bridge
CA S
C RE
RANCO C AS C REEK
US Route 130
543
G
H
RIVERSIDE TWP
NJ Route 38
HAINESPORT TWP
EK
NJ TURNPIKE
130
0
EK
38
New Jersey
Turnpike
635
G
H
Bridge St
537
G
H
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
DELRAN TWP
Pavillion Ave
Assiscunk Creek Crossings

East Pearl Street (CR 656) Burlington City, NJ
East Broad Street/Columbus Street (CR 694)

Burlington City, NJ
Mitchell Avenue - Burlington City, NJ
US 130 Burlington City, NJ
Map 17: Assiscunk Creek Crossings

AR
DELAW
R
E RIVE
Pearl St
Burlington-Bristol
Bridge
130
0
BURLINGTON
TOWNSHIP
Broad St / Columbus St
BURLINGTON CITY
US Route 130 ASSISCUN

K CRE
The Assiscunk Creek, shown on Map 17, extends
EK
from the Delaware River in the north, southeast
0
through Burlington City, before splitting into a few
small streams in Burlington Township. The crossing
along East Pearl Street (CR 656) is equipped with
sidewalks and narrow shoulders that are suboptimal for bicyclists in its present condition. The crossing just
to the south, on Broad Street/Columbus Street (CR 694), is similar. Consisting of even narrower shoulders
inadequate to accommodate bicyclists. South of Broad Street is the Mitchell Avenue crossing. Mitchell Avenue
appears to be a low speed/low volume roadway that would be comfortable for most bicyclists. The Route
413
Mitchell Ave
130
43
June 2014
130 crossing maintains a high volume of motor vehicle traffic travelling at high speed, and therefore, is very
inhospitable to most bicyclists.
Map 18: Blacks Creek Crossings
Blacks Creek Crossings

Burlington Avenue (CR 662) Bordentown City, NJ and
Bordentown Township, NJ
US 206 - Bordentown Township, NJ
US Route 130
K
K
EE
CR
A short stretch of the Blacks Creek, shown on Map 18, extends

from the Delaware River in the north to US 206 in the south before
splitting into several smaller tributaries. Burlington Avenue (CR
662) currently has sharrow shared road markings installed along
this corridor, and is included as a segment of the Delaware River
Heritage Trail. Both US 130 and US 206 have bikeable shoulders at
their crossings of the creek.
206
0
662
G
H
UN
SC
US 130 Bordentown Township, NJ
SI
AS
BORDENTOWN CITY
Burlington Ave
130
0
US Route 206
BORDENTOWN TWP
Crosswicks Creek Crossings
US 206 - Bordentown Township, NJ and

Hamilton Township, NJ
Map 19: Crosswicks Creek Crossings

CROSS WI C
KS CREEK
MERCER COUNTY
US Route 206
CR O
MERCER COUNTY
River LINE Rail Bridge (equipped with adjoining

multi-use trail)
S SW
I CKS CR
EEK
US Route 130
206
0
BORDENTOWN TWP
130
0
CHESTERFIELD TWP
DE
Crosswicks Creek is a physical barrier to the

bikeway network from approximately US 130 to the
Delaware River, which is illustrated in Map 19. Both
US 130 and US 206 have bikeable shoulders at their
crossings of the creek.
R
LA
W A R E R IV E
US 130 Bordentown Township, NJ and

Hamilton Township, NJ
44
June 2014
5. Network Recommendations
Recommendations were developed to create a countywide bikeway network that meets the Plans goals of
connectivity, safety and convenience. As such, significant attention was given to major travel corridors that
link communities and town centers within the county. These recommendations are strictly proposals and do
not compel Burlington County to construct these bikeways. Recommendations are based on observations
made at a high level of analysis focused on the network as a whole. Upon a subsequent lower level analysis of
specific recommendations, certain engineering or safety concerns could become apparent that could hinder or
prevent implementing bikeways. Burlington County should, however, make every effort to perform the level
of examination necessary to determine the feasibility and resources required to implement each one of these
recommendations.
Network recommendations primarily seek to utilize county-maintained roadways and available, or
feasibly available, off-road trail segments. Bikeway linkages on local or state right-of-ways were considered
only if they provided critical linkages in the county network. Again, inclusion of these roadways in Plan
recommendations does not compel the state or municipality to construct these bikeways. It merely advises
Burlington County to seek the cooperation of state and municipal partners to provide further study and work
towards implementation. Furthermore, it is advisable to have the participation of the affected municipalitys
traffic safety officer, engineer, and other officials, when taking the next steps required to implement network
recommendations.
Network Development Criteria

Bikeway corridors were selected considering a number of criteria identified through the public input process,
analysis of existing conditions, previous planning and analysis efforts, roadway data and the input and review
of Burlington County staff and the PAC.
Key principles guided the network recommendations:
Connectivity
The network should serve the needs of all users, regardless of experience, age or trip purpose.
Factors:
Connection to existing bikeways.
Potential to overcome physical and geographic barriers to bicycle travel.
Potential to access disadvantaged or limited mobility populations.
Connections to transit facilities.
Demand
The network should serve areas and destinations that are likely to support significant rates of bicycling, both
now and in the future.
Factors:
Proximity to walkable town centers, parks, business parks and commercial centers.
Proximity to public facilities such as parks, schools, libraries and other social services.
45
June 2014
Proximity to areas with high population and development density.
Proximity to areas with demographic factors suggesting significant potential bicycle usage, including zerocar households and current walking, biking and transit commuters.
Feasibility
The network should be implemented in a reasonable, foreseeable time frame.
Factors:
Presence of bicycle-compatible on-road conditions, especially motor vehicle volumes and speeds.
Presence of sufficient roadway width to provide bikeway accommodations.
Current Bicycle Level of Service per DVRPC determinations outlined in the 2013 Burlington County
Bicycle Level of Service Study referenced in Chapter 2.
Status of trail right-of-way usage rights.
Proposed Network
The proposed county bikeway network, shown on Map 20, Table 9: Burlington Countys Proposed Bikeway
includes 398 miles of new bikeways for the county. Proposed Network by Corridor
Corridor
Mileage
%
bikeways are classified within the network as Primary or
Secondary. These classifications denote a proposed bikeways
Primary
152
38.1%
function within the county network as a whole, similar to
Secondary
246
61.9%
roadway functional classification. Primary Bikeways are major
Total
398
100%
continuous bicycle travel corridors that link population and
commercial centers of the county. Secondary Bikeways provide Table 10: Burlington Countys Proposed
linkages to the Primary Bikeway spines, as well as between Bikeway Network by Bikeway Type
residential, commercial, employment and recreation areas.
Bikeway Type
Mileage
%
It should be noted that a bikeways corridor designation does
On-road
334
83.9%
not require a separate set of improvement standards. Corridor
Off-road
64
16.1%
designation is primarily related to the bikeways function within
the larger network. The context of the bikeways location should
be the determining factor when considering improvement standards and the associated design considerations.
As shown in Table 9, 152 miles, or 38.1%, of the proposed bikeway network is composed of primary corridor
projects and 246 miles, or 61.9%, is composed of secondary corridor projects.
Tentatively, these corridors would be comprised of 334 miles of on-road bikeway facilities and 64 miles of
off-road bikeways, as shown in Table 10. However, a projects on- or off-road designation is preliminary at this
time. A projects on- or off-road status could change as it progresses into the design and construction phases.
No specific design recommendations for individual projects are proposed within this Plan. The on- and offroad designation is simply based on the projects location along a county roadway, or through a park or open
space area with no possibility for on-road facilities.
A detailed list of the specific bikeway segments that compose the proposed network is contained in Appendix
C. To examine specific projects, in greater detail, consult the Burlington County Bicycle Proposed Bikeway
Network Map Atlas contained in Appendix D
46
June 2014
Map 20: Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
PALMYRA BORO
130
RIVERSIDE TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
130
(
'
&
%
BORDENTOWN TWP
295
DELRAN TWP
PIK
URN
NJ T
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
MERCER
COUNTY
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MANSFIELD TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
(
'
&
%
206
295
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
38
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
73
NEW HANOVER TWP

PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
70
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Legend
Proposed County Bikeways
Primary Bikeway Corridor
Secondary Bikeway Corridor
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
Bikeways
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
47
June 2014
Primary Corridors
Based on the selection criteria identified earlier, it is not surprising that a bulk of the Plans Primary Corridors
are located in the northwestern section of Burlington County, in the area north of Route 70 and west of
Route 206. This is the location of the majority of Burlington Countys population and commercial centers,
thus presenting the greatest opportunity to maximize the connectivity of the bikeway network to people,
jobs, transit, recreational opportunities and other services. Burlington Countys northwestern section is also
the location of the largest untapped pool of bikeway demand exhibiting the largest concentration of factors
favorable for bicycle trip generation including: high population density; households without access to a motor
vehicle; significant public transit infrastructure; and individuals who report using biking, walking or transit
as their primary method of commuting to work yet, it lacks in high quality bikeways. This section of the
county is also the location of the largest proportion of bicycle crashes in the county, demonstrating a need
to implement high quality bikeways that provide a superior level of safety for bicyclists, compared to their
current condition.
IN
RD
295
RI
NG
IL
NV
RD
KS
CA
JA
C
RD
MAR
N
38
E HW
MT
ST
BY
S
PA
MOUNT
HOLLY TWP
WASHING
TO N ST
M
IL
ST
AU
ST
TL
N- M
RE
IN
HA
P
ES
HAINESPORT TWP
RD
LY
OW
LN
686
G
H
TM
OR
A
TL
L
RE
L
HO
537
G
H
UNION MIL
L RD
RE
BO
PIK
537
G
H
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
(
'
&
%
W
EL
Primary Bikeway
N
UR
NC
603
G
H
RD
CHURCH ST
NJ
LL
E HW
M
AI
FE
O
MO
73
I
SH
541
G
H
AR
38
PI K
WESTAMPTON TWP
E MAIN ST
MAR
N
CAMDEN
COUNTY
RN
CENTERTON RD
RA
537
G
H
TU
LL
Y
ND
NJ
HO
LA
RD
M
T
ST
B
AV
N
TO
OR
DE
RD
CH
C AM
D EN
MAPLE SHADE TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
AN
SP
UR
537
G
H
636
G
H
RD
L
IE
CH
ST
DL
TF
MAIN
W
OO
SI
ES
W
607
G
H
73
EA
M
OX
RD
Map 21: CR 537 Primary Corridor from Maple Shade to Mount Holly
LR
AS
RA NC
CR
EE
RD
IR
I
NJ TURNPIKE
OC
AS
CK
OC
BR
NC
ID
RA
ST
Cross County Connection staff determined Primary Corridor alignments by first identifying which
destinations in Burlington County should be
Map 22: Primary Corridor Along County Roads in Willingboro,
linked. This was done by consulting the needs Westampton, and Mount Holly
analysis covered in Chapter 4, paying particular
Primary Bikeway
WILLINGBORO TWP
attention to requests made during the public
outreach process and identified bicycle trip
WESTAMPTON TWP
626
H
G
generators. County Road segments that were
635
H
G
637
295
H
G
most feasibly able to link these destinations
together were then identified based on the Bicycle

630
H
G
Level of Service (BLOS) analysis performed by
541
H
G
DVRPC for county operated roads, referring
to NJDOTs Straight Line Diagrams (SLD) for
537
H
G
MOUNT
Burlington Countys 500 and 600 level series
HOLLY TWP
County Roads and by consulting with the
Burlington County Division of Engineering.22 Important factors that were evaluated in selecting appropriate
County Road segments to form Primary Corridors included the speed and volume of motor vehicle traffic and
NE H
WY
County
Library
LA
NE
MT
RD
HO
Y
LL
Human
Services
Building
BY
SS
PA
ST
HIGH
MAR
OO
D
22
500 series county roadways denote inter-county roadways travelling through multiple county jurisdictions, while 600 series
roads are intra-county roadways under the sole jurisdiction of one county.
48
June 2014
the availability of sufficient space within the right-of-way for bikeway implementation.23 Special consideration
was also given to County Road segments that would allow the proposed bikeway network to build off existing
or significant proposed bikeways identified in the 2013 Burlington County Bicycle Facilities inventory.
Segments of County Roads, feasible for the implementation of bikeways, which could be linked to provide
long, uninterrupted, stretches of bikeways that effectively connected important destinations, were identified
as Primary Corridors. Sometimes, these segments could align along a single county road. An example is a
13 mile section of CR 537 stretching between Burlington Countys border with Camden County in Maple
Shade Township, through Moorestown, Mount Laurel, and Hainesport Townships, into downtown Mount
Holly. This segment of CR 537, shown in Map 21, was given a fair to favorable BLOS by DVRPC and was
deemed to have sufficient right-of-way to support the implementation of bikeways based on the SLD.
In many cases, the creation of Primary Corridors required linking roadway segments from adjoining county
roads. This could be due to many reasons. Often the most direct route between two important centers in the
county would require using multiple County Roads. In other cases, linking continuous segments of roadways
favorable to the implementation of bikeways, or providing a safe crossing at barriers to bicycle travel such as
divided highways and rivers, required aligning the corridor along different county roads. In other instances,
the Primary Corridor alignment may divert along different county roads in order to maximize linkages
between destinations identified in the Chapter 4 of this Plan. The Primary Corridor linking Willingboro to
Mount Holly, shown in Map 22, takes all of these factors into account. This primary bikeway would utilize
roadways segments along CR 635, CR 626, CR 637, CR 630 and CR 541. The alignment along Rancocas
Road (CR 626) from Bridge Street (CR 635) to Irick Road (CR 637) was decided in order to take advantage
of county road segments, suitable for bikeway implementation, which would allow bicyclists to safely cross
Rancocas Creek, I-295, and the NJ Turnpike. To the east, the alignment then proceeds on Irick Road (CR
637) and then heads eastward along Woodlane Road (CR 630). This was done to reach many of Burlington
Countys social services (County Library and Humans Services Building) that were identified by the public
and other stakeholders as desired destinations.
Trails
There are many proposed multi-use trail networks within Burlington County that entail potential projects
that could drastically improve the quality of bicycling in Burlington County. These trail networks have
the potential to act as the superhighways for bicycle travel in the county; allowing for lengthy continuous
stretches of bikeways featuring little to no interaction with motor vehicles. Much of the planning work to
develop these trial projects predates work on this Plan and have had a sizable amount of time, effort and other
resources directed towards them. The Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan has incorporated these trail
networks into its planned Primary Corridors to reflect their importance to the development of the countys
bikeway network, and to ensure the Plan builds upon the years of effort multiple organizations have devoted
to planning and implementing these ambitious projects.
The Delaware River Heritage Trail
The Delaware River Heritage Trail (DRHT) is a network of on-road and off-road bikeways that will loop
through the Delaware River waterfront communities on both sides of the river. Planning of this trail network
23
The right of way (ROW) is the width of the land allotted to maintain a public roadway. It can consist of multiple elements
including: travel lanes; medians; shoulders; sidewalks; drainage ditches; or other buffers, between the roadway and the adjoining
property line. The county prefers to install bike lanes no less than six feet wide. In other conditions bikeways other than bike lanes
could be appropriate on county roads. This will be addressed in Phase II of the Plan.
49
June 2014
dates back to 1996. The trail will be located between Philadelphias Tacony neighborhood and Morrisville
in Bucks County, on the Pennsylvania side, and between Trenton and Palmyra on the New Jersey side. The
trail will highlight many of the natural and historical highlights of this region and will pass through all of
Burlington Countys Delaware Riverfront communities.
There are approximately 25 miles of DRHT trail section proposed in Burlington County. At the time of this
Plans release, two sections have been completed.
The second completed section is the Burlington City Riverfront

Promenade, a 1.6 mile multi-use trail shown in Map 24. This trail
runs alongside the Delaware River through a waterfront park and
is accessible from downtown Burlington City and the Burlington
Town Center and Burlington South River LINE stations.
The remaining sections of the trail are planned

to run alongside the Delaware River. In the best
case scenario, the trail will feature off-road sections
granting waterfront access where land can be
acquired. In the alternative, on-road facilities
will be provided where access to the riverfront is
prohibitively difficult or impossible.
The Rancocas Greenway
The Rancocas Creek Greenway will be an off-road
trail system running largely along the southern
bank of the Rancocas Creek through Riverside
Map 24: Delaware River Heritage Trail Segments in Burlington

City
Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
Existing Off-Road
PENNSYLVANIA
413
W PEARL ST
BURLINGTON
CITY
BROAD ST
2
I
W BROAD ST
FEDERA
2
I
L ST
RIV
ER
HIGH ST
PRINCE ST
TH AVE
FARNSWOR
The first is a 2.8 mile section of trail linking Map 23: Delaware River Heritage Trail Segments in
Bordentown City, Fieldsboro and Bordentown Bordentown City
Primary Bikeway
Township, portions of which are shown in Map
Secondary Bikeway
MERCER
Existing Off-Road
23. The trail consists of new sidewalks and shared
Existing Bike Route
COUNTY
roadways, designated by sharrows and signage.
ST
RK
PA
There are also information kiosks along the
2
I
route, educating the user on the history of their
295
BORDENTOWN CITY
current location. In the north, the trail begins
CR
130
OS
in Hamilton Township, Mercer County as a six
0
SW
E
V
IC
A
ON
T
K
G
IN
S
BURL
ST
foot wide wooden bridge, seen in Figure 13, that
runs alongside the River LINE tracks across the
Crosswicks Creek and into Bordentown City
in Burlington County. The primary trail then consists of shared roadways, running through downtown
Bordentown City and heading southward, through Fieldsboro, and into Bordentown Township. There is
Figure 13: Crosswicks Creek Mul-Use Trail in also a spur of the DRHT in Bordentown City which serves a
waterfront park at the confluence of the Crosswicks Creek and
Bordentown
the Delaware River. This waterfront park functions as a trailhead
for the DRHT and includes parking, a rest area and recreational
facilities.
BA
NK
UN
ION
ST
COL
UM
BUS
ST
50
Township, where it will connect to the Delaware River

Heritage Trail, and eastward to Brendan Byrne Forest in
Southampton Township. This trail has the potential to link
many of Burlington Countys parks and natural areas in one
continuous 25 mile greenway. State, county and municipal
governments have been acquiring lands bordering the
Rancocas Creek for many years to preserve the waterfront
and the trail would primarily run through these acquired
lands, such as those seen in Figure 14. This trail provides
an excellent opportunity to link many communities in the
heavily developed northwestern section of the county, to
the Pinelands National Reserve to the east.
June 2014
Figure 14: Rancocas Pointe Trail Segment of
Rancocas Greenway in Mt. Laurel
Source: Burlington County Division of Parks
The Kinkora Trail

The Kinkora Rail Trail is a planned off-road rail-trail extending 13 miles from Mansfield Township in
northwestern Burlington County, southeastward to Pemberton Township. The trail will largely consist of
off-road multi-use trails constructed on an abandoned rail right-of-way, but will also involve some on-road
segments. The trail is proposed to link with the Delaware River Heritage Trail at its northwestern end, and
to the proposed Pemberton Rail-Trail, another Primary Corridor in this Plan, at its southeastern end. The
Kinkora Trail includes a constructed underpass of Route 130, shown in Figure 15, providing a key off-road
crossing of a roadway identified as a barrier by the public and other stakeholders. The Kinkora Trail also
provides an effective way for communities in the northwestern part of the county to access the farmland and
rural communities located to their southeast.
Figure 15: Kinkora Trail Route 130 Underpass
Source: Greater Philadelphia Bicycle Coalion
Secondary Corridors
Secondary Corridors are the segments of county road that have been identified as important linkages between
the Primary Corridors. They were identified using the same criteria employed in deciding the Primary
Corridors. The alignment process was carried out in the same manner as well.
The reasoning behind identifying specific county road segments as secondary varied. In some cases, these
51
June 2014
Secondary Corridors are of vital importance to supporting the Primary Corridors, especially in circumstances
where they bridge gaps in the Primary Corridors. In these cases, county road segments were identified as
secondary only due to concerns over feasibility and the ability to install bikeways in a timely manner. This
does not intend to diminish their value.
CH
UR
CH
The Secondary Corridors (CR 616, CR 674, and CR Map 25: Secondary Corridors Surrounding Church
618) located in the proximity of the intersection of Street and Church Road Intersecon
Primary Bikeway
Church Street (CR 607) and Church Road (CR 616)
607
Secondary Bikeway
G
H
on the border of Evesham Township and Mt. Laurel, as
seen in Map 25, provide an example of issues relating
D
R
L
IL
to feasibility affecting corridor designation. The
M
616
G
H UNION
geometry of this intersection, the current inadequate
right-of-way to install bikeways and high volume of
traffic traveling at high speeds make it unfeasible to
616 CHURCH RD
GREENTR
construct a bikeway in its current state. To bring this
G
H
EE RD
674
G
H
intersection up to the standard required to make it safe
for cycling would require a large amount of resources.
However, it should be something that is pursued in the
future, thus it is worthy of being included in this Plans
618
G
H
network recommendations. A solution could be to route
bicycle traffic along Academy Drive which circumvents
this intersection and almost completely bridges the gap between the Primary Corridors. Academy Drive is
identified as a Secondary Corridor because it falls under the jurisdiction of Mount Laurel Township and
does not provide the shortest and most direct connection between Primary Corridor bikeways. This potential
alignment of the bikeway network would require cooperation between county and municipal officials.
DE
ACA
CHURCH ST
D
R
MA
P
R
RD
FO
LE
AV
DR
MY
S BORO-M E D
EV E
In other cases, county roads were designated as Secondary Corridors because they were in areas exhibiting
lower levels of the factors that contribute to bicycle trip generation or they were not necessary to form
direct links to destinations identified by the public and other stakeholders. Cross County Connection staff
reviewed the entire network of County Roads in Burlington County. The road segments that were deemed
suitable for bikeway implementation and provided linkages between Primary Corridors were designated as
Secondary Corridors. Many of these Secondary Corridors are located in rural areas of Burlington County and
provide access to many of its smaller communities as well as areas rich in recreational biking opportunities
and valuable to agritourism such as farmland and the Pinelands National Reserve. Implementation of these
facilities is extremely important to developing a comprehensive bikeway network that meets the needs of all of
Burlington Countys residents who wish to bike.
52
June 2014
6. The Implementation Plan

This chapter of the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan is intended to provide the county guidance on
implementing 398 miles of bikeways proposed as network recommendations in Chapter 5. Prioritization
criteria were developed that scored each individual project. The prioritization scoring results were taken into
account to create a potential phasing plan for Burlington County that would guide network implementation
over the next ten or more years. The projects contained in each stage of the phasing plan are merely
recommendations. There will be a number of factors evaluated during further consideration of a proposed
project that could significantly hinder project delivery or prevent construction completely.
Prioritization Criteria
The purpose of creating prioritization criteria was to develop a methodology that could assist Burlington
County in deciding which projects are most deserving of the finite resources at their disposal. Projects are
scored based on whether or not they satisfy specific criteria and then ranked by their total score. The scoring
and ranking process promotes a more objective method to evaluate projects, compared to a process dependent
largely on perception and anecdotal evidence that could be subject to an individuals bias. However, this is not
meant to say that human judgment should be removed from the process completely. The prioritization criteria
can only address so many factors and may not provide a complete picture of conditions on the ground.
Prioritization criteria are divided into two categories utility and feasibility.
Utility Criteria
Utility criteria are meant to address conditions that indicate an individual projects ability to enhance the
usefulness of the bikeway network. These criteria are dedicated largely to measuring a proposed bikeways
connectivity to people, places and things. The criteria selected are meant to encapsulate the diverse setting of
Burlington County a place that contains swaths of sparsely populated forests, densely populated small cities
and everything in between.
Feasibility Criteria
Feasibility criteria identify a projects relative ease of implementation. Projects with high feasibility scores
should require the least investment of resources, while low scores indicate which projects may require the
largest investment of time, energy and funding to implement. The feasibility criteria identify the low hanging
fruit, or projects that can be an easy win in Burlington Countys efforts to expand bikeway network mileage.
When a projects feasibility score is taken into account with its utility score, county staff will also be able to
identify important projects that may require a large amount of resources, but are still worth pursuing.
On-road and off-road projects employ different criteria to measure their feasibility, due to the distinctive
nature of the factors affecting their ease of implementation. The process of installing asphalt paths in
environmentally sensitive areas can be very different than striping bike lanes within an existing roadway.
The utility and feasibility criteria employed in the prioritization process, and the scores associated with each
individual criterion, are shown in Table 11. For a more detailed description of the prioritization criteria, refer
to Appendix E.
53
June 2014
Table 11 - Project Priorizaon Criteria

UTILITY -100 maximum points
Criteria
Measure
Scoring
Population density
Population rate per square mile
1 - 5 points
Zero car households
Rate of households with zero cars
1 - 5 points
Current levels of bicycling
Rate of adults commuting to work via

bicycle
1 - 5 points
Economically insecure population
Rate of population within 150% of the

poverty line
1 - 5 points
Connection to an existing bikeway
Does the project connect to an existing

bikeway?
10 points
Connection to a proposed municipal

bikeway
Does the project connect to a proposed

municipal bikeway?
5 points
Connection to regional trail networks or

bike tour
Is the project part or of, or connect to, a 5 points

regional, state or county bike tour or trail
Connection to employment opportunity
Projects proximity to office/industrial

park, hospital
5 points if within 1 mile

10 points if within 1/2 mile
Connection to a county or municipal

park
Projects proximity to a county or

municipal park over a acre?
5 points if within a 1/4 mile
Connection to an agritourism
destination
Does the project connect to a farmers

market, winery, or pick your own farm
5 points
Connection to a school or college
Projects proximity to an elementary,

middle, high school; or a college

10 points if within 1/2 mile
Connection to a walkable town center
Proximity to a Town Center identified

by DVRPC
5 points if within 1 mile of town center
Connection to a bus stop
Proximity to a NJ TRANSIT or BurLink 5 points if within a 1/4 mile

bus stop
Connection to a train station
Proximity to a NJ TRANSIT train

station

Overcomes a physical barrier to bicycling Located in an area identified in Section 4 5 points

(river, highway, etc.)
of this Plan
Safety
Location of a bicycle crash between

2008-2012
5 points
Measure
Scoring
Suitability for bike lanes
BLOS Score from DVRPC Burlington

County Bicycle Level of Service Study
0 - 15 points
Identified in County Road Resurfacing

Plan
Project on roads in Countys Two Year

Resurfacing Plan
0 - 10 points
Located within county owned property

(open space or parks)
The length of the project located within

county owned parks or open space
0 - 10 points
Potential to require environmental

permitting
Project located outside an

environmentally sensitive area?
10 points
Presence of an existing feature

appropriate for trail development
Project located along abandoned rail

5 points
corridor, utility right-of-way or dirt road?
FEASIBILITY- 25 maximum points

Criteria
On-road projects only
Off-road projects only
54
June 2014
Prioritization Scoring Results

The maximum potential score for a project is 125 points (100 points for utility and 25 for feasibility).
However, the chance of one project satisfying every criterion and reaching this score would be extremely
difficult. Again, this is largely a result of the prioritization criterias attempt to capture the diverse setting of
Burlington County, and highlight the relative strengths of its rural, suburban and urban areas.
Cross County Connection developed a computer model to score each project using Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) software. After evaluating this Plans proposed bikeways, the resulting project prioritization
scores ranged between 16 and 79. A table summarizing the utility, feasibility and total score of each project
can be seen in Appendix E. A map illustrating the proposed bikeway network additions and their associated
Project Prioritization Score are shown in Map 26.
The results of the project prioritization scoring, and the subsequent ranking of individual projects, are meant
to serve as guidelines for selecting projects for implementation. The factors resulting in the score may change
over time due to shifting priorities or conditions. Burlington County staff should reassess this ranking every
few years to account for changing realities on the ground.
55
June 2014
Map 26: Project Priorizaon Scoring Results

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
PALMYRA BORO
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
130
FLORENCE TWP
130
MAPLE SHADE TWP
(
'
&
%
BURLINGTON TWP
DELRAN TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
295
PIKE
URN
NJ T
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MERCER
COUNTY
CHESTERFIELD TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
(
'
&
%
206
295
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
38
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
73
NEW HANOVER TWP

PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
70
206
72
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Proposed Bikeways
Project Prioritization Score
16 - 31
LOW
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
32 - 44
BASS RIVER TWP
45 - 54
55 - 65
66 - 79
0
2.5
HIGH
5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
56
June 2014
The Phasing Plan

The Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan is intended to guide the development of the countys bikeway
network over the next ten or more years. To assist county staff with effectively implementing the network
recommendations in an effective and coherent manner, a multi-stage phasing plan has been developed based
upon an evaluation the Project Prioritization Criteria scoring results. The goal is to develop an implementation
strategy where each successive stage of the plan logically builds off of the network improvements contained in
the previous stages.
The Phasing Plan consists of four stages:
1.
The Immediate Plan
2.
The Short-Term Plan
3.
The Medium-Term Plan
4.
The Long-Term Plan.
The early stages of the Phasing Plan seek to mix the cost effective low-hanging fruit types of projects with
projects that have high utility scores and may require a large amount of resources to implement. The later are
projects with a high utility score, indicating the proposed bikeways importance to the countywide network,
but the presence of a low feasibility score indicates significant work may be necessary to make the project
construction ready. This requires beginning the implementation process sooner, rather than later, in order to
construct the bikeways most beneficial to local bicyclists, at an early stage of the Plan. This maximizes limited
county resources and lays the foundation for the completed bikeway network envisioned in this Plan.
The later stages of the Phasing Plan contain lower utility projects and projects that, at the present time, will
likely take many years to become construction ready, even if steps towards their implementation are taken
immediately.
The projects contained in each stage of the implementation plan are simply recommendations. Priorities and
factors affecting the rate of implementation will vary over time. These variations could make it beneficial to
construct certain projects at either an earlier, or later, stage of the Phasing Plan than it is currently assigned.
Again, it is possible that certain engineering or safety concerns could become apparent upon further detailed
analysis that either prevent bikeway construction, or identify barriers to construction that could take
significant time to overcome.
The Immediate Plan
Immediate Plan projects should be targeted for implementation within next two years. These include projects
located on roads scheduled for repaving within the next two years and that, in their present condition, appear
to be suitable to provide some form of bikeway. In some cases, this could simply entail providing sharrow
pavement markings and/or signage. In other cases, it could entail the striping of bike lanes. This stage of
the plan also includes projects connected to roads identified in the Burlington County resurfacing plan that
would benefit from immediate county action.
A limited number of off-road projects are also included in the Immediate Plan. These projects appear to be
construction ready and would require the final step of paving a shared use path.
The projects contained in the Immediate Plan are shown in Map 27.
57
June 2014
Map 27: The Immediate Plan

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
PALMYRA BORO
MERCER
COUNTY
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
DELRAN TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Proposed Bikeways
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
Implementation Phase
Immediate Plan
All Other Phases
Existing Bikeways
0
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
58
June 2014
The Short-Term Plan

The Short-Term Plan contains projects with high overall prioritization scores, in addition to projects with
high feasibility scores that provide additional network connectivity and fill in network gaps between projects
implemented during the Immediate Phase and/or currently existing bikeways.
The Short Term Plan also contains a number of projects that are part of the Delaware River Heritage Trail and
Rancocas Greenway trail networks, identified as primary corridors in Chapter 5. While there are a number
of facilities included in this early stage of implementation, many projects, especially those that are part of the
trail networks, are located along residential streets that would require minimal infrastructure improvements
beyond providing wayfinding signage and perhaps painting sharrow pavement markings. These types of
projects would require cooperation with municipal partners, and communication should be started at the
earliest stages of the project implementation process.
The projects contained in the Short-Term Plan can be seen in Map 28, building upon the existing county
bikeway network and the projects included as part of the Immediate Plan.
59
June 2014
Map 28: The Short-Term Plan

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
PALMYRA BORO
MERCER
COUNTY
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
DELRAN TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Proposed Bikeways
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
Immediate Plan
Short-Term Plan
Other Phases
Existing Bikeways
0
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
60
June 2014
The Medium-Term Plan

The Medium-Term Plan consists of a mixture of medium priority projects; projects with relatively a high
utility score, but with a low feasibility score; and projects that fill in important network gaps remaining after
the implementation of the Immediate and Short Term Plans.
At this stage of the Implementation Plan, Burlington Countys Bikeway network really begins to take a
cohesive form. Many of the countys most densely populated areas are linked together. Connections from these
populated areas into the scenic rural and forested portions of the county are also established. Additionally,
many of the county trail networks and other primary corridors begin to take a cohesive form.
Many of these projects will require a considerable amount of time and resources to become construction
ready. Work should begin as soon as possible to bring these projects to construction ready status within the
next five to ten years.
The projects contained in the Medium-Term Plan can be seen in Map 29, building upon the existing county
bikeway network and the projects contained in the Immediate and Short-Term Plans.
61
June 2014
Map 29: The Medium-Term Plan

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
PALMYRA BORO
MERCER
COUNTY
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
DELRAN TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Proposed Bikeways
Immediate Plan
Short-Term Plan
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
Medium-Term Plan
Other Phases
Existing Bikeways
0
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
62
June 2014
The Long-Term Plan

The Long-Term Plan consists of: low priority projects; medium priority projects that fill network gaps
remaining after implementation of the Medium-Term Plan; medium priority projects with relatively low
feasibility scores; and high priority projects with considerable feasibility concerns.
Some of these low priority projects score high in terms of feasibility, but low in utility. These projects could
be implemented much sooner, but they are not vital to creating network connections in the early stages of
this Implementation Plan. Other low priority projects have both low utility and feasibility scores, and should
only be explored further if factors change enough to warrant reevaluation.
Work could begin immediately to implement projects contained in this stage of the Implementation Plan
with high utility scores, but low feasibility scores. Their placement in this Long-Term plan simply indicates
that it appears that many years of work are required to bring these projects up to a construction ready status.
Of course, conditions may change that could shorten the timeline on project delivery.
The projects contained in the Long-Term Plan can be seen in Map 30, building upon the existing county
bikeway network and the projects contained in the Immediate, Short-Term, and Medium-Term Plans.
63
June 2014
Map 30: The Long-Term Plan

BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
PALMYRA BORO
MERCER
COUNTY
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
DELRAN TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
Proposed Bikeways
Immediate Plan
Short-Term Plan
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
BASS RIVER TWP
Medium-Term Plan
Long-Term Plan
Existing Bikeways
0
2.5
10 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
64
June 2014
7. The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit

The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit provides a brief overview of the best practices in bicycle facility design
currently in use throughout the United States. In other words, it highlights many of the tools at Burlington
Countys disposal to develop a high quality environment for bicycling that is safe, convenient and attractive to
both existing and potential bicyclists. The Toolkit is provided for information only.
The Toolkits Content & Purpose

The standards, dimensions, and applications contained in this The AASHTO Guide
toolkit are based on a review of the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities, 2012, Fourth Edition24 and National
Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban
Bikeway Design Guide, April 2011 Edition25 and the Federal Highway
Administrations Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009
Edition (MUTCD).26 All publications are approved as standards for
bikeway design by the U.S. Department of Transportations Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA).27 However, this does NOT mean
The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit should be considered an officially
sanctioned, or approved, engineering guide for the design of bicycle
facilities. All engineering decisions regarding the design of bikeways
and bicycle supportive facilities should be made by a licensed engineer
and only after consulting the FHWA approved guides.
The Toolkit is intended for multiple audiences in Burlington County. Source: www.tooledesign.com
The public can learn about new and innovative bikeways and design
practices occurring throughout the United States and request similar accommodations for bicyclists in their
community. Elected officials, and other decision makers, can use The Toolkit to educate themselves in order
to have informed and productive discussions with transportation engineers and other project designers. And
local planners, engineers and other design professionals can use The Toolkit to identify potential bikeway
and supportive facility design treatments at the earliest stages of the project design process. Project designers
should then formulate specific questions and concerns, related to the projects context, which should then be
explored using the federally accepted AASHTO, NACTO and MUTCD guides (as amended) mentioned
above.
Bikeway Facility Selection and the Four Types of Cyclists
When designing a bikeway network it is important to keep in mind the various types of individuals that will
potentially use it. This includes not only people who are currently bicycling on a regular basis, but those who
may decide to embrace the bicycle as a means of everyday transportation, if provided a safe and convenient
24
https://bookstore.transportation.org/collection_detail.aspx?ID=116
http://nacto.org/cities-for-cycling/design-guide/
26
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/
27
Some treatments contained in these guides are considered experimental. To inquire as to their official status according to the
FHWA, consult http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_guidance/mutcd_bike.cfm
25
65
June 2014
means to do so. A successful bikeway network is one that appeals to the widest range of the population as
possible. This includes men and women of all ages and abilities, whether they are eight or eighty years old.
Portland, Oregons Office of Transportation developed a useful categorization that is informative when
visualizing the potential range of bicyclists for whom you are designing a bikeway network. They classify
the general population into four categories based on their attitudes towards bicycling, as described in Table
12. This classification method has become an accepted industry standard and is widely referred to in bicycle
planning documents, literature and academic journals.28
Table 12: The Four Types of Cyclists
Cyclists Type
Description
Strong and fearless
Bicyclists who are comfortable riding practically anywhere,

including busy streets with high speed limits where no bike
lanes are provided.
Enthused and confident
Bicyclists that are comfortable riding on busy streets equipped

with a bike lane or wide shoulders, as well as with traffic on
moderately busy streets with lower speeds.
Interested but concerned
Bicyclists who occasionally ride on off-road trails or low volume

neighborhood streets. These are the types of bicyclists who
enjoy riding a bike on the boardwalk during vacation or taking
a leisurely ride in their neighborhood, but do not feel safe
riding near traffic on busy streets and are hesitant to use the
bicycle on a consistent basis.
No way no how
Individuals who do not currently ride a bicycle or do not

foresee themselves doing so in the future due to lack of interest
or inability to do so.
The Four Types of Cyclists categorization is effective because, it not only focuses on the segment of the
population currently biking, but includes the much larger segment of the population who do not regularly
use a bicycle. By focusing on attitudes to biking, and not just experience, this categorization identifies the
untapped market potential for bicycling represented by the Interested but Concerned type of cyclist.
In order to get the most out of investments directed Interested but concerned cyclists?
towards developing a bikeway network, it should include
facilities that appeal to this largely untapped market of
individuals open to biking more regularly. This portion of
the populations greatest concern is often the perception
of safety; more specifically, interacting with high volume
and high speed automobile traffic. Portland found that
60% of the citys population fell into the Interested but
Concerned category, but often selected other modes of
Source: www.wildwoodsnj.com
travel due to safety concerns.29
While the population of Burlington County has never been surveyed to determine what percentage of the
28
Dill, Jennifer & McNeil, Nathan. (2012). Four Types of Cyclists? Examining a Typology to Better Understand Bicycling
Behavior and Potential. Retrieved from http://docs.trb.org/prp/13-5213.pdf
29
Geller, Roger. (2009). Four Types of Cyclists. Portland Office of Transportation. Retrieved from http://www.portlandoregon.
gov/transportation/article/237507
66
June 2014
population falls into the Interested but Concerned category, it can be assumed that safety is a primary
consideration of many Burlington County residents when choosing to bike, based on many of the issues
raised by the public that are discussed in Chapter 4 of this Plan. Bikeway types and supportive facilities should
be selected with this consideration in mind in order to maximize the effectiveness of Burlington Countys
bikeway network.
Toolkit Contents and Terms
In order to be brief and informative, The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit will focus on just a few key items.
General Description A general overview of the facility and its most distinguishable attributes.
Minimum Features The features required for each facility type to function adequately. Includes features
such as width, height and materials, etc.
Recommended Features The features required to design the facility to operate in an optimal manner. These
features should be incorporated whenever possible, if appropriate within context of the project.
Typical Applications The types of situation where each facility type is appropriate. This is often based on
location, traffic patterns, motor vehicle traffic volume and speed, and the estimated volume of bicyclists.
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT), a measure used to estimate traffic volume, is often a key factor in the
bikeway facility selection process. AADT measures the average number of motor vehicles using a road per day.
The distinction between low volume roads and high volume roads is relative. In Burlington County, a typical
residential street may have an AADT under 1,000 while an interstate will have an AADT above 100,000.30
Estimated costs Cost estimates contained in The Toolkit are rough estimates that, for the most part,
take into account material costs only. They do not include the costs of labor, planning, design, property
acquisition or other associated tasks such as curb removal, grading, and clearing vegetation. Of course all of
these activities will often be associated with implementing bikeways. These factors will be considered when
estimating engineering costs on a project-by-project basis, commonly done when developing the county
Capital Improvement Plan. Burlington County Staff will expend all efforts to secure grant money to cover
these costs. Potential grant resources are detailed in Chapter 10, Funding Sources.
For the purposes of The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit, it is most useful to compare each facility in terms
of relative costs for associated materials, since the specifics of each project are unknown at the master
planning stage. Whenever possible, these costs will be represented in a per linear mile figure, but intersections
treatments, signage and supportive infrastructure will most often be reported as per unit costs.
Project costs were determined by consulting with local engineers familiar with the material costs associated
with implementing bikeways,31 consulting cost estimates contained in other bicycle master plans32 and using
cost databases that track project construction bids throughout the nation.33
Appendix F provides further detail on developing cost estimates for each bikeway type and the associated
formulas.
30
To see the AADT of numerous roads in Burlington County as a reference point, consult http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/
refdata/roadway/traffic_counts/ which contains the results of NJDOT traffic studies throughout the state.
31
A special thanks to William Schreefer at CME Associates for his assistance.
32
http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Spokane_ComprehensivePlan_Apx_11.2.pdf
33
http://katana.hsrc.unc.edu/cms/downloads/Countermeasure%20Costs_Report_Nov2013.pdf
67
June 2014
Candidates Potential projects contained in this plan that may be appropriate for each bikeway design
treatment based on a cursory review of roadway details. These are not intended to represent formal design
recommendations, but merely options subject to further consideration during future studies or the early
stages of project design.
The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit is divided into four sections, as follows:
On-Road Bikeways
Off-Road Bikeways
Intersections
Supportive Infrastructure.
68
June 2014
On-Road Bikeways
On-road bikeways are designed to facilitate safe and convenient travel for bicyclists on roadways. A bicyclist
will often find the existing street network the most convenient transportation system to reach desired
destinations. However, a bicyclist has different mobility needs than a motorist, which may require some
form of accommodation to provide for their safety and ease of movement. Depending on the prevailing
conditions of the roadway, these accommodations can be as simple as providing signs alerting motorists to
the presence of bicyclists, or in some cases, may require physical separation within the roadway between
motor vehicle and bicycle traffic. Bikeways covered include:
Shared roads
Bike lanes
Protected bike lanes, also knows as cycle-tracks.
All of these treatments are designed specifically for the needs of on-road bicyclists (and the motorists
interacting with them), unlike off-road bikeways covered later, which must be designed to accommodate
pedestrians and disabled users as well.
69
June 2014
SHARED ROADS
SHARED LANE
A method used to designate preferred routes
for bicycle traffic. Often employ pavement
markings(sharrows)and signs to alert motorists
to the presence of bicyclists and to provide
wayfinding assistance for the cyclists traveling
between desired destinations.
Minimum Features: Share the Road or Bike
Route signs
Recommended Features: Signage paired with
wayfinding guidance and sharrow pavement
markings every 250 ft. Sharrows should be
placed at least 4 ft. from the curbface if no
curbside parking provided; 11 ft. if curbside
parking provided.
Bike route with wayfinding

Source: Cross County Connection TMA
Sharrow placed outside the doorzone in Ocean City, NJ

Candidates:
Main St., Medford Twp.
(Project ID# 3)
High St., Burlington City
(Project ID# 31)
Typical Applications: Preferably on low volume

roads ( 3000 AADT) with travel speeds 25
mph. May be used on low volume roads with
travel speeds 35 mph if space constraints rule
out bike lanes.
Lincoln Ave.,
Edgewater Park Twp.
(Project ID# 62)
Railroad Ave.,
Eastampton Twp.
(Project ID# 81)
Estimated Costs: $200 per sign; $250 per

sharrow ($11,000 per linear mile if placed on
both sides of the street every 250 ft.)
Bike route designated by signage and pavement markings
Source:2012 NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide
BICYCLE BOULEVARD
Continuous stretches of shared roads that give
priority to bicycle travel by removing frequent
stopping. Should ideally provide direct
linkages to desired destinations.
Minimum Features: Signs and pavements
markings identifying the corridor as a bicycle
blvd.
Recommended Features: Wayfinding
guidance on reaching desired destinations.
Traffic calming and diversion methods that
limit the volume of motor vehicle traffic 3000
AADT and bring speeds 25 mph (15-20 mph
preferred). Set speed limit at 15 or 20 mph.
Bicycle blvd. with 15 mph speed limit and traffic calming

in Ocean City, NJ
Traffic diversion to prioritize bicycl through traffic

Source: oregonlive.com
Candidates:
Academy Dr., Mt.
Laurel Twp. (Project
ID# 170)
Typical Applications: Low volume residential

streets with travel speeds 25 mph. Often
located in proximity to major thoroughfares to
provide a safe, low-stress alternative to roads
with a high volume of motor vehicle traffic.
Riverton Rd., Riverton

Borough (Project ID#
181)
Polk St., Riverside Twp.
(Project ID# 220)
Estimated Costs: Variable depending on

many factors including use of traffic calming
and diversion techniques.
American Legion Dr.,

Riverside Twp. (Project
ID# 221)
Bicycle blvd. with traffic calming and a 20 mph speed limit
Source: 2012 NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide
70
June 2014
BIKE LANES
STANDARD BIKE LANE
Bike lanes are marked by striping, signs and
pavement markings for the exclusive use of
bicyclists. They allow bicyclists to travel at their
own pace, removed from motor vehicle traffic
and facilitate more predictable interactions
with motorists.
Minimum Features: 5 ft. min. width when
adjacent to a curb or parking. 4 ft. min. width
if no curb or parking present.
Recommended Features: 6 ft. preferred when
alongside high traffic volume or parking.
Provides more comfort and the ability to avoid
obstacles such as car doors. Ideally, bike lanes
should be placed outside the door zone. 7-8
ft. bike lanes allow bicyclist to ride side-by-side
and preferred where there is a high volume of
bicyclists, but could lead to illegal parking.
Bike lane with no curbline or parking

Candidates:
W. Main St., Maple
Shade Twp. (Project
ID# 17)
South Ave., Mt. Holly
Twp. (Project ID# 113)
Bridgeboro St.,
Riverside Twp. (Project
ID# 185)
Typical Applications: Roads with travel speed

between 25-35 mph and 3,000 AADT. Usually,
located to the right of motor vehicle traffic
and flow in the same direction. On some oneway streets, bike lanes may be located to the
left or flow in the opposite direction of traffic.1
Estimated Costs: $14,500 per linear mile
1
Bike lane next to parking with the door zone marked

Source: bikepedimages.org - Dan Burden
Pemberton-Browns
Mills Rd., Pemberton
Wider bike lane with room to avoid obstacles
See NACTO or AASHTO guides for more details.
BUFFERED BIKE LANE

Buffered bike lanes are fitted with an
additional painted buffer between bicyclists
and motor vehicle traffic and/or parking.
Provides additional passing (or shy) distance
between bicyclists and motor vehicles,
contributing to an increased sense of security.
Allows bicyclists to ride side-by-side or pass
each other, without encroaching into the
adjacent travel lane or the door zone, but
lack the drawback of appearing to be a
parking lane like 7-8 ft. bike lanes.
Buffered bike lane with room to pass in Philadelphia

Source: Kyle Gradinger - Flickr
Buffered bike lane next to parking in Ocean City, NJ

Candidates:
Minimum Features: 6-7 ft. total bike lane width.

2 ft. buffer marked with two solid white lines
paired with 4-5 ft. bike lane.
Stokes Rd., Medford

Recommended Features: 8-10 ft. total bike

lane width. 3 ft. buffer, with diagonal or
chevron internal striping, paired with 5-7 ft.
bike lane. 7 ft. bike lane preferred where
bicyclist volumes high.
Camden Ave.,
Moorestown Twp.
(Project ID# 16)
Typical Applications: Same as standard bike

lanes, but conditions such as traffic speed
and volume make additional separation
preferable for most bicyclists.
Jacksonville Rd.,
Burlington Twp.
(Project ID# 141)
Estimated costs: $21,000 per linear mile
High St., Burlington City

(Project ID# 31)
A buffered bike lane next to parking

Church Rd., Mt. Laurel

Twp. (Project ID 172)
71
June 2014
PROTECTED BIKE LANES (Cycle-tracks)

ONE WAY CYCLE-TRACK
Bike lanes that use a physical barrier
to provide the comfort and perceived
safety of an off-road path, but with lower
implementation costs, since they are built
within an existing roadway. The physical
barrier also removes threat of illegal parking.
Minimum Features: 5 ft. bike lane paired with
a physical barrier. Common barriers used
include: bollards; on-street parking; curbs;
raised medians; or planters. In absence of a
curb or raised median, a min. 3 ft. painted
buffer featuring a barrier should be provided.
Removable bollards are commonly used to
alleviate snow removal concerns.
Cycle-track separated by bollards and parking lane

Source: Bike Belong - Flickr
A raised cycle-track separated by a parking buffer

and a curb in Ocean City, NJ
Candidates:
Marlton Parkway,
Evesham Twp. (Retrofit
of existing bikeway)
Recommended Features: Bike lanes should

be at least 7 ft. in areas with high bicyclists
volumes. Motor vehicle traffic crossing
the cycle track should be constrained or
channelized to make turns at sharp angles to
reduce travel speed prior to the crossing.
Typical Applications: Roads where bike lanes
are insufficient to alleviate bicyclists stress
associated with high traffic volumes, high
speed traffic, or high parking turnover.
Marne Hwy.,
Hainesport Twp. and
Moorestown Twp.
(Project ID# 11)
Church St., Mt. Laurel
Twp.(Project ID # 19)
River Rd., Florence
Using planters placed in the painted buffer as barrier
Estimated Costs: $84,000 per linear mile
TWO WAY CYCLE-TRACK

Cycle-tracks designed to accommodate twoway bicycle traffic on one side of the road, or
in a median. Often placed at street level, but
can be a raised cycle-track.1 Provides the
experience of a multi-use trail, but with lower
implementation costs if utilizing a roadways
existing pavement and drainage.
Minimum Features: Same as a one-way cycletrack, but with an 8 ft. bike lane, divided by
a dashed yellow center-line to separate twoway traffic. Additional considerations required
at conflict areas (driveways and cross streets)
to advise motorists of two-way bicycle traffic.
Two-way cycle-track in a suburban context

Source: Bikes Belong - Flickr
A two-way raised cycle-track

Candidates:
US 130, Florence Twp.
(Project ID# 51)
Recommended Features: 12 ft. bike lane with

dashed yellow center-line and a physical
barrier.
Broad St., Riverton

Borough (Project ID#
70)
Typical Applications: To connect with another

two-way facility on the same side of the
road, or where there is insufficient space to
provide two one-way cycle-tracks. Preferred
in locations with few driveways or cross streets.
Creek Rd.,
Moorestown Twp.
(Project ID 76)
Estimated costs: $46,000 per linear mile

Raised cycle-tracks are elevated above street level to create
separation, but distinguished from sidewalks in some manner
(height, color, street furniture). Raised treatment can also be
used with one-way cycle-tracks.
Two-way cycle-track featuring high visibility paint in conflict areas

72
June 2014
Intersections
Intersections are often the most dangerous part of the roadway for a bicyclist. They are the site of a majority
of conflicts with motorists, as they often lack accommodations for bicyclists. As noted in Section 3 of this
Plan, 52% of reported crashes involving a bicycle within Burlington County, between 2008 and 2012, were
located at intersections. Bicyclists are often less noticeable at an intersection than motor vehicles due to their
smaller size and tendency to ride along the periphery.
Accommodations for bicyclists provided at intersections should minimize conflict between motorists and
bicyclist, as well as with other vulnerable road users such as pedestrians. This can be done by designing
facilities that improve a bicyclists visibility, facilitate eye contact between all road users and denote a clear,
logical, direct path for bicycle traffic through the intersection.
These accommodations will vary based on bikeway type, the volume of both bicycle and motor vehicle traffic,
the types of vehicle turning movements, whether there are intersecting bikeways, as well as other various
factors. Intersection treatments can range from simply providing guidance through signage and pavement
markings, to more advanced treatments such as the use of specialized or dedicated signals to coordinate the
distinct movements of motorists and bicyclists. Treatments covered here include:
Bike boxes
Two stage turn boxes
Through bike lanes
Combined turn lanes.
Signal heads and pavement markings commonly used at intersections, are discussed in more detail later in
The Toolkit, under Supportive Infrastructure.
73
June 2014
INTERSECTION TREATMENTS
BIKE BOX
Designated area placed ahead of queuing
motor vehicle traffic at signalized intersections.
Increases a bicyclists visibility, facilitates left
turning movements and alleviates right hook
conflicts. Allows bicyclists to clear intersections
faster, reducing their impediment to motor
vehicle traffic.
Minimum Features: 10-16 ft. deep box,
featuring an advanced stop line advising
motorists where they are required to stop
and a bike symbol (MUTCD 9C-3A or 9C-3B)
designating the space for the use of bicyclists.
A green bike box

Source: Green Lane Project - Flickr
A bike box for left turning and straight bicycle traffic

Source: Curtis Ailes - Flickr
Candidates:
Washington St.
intersections with High
St. & Madison Ave., Mt.
Holly Twp. (Project ID#
10, 22, 79)
Recommended Features: Colored pavement

to encourage motorists compliance. A
designated ingress point to allow bicyclist
access. A No Turn on Red restriction to
prevent motorists encroachment. Yield to
Bikes signage to reinforce a bicyclists right of
way through the intersection.
Main St. intersections

with Chester Ave
& Church St.,
Moorestown Twp.
(Project ID# 14, 15, 19,
180)
Typical Applications: Signalized intersections

with multiple turning movements and/or
where a bicyclist may turn left to access an
intersecting bikeway.
Estimated costs: Varies ($5,000 - $10,000)
depending on materials used
Church St. & Church

Rd. intersections with
Academy Dr., Mt.
Laurel Twp. (Project
ID# 19, 170, 172)
Advanced stop line and bike box

TWO STAGE TURN BOXES

Provide a safe method of making left turns
on multi-lane roadways, where it would be
dangerous for bicyclist to merge into traffic
from bikeways located to the right side of
traffic (or vice versa). Positioned to the left, or
right, of the bikeway to avoid conflicts with
bicycle through traffic.
Minimum Features: A box, designated with a
bike symbol, large enough to hold queuing
bicyclists and located in an area protected
from motor vehicle traffic (within an on-street
parking lane or between the bike lane and
crosswalk).
Two stage turn box set to the right of a bike lane

Two stage turn box set to the left of a cycle-track in the

parking lane
Candidates:
Hainesport-Mt. Laurel
Evesboro-Medford Rd.,
Evesham Twp. (Project
ID# 18, 177)

to define the exclusive bicycle space.
Typical Applications: At T-intersections to
facilitate a jug-handle turn. Has been used at
signalized non T-intersections of high volume
and/or high speed roads and at mid-block
crossings to orient bicyclists properly to cross
safely. Also, used with cycle-tracks that
prevent bicycles from merging with traffic in
order to turn.
Estimated costs: Varies ($5,000 -$6,000) based
on materials used and context of intersection
Bridgeboro Rd.
intersection with
Riverton Rd. & Chester
Ave., Moorestown
Twp. (Project ID# 180,
181, 186)
A turn box set outside the flow of bike, pedestrian and automobile traffic
74
June 2014
THROUGH BIKE LANE

Correctly position bicyclist to the left of right
turning vehicles to avoid right hook crashes.
Uses pavement markings and signage to
guide bicyclist along a preferred path and
alert motorists to yield to bicycles. Identifies
the appropriate location for motorists to safely
merge across the bike lane into the turn lane.
Minimum Features: A transition area, 4-6 ft.
wide, beginning at least 50 ft. before the
intersection, marked with dashed lines to
designate the merge area. Should begin
100 ft. before the intersection along high
speed/volume roads. Bike symbol and arrow
pavement markings used to define the bike
lane and provide guidance to the bicyclist.
A through bike lane dashed in conflict zones

Sign advising right turning vehicles to yield to bikes

Source: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Candidates:
Sunset Rd. intersection
with Rancocas Rd.,
Willingboro Twp.
(Project ID# 41, 208)

and signage to reinforce yielding to bicycles.
Mill St. intersection with

High St., Mt. Holly Twp.
(Project ID# 9, 22)
Typical Applications: At intersections with

a right turn lane and a right-side bike lane
where bicyclists may be expected to continue
straight. Should not be used at intersections
with multiple right turn lanes or where a travel
lane transitions to a turn only lane.1
Estimated costs: Varies widely depending on
materials used and context of intersection.
1
A through bike lane marked with high visibility paint in conflict area
See NACTO or AASHTO guides for options
Currently used in
Burlington County.
For examples see
Evesboro-Medford
N. Elmwood Rd.,
Greenbrook Dr. &
Carlton Ave., Evesham
Twp.
COMBINED TURN LANE

Places a suggested bike lane within the inside
portion of a dedicated turn lane. Provides
similar benefits as a through bike lane for
intersections that lack the width to install one.
Minimum Features: The combined turn lane
should be 9-13 ft., with a suggested bike
lane at least 4 ft. wide. Suggested bike lane
designated using a dashed line paired with a
bike symbol pavement marking. Sharrows may
also be used in the alternative
Combined turn lane with advisory signage in Evesham

Twp.
Mixing zone lane exiting a cycle-track using sharrows

Recommended Features: Signage advising

motorist to yield to bikes and that through
bicycle traffic may use the right turn lane.
Candidates:
Camden Ave.
intersection with Lenola
Rd., Moorestown Twp.
(Project ID# 16, 179)
Typical Applications: Intersections with a

right turn lane where limited space rules out
providing a through bike lane. To create a
mixing zone for bicycle traffic exiting a cycletrack, where a separate bicycle signal phase
is not feasible. Not recommended where a
high volume of right turning motor vehicle
traffic is anticipated.
Estimated costs: Varies depending on
materials used and context of the intersection.
Tuckerton Rd.
intersection with
Taunton Blvd., Medford
Twp. (Project Id# 163,
166)
A mixing zone featuring sharrows and a sharp merging angle

Currently used in
Burlington County. For
examples see Marlton
Pkwy. intersections
with Sagemore Dr. and
Evans Rd, Evesham
Twp.
75
June 2014
Off-Road Bikeways
Off-road bikeways allow bicyclists to travel with limited interaction with motor vehicle traffic. Off-road
bikeways can be located alongside river and ocean fronts; active or abandoned rail corridors; or, within parks
and open space. In some cases, off-road paths run alongside roads, or even highways. Off-road bikeways can
be linked together to create linear trail corridors referred to as greenways.
Off-road bikeways are often the most attractive facilities to the widest range of bicyclists. They are often
the preferred facility for children, and inexperienced bicyclists, uncomfortable with interacting with motor
vehicle traffic. They are separated from motor vehicle traffic by either a physical barrier of open space
and most often take the form of the shared use paths. Shared use paths differ from cycle-tracks, covered
previously, because they are designed for the use of pedestrians, and other types of non-motorized uses, in
addition to bicyclists. Since shared use paths are intended for use by pedestrians, and not just bicyclists, they
fall under accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Additionally, if an offroad path is located in an environmentally sensitive area, it may be subject to a rigorous permitting process.
Shared use paths are often referred to as trails, but this term can apply to a much broader group of off-road
facilities. Trails can also refer to unimproved or gravel paths that are only suitable to specific types of bicycles,
such as mountain bikes. In other instances, trails may not be suitable or intended for bicycle use at all. This
section will only discuss paved shared use paths. These include:
Multi-use paths
Sidepaths
76
June 2014
SHARED USE PATHS

MULTI-USE PATHS
Bikeways physically separated from motor
vehicle traffic by a buffer or barrier. Typically
permit two-way bicycle traffic and may be
shared with pedestrians, in-line skaters, etc.
Minimum Features: 8 ft. min. width to allow
two-way traffic. Acceptable in areas with low
peak hour bicycle volume, pedestrian use is
occasional or where space is constrained. 8
ft. min. vertical clearance required. A graded
shoulder at least 2 ft. wide should be provided
on either side of the trail.
Recommended Features: 10-14 ft. preferred.
11 ft. required to allow a pedestrian and two
bicyclists passing in opposite directions to
safely use the path. Larger widths preferred
where volumes are anticipated to be higher.
Striping to segregate uses may be helpful in
high-use areas. 10 ft. vertical clearance and a
graded shoulder between 3-5 ft. preferred.
A multi-use path along an independent right of way in

Wildwood Crest, NJ
Source: Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia
A typical multi-use path cross-section
Segregated Uses along a high volume trail in North

Wildwood, NJ
Candidates:
Louis Kite Field,
Edgewater Park Twp.
(Project ID# 60)
Rancocas State Park
Trail, Westampton Twp.
and Hainesport Twp.
(Project ID# 78)
Mt. Holly to Pemberton
Rail Trail, Eastampton
Typical Applications: Independent rights-ofway removed from motor vehicle traffic (i.e.
along waterways or abandoned railbeds),
but may be located alongside roadways. See
Sidepaths below.
Three Bridge Rd.,

Shamong Twp. (Project
ID # 98)
Estimated costs: $213,000 per linear mile for a

12 ft. wide path with a curb ramp at each end
SIDEPATHS
A shared-use path that runs adjacent to the
roadway. Unlike sidewalks, sidepaths are
designed for bicycle operating speeds. Can
be either one-way or two-way. Ideally, should
not be a substitute for on-road facilities, but
should compliment them. Preferable for
children and inexperienced bicyclists, but
may not be ideal for experienced bicyclists
traveling at higher speeds.
Minimum Features: Same as multi-use paths,
but with an additional 5 ft. min. separation
between the path and the roadway.
Recommended Features: Separation >5 ft.
preferred when adjacent to high-speed/highvolume roads.
Typical Applications: Adjacent to roadways
with few driveways or intersections.
Situations where improving the roadway
to accommodate on-road bikeways is
impractical. Sidepaths, especially two-way,
can face issues with intersecting driveways
and side-streets that should be considered.1
Estimated costs: $142,500 per linear mile for an
8 ft. wide path with a curb ramp at each end
Schuylkyll River Trail, Philadelphia

A typical sidepath cross-section
Bicyclist riding the wrong way next to an inadequate

sidepath in Moorestown
Candidates:
Church St.,
Moorestown Twp.
(Project ID# 19)
Levitt Pkwy.,
Willingboro Twp.
(Project ID# 30)
Kinkora Trail Phase
II, Springfield Twp.
(Project ID# 33)
Creek Rd.,
Moorestown Twp.
(Project ID# 76)
Consult the AASHTO guide for a full listing of these operational

issues and associated design considerations.
77
June 2014
Supportive Infrastructure
The provision of bikeways alone may be insufficient to create a truly high quality bikeway network. Often,
providing a safe and convenient environment for bicycling will require providing amenities beyond striping
a bike lane or paving a shared use path. During a bicyclists trip, they may need directions on how to reach a
destination, assistance with crossing a busy roadway or intersection, and a secure place to park their bicycle
once they reach their destination. This section will focus on infrastructure that acts in a supportive role to
providing bikeways, which can provide for a more enjoyable and safer user experience. This section will
discuss:
Pavement Markings
Signage
Bicycle Traffic Signals
Bicycle Parking.
There was some discussion of pavement marking and signage included throughout the discussion of onand off-road bikeways, but specific treatments covered here warranted additional discussion based on a
treatments specific intended purpose to provide additional guidance and support to bicyclists beyond basic
pavement marking and signage.
78
June 2014
PAVEMENT MARKINGS & SIGNAGE

SHARED LANE MARKING (SHARROWS)
Provides a higher level of guidance to both
motorists and bicyclists by demonstrating
where a bicyclist should ride to be safe.
Recommended features: Placed at least 4 ft.
from the curb on streets with no parking,11 ft.
on streets with parking, at intervals no greater
than 250 ft. apart.
Typical Applications: Roads with insufficient
width to accommodate bike lanes. Not to be
used on roads with speed limits >35 mph.
Shared lane (sharrow) marking dimensions

Source: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Sharrow advising cyclists may take the full travel lane

Colored treatment at a driveway

Source: Green Lane Project
South Street Bridge, Philadelphia

Source: hiddencityphila.org
Using a bike symbol and dashed line through the

intersection in Ocean City, NJ
Using green paint and a dashed line in conflict areas

Signage pointing out direction and distance

An altered sharrow to indicate preferred route direction

Estimated costs: $250 per symbol
COLORED PAVEMENT
Used on any bikeway to increase its visibility,
reinforce yielding to bicyclists in conflict areas
and reduce illegal parking within the bike
lane.
Recommended features: Skid resistant and
retroreflective green paint
Typical Applications: As a spot treatment
in conflict areas such as intersections and
driveways or sometimes the entire length of
the bikeway.
Estimated costs: $5 - $15 per sq. ft.
INTERSECTION CROSSINGS
Pavement markings through intersections
guide bicyclists on a safe and direct path
through the intersection and advise motorists
of areas they should yield to a bicyclist.
Recommended features: Dashed lines often
adequate. Sharrows or colored treatment
may be beneficial in high conflict areas.
Typical Applications: Intersections where a
bicyclists path may be unclear or conflicts
with motorists may be anticipated.
Estimated costs: Varies based on treatment
WAYFINDING
Signs and/or markings guiding bicyclists to
destinations along preferred bicycling routes.
Can be used to uniquely brand trail networks.
Recommended features: Should provide
directional guidance, route identification and
distance to key destinations.
Typical Applications: Used at decision points
along a route, at the intersection of two or
more bikeways and/or every 1/4 to 1/2 mile.
Estimated cost: $200 per sign; $250 per
sharrow
79
June 2014
BICYCLE TRAFFIC SIGNALS

BICYCLE SIGNAL HEADS
Simplifies bicycle movements through
complex intersections and reduces conflicts
with motorists by giving bicyclists a separate
signal phase
Recommended features: Adequate signal
timing for a cyclist to clear the intersection
Typical Applications: Signalized intersections
where predominate bicycle movements
conflict with common motor vehicle
movements during a green signal phase.
A bicycle signal head

Signal heads relieving a conflict between through

bicycle traffic and left turning automobiles
A warning beacon at a commercial highway crossing

A warning beacon at a trail crossing

Source: Florida Dept. of Transportation
HAWK signal head with multiple phases

HAWK placed at a highway crossing in Ocean City NJ

Bicycle loop detection

Push button actuation designed for bicyclists access

Estimated costs: $10,000 - $50,000
ACTIVE WARNING BEACONS

Use yellow flashing lights to alert motorists to
yield to bicyclists that have the right of way.
Recommended features: Push button
actuation that does not require a bicyclist to
dismount or automated bicycle detection
Typical Applications: Two-lane or multi-lane
roads where motorist compliance to yield to
bikes (or pedestrians) is low. Where bikeways
cross roads at mid-block or at unsignalized
intersections. Common at trail crossings.
HYBRID BEACONS (HAWK)

Similar to active warning beacons, but use
a multi-stage signal phase employing both
flashing and steady phases of yellow and red
lights to provide a higher level of guidance.
Recommended features: Differ based on
traffic volume and speed and other factors.1
Typical Applications: Where bikeways
intersect major streets (high volume/speed)
without existing signalized crossings.
1
Consult NACTO, AASHTO and MUTCD guides for specifics
BICYCLE SIGNAL DETECTION

Alerts the traffic signal controller of the
demand to cross the intersection. May take
the form of in-pavement detection loops,
video recognition, or push button actuation.
Recommended features: Guidance for the
bicyclists on how to actuate the signal.
Typical Applications: Intersections equipped
with a bicycle signal/beacon or where
bicyclist would experience undue delay if not
detected and be tempted cross on red.
Estimated costs: Varies based on treatment
80
June 2014
BICYCLE SAFE SEWER GRATES

BICYCLE SAFE GRATES
NO
Drainage grates with openings running parallel

to the curb may allow a bicycle tire to fall into
the slot, causing a crash. A bicycle safe grate
uses narrow openings that run perpendicular
to the direction of travel.
YES
Recommended features: Should be flush with

road surface with a gap <1 in. between the
frame and grate
Typical Applications: Where drainage grates
cannot be eliminated.
An unsafe bicycle sewer grate
A bicycle safe sewer grate
Source: FHWA
Estimated costs: $400 - $800 per grate
BICYCLE PARKING
Location
Bicyclists should expect the same level of convenience for parking
their bicycles at likely trip end-points as would be provided for their
cars. The expectation of secure and convenient parking could
provide a key asset in convincing the public to use the bicycle
for short trips, rather than their car. Failing to provide convenient
parking could result in bicycles being locked to nearby stationary
objects interfering with pedestrian and disabled persons mobility.
Bicycle parking should be placed as close to a destination as
possible, in areas where the bicycle can be observed by the owner
or passers-by, to limit the attractiveness of theft. Whenever possible,
covering should be provided to shield bicycles from the elements.
Short Term Parking

Short term bicycle parking provides a means to secure a bicycle for up to a few hours. However, it often lacks the
ability to protect a bicycle from the ill-effects of weather and is easily accessible to potential thieves. Bike racks
provided for short-term parking should:
Adequately hold the bicycle upright by supporting it in two places
Not allow the front wheel to tip over and potentially become damaged
Be designed to allow a u-lock to secure both the frame and wheel of a bicycle.
Commonly used and effective types or racks include the inverted u and post and ring style racks. Common
racks that do not provide proper support and security are schoolyard style racks and wave racks. These racks
only support the bicycle in one place, most often the wheel, potentially damaging the bike and making it difficult
to secure both the bike frame and wheels.
INVERTED U
A typical u-rack supporting two bicycles

Estimated
E
ti
t d costs:
t $200 per rack
k
POST AND RING
A former parking meter converted to a post & ring rack

Estimated
E
ti
t d costs:
t $150 per rack
k
81
June 2014
U-racks and post and ring racks can be grouped together to allow multiple
bicycles to park in the same location. Racks should be adequately spaced
apart to allow access for both the bicycle and its owner attempting to lock it.
Side by side racks should be at least 36 in. apart, and if providing multiple rows
of parking, racks should be spaced 96 in. apart, from end to end, to create
adequate aisle space to maneuver.
BIKE CORRALS
Bicycle corrals, designed specifically to secure multiple bikes in a confined

space, can also be used to accommodate parking demand. Bike corrals have
often been located in parking spots to allow multiple bicycles to park in a
space that formerly held only one car. A typical bike corral holds between 10
and 14 bicycles.
All racks should be periodically monitored for the presence of abandoned
bikes and locks to maximize their effective capacity.
Long Term Parking
A bike corral placed in a former parking spot

Source: Bicycle Coalition of Philadelphia
Estimated costs: $
$1,500 - $3,000
$
Long term bicycle parking provides a higher level of security and protection from weather in locations where a
bicycle will commonly be left unattended for longer periods of time from anywhere between a few hours to a
few days. Locations appropriate for long term parking are schools, housing complexes, employment locations,
transit stops and park and rides. Common forms of long term parking are dedicated space within secured areas of
a building, monitored bike parking areas, bike lockers or bike stations. These types of facilities should be well lit and
provide a high level of personal security as well bicycle security.
Bicycle Lockers
Bike lockers are self contained units that store one, or more bikes within them. Bicycle lockers often require a
code or key to access them, and may require user registration in order to lease them. These types of locker
systems require an agency to administer the leasing process often a transit agency, municipality or non-profit
organization. Only a single user can lease these types of lockers over an extended period of time.
Electronic bicycle lockers have been designed to overcome
these inefficiencies. E-lockers will often employ smart card
systems. With these systems, an interactive screen will identify
a lockers availability. A bicyclist uses their card to access the
locker, and then later, retrieve their bicycle. The empty locker
will then identify itself as being available for another user.
Some bicycle locker designs raise security concerns because
they do not allow for observation of their contents. Suspicous
packages could be left inside and remain undetected. This
is especially a concern at high traffic locations such as transit
stations. Many locker designs now account for this security
concern and incorporate transparent sides and fronts, often
constructed with metal mesh.
E-Lockers
Transparent e-lockers using a smart card system

Source: Trimet.org
Estimated costs: $2,500 per locker (not accounting

for installing a smart card system)
Bicycle Parking Stations

Bicycle stations are access controlled rooms that provide a high level of
security for a large volume of bicycles (anywhere between 25 and 300
bicycles). Bicycle stations in the United States are often located at large train
stations, or other locations with a high demand for bicycle parking.1 These
stations are often staffed to provide security and assist customers with parking
and retrieving their bicycles. Many feature facilities, such as showers and
changing rooms, to provide customer comfort. Bike stations can be scaled
down to be suitable for locations with less intensive demand. These stations use
keys or access cards to provide security.
Many stations function similar to a parking garage, employing monthly/yearly
membership pricing plans, or charging by the hour, day or use. Others may
require no charge.
Some stations employ two-tired rack systems that maximize bicycle parking
capacity.
1
BIKE STATIONS
Two-tiered racks at Union Station, Washington, DC

Estimated costs: Varies widely

based on scale and amenities
See Bikestation Washington DC, located next to Union Station and the McDonalds Cycle Center located in Millennium Park, Chicago
82
June 2014
8. Bicycle Supportive Programs

While engineering solutions help to create safer and more convenient physical environments for bicyclists,
a comprehensive approach is required to leverage the benefits of bicycle infrastructure investments and
increase rates of bicycling throughout the county. Bicycle-supportive programs can help educate motorists
and bicyclists about traffic laws, encourage bicycling as a form of transportation, and measure progress in
the development of a countywide bikeway network. The following programs, which are categorized into the
remaining four Es of bicycling planning (Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Evaluation), support
and advance the implementation of the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan.
While Burlington County may not be the lead agency on many of these initiatives, nor do they have the
authority to undertake several of these actions, county staff should support and encourage municipalities, and
other project partners, to pursue these efforts whenever possible. For example, some programs listed in this
chapter list municipal agencies as the Primary Agency. This should not be interpreted as the county directing
municipalities to comply with this recommendation. Rather, the county is seeking a partnership with
municipal governments and encourages them to participate in implementing this Plans recommendations,
especially in those areas where municipalities have the ultimate authority.
The bicycle-supportive programs discussed in this chapter advance the following goals and objectives of the
plan that are outlined in Chapter 2:
1. Connectivity - Create a bikeway network that connects town centers, regional bikeways and
destinations for recreation and transportation.
Perform road diets on appropriate roadways in order to accommodate all road users safely
and incorporate bikeways when feasible
Integrate construction of the county bikeway network with road reconstruction and
resurfacing programs
Seek public and private grant funds to pay for the implementation of the bikeway network
Coordinate municipal, regional, state, and private efforts to construct bikeways
2. Safety - Increase the safety of roadways for bicyclists
Consider bicyclists needs in development review and roadway construction

Develop maintenance guidelines for bikeways and integrate into roadway and park
maintenance program
Pursue traffic enforcement efforts that increase road safety for bicyclists
Integrate bicycle safety education in schools and other community education venues
3. Convenience - Make bicycling a convenient and attractive transportation option
Create a countywide bicycle map

Support events, such as organized rides and festivals, that foster a bicycle culture in the
county
Provide bicycle parking in town centers, transit stops, and common destinations
Develop model bicycle parking standards or policy guidelines for new commercial,
industrial, and multi-family residential and public buildings.
83
June 2014
Educational Programs
Safe Routes to School (SRTS)
Target audience
Lead agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Students of K-8 schools and their parents, school administration and faculty
Cross County Connection TMA; K-8 school administration and faculty
School districts; Parent Teacher Organizations (PTOs); Parent Teacher Associations
(PTAs); local law enforcement agencies; health agencies; community interest groups;
Burlington County Department of Public Works, Division of Engineering
Educates children on bicycle and pedestrian safety, promote active transportation,
and identify areas around K-8 schools for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure
improvements
Cross County Connection TMA: www.driveless.com
NJ Safe Routes to School Resource Center: www.saferoutesnj.org
SRTS programs currently exist in seven Burlington County municipalities.
Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a national program

that encourages children to be more physically active
and creates safe, convenient and fun opportunities for
children to bicycle and walk to and from school. The
program also aims to educate communities about the
benefits of active transportation and reduce congestion
and air pollution around schools.
SRTS Walk to School Day in Southampton
In New Jersey, the SRTS program is administered

through the states Transportation Management
Associations (TMAs). Cross County Connection TMA
has a full-time Safe Routes to School Coordinator who
organizes a variety of educational bicycle and pedestrian
safety events for communities throughout the region, Source: Cross County Connecon TMA
including in-class bicycle and pedestrian safety lessons, bicycle helmet fittings, walk to school days, and bicycle
rodeos. The SRTS Coordinator can also lead an audit of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure surrounding a
school to identify safety concerns and examine opportunities for physical improvements. The findings from
an audit can be used to create a school travel plan, which documents these barriers and opportunities. Having
a travel plan is viewed favorably when applying to the Safe Routes to School Infrastructure Grant, which
funds bicycle and pedestrian improvements within two miles of K-8 schools. Developing a Safe Routes to
School Program can also earn a community 10 points toward Sustainable Jersey certification.
Southampton Township, Pemberton Borough, and Pemberton Township have implemented district-wide
SRTS programs. Additionally, other Burlington County municipalities have reported that their local schools
engage in SRTS activities, including Burlington City, Florence Township, Riverton Borough, Moorestown
Township, and Chesterfield Township. Burlington County should support the SRTS program by referring
interested communities to Cross County Connection TMA to develop a program catered to local needs
and circumstances. Burlington County Engineering staff should also be invited to attend SRTS bicycle and
pedestrian audits around schools, especially in study areas where county roads are located.
84
June 2014
New Jersey Ambassadors in Motion (NJAIM)

Target audience
Lead agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
General Public
New Jersey Bicycle and Pedestrian Resource Center
Burlington County Department of Public Works, Division of Engineering;
Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation; Burlington County
College; local law enforcement agencies
NJAIM educates the general public, including motorists, about pedestrian and
bicycle safety. Outreach may occur in classroom settings, at events, such as bike tours
or farmers markets, or in places where people bike and walk often, such as parks,
trails, and downtown business districts.
New Jersey Bicycle and Pedestrian Resource Center: www.njbikeped.org
NJAIM is active statewide, but have yet to schedule an event in Burlington County.
NJAIM is a team of trained adult ambassadors that promote safety and active transportation by educating
and conducting outreach to bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists throughout New Jersey. The Ambassadors
offer training and educational programs from April to November to encourage bicycling and walking and
everyday safe practices.
While SRTS education programs deal solely NJAIM Presents on Bicycle Safety at Rutgers Internaonal
with children in grades K-8, NJAIM educates Students Orientaon Day
individuals of all ages. Education and outreach
may take the form of presentations in classroom
settings, or these efforts may be targeted at
accident hot spots and places where people bike
and walk often. By request, NJAIM will mobilize
at high-crash intersections, or along popular
trails throughout the state to distribute bicycle
and pedestrian safety literature.
County staff can spread the word about the
NJAIM program to its municipalities, or invite
NJAIM to educate bicyclists along popular trails,
in busy parks, at seasonal bicycle events, or in a Source: Alan M. Voorhees Transportaon Center
classroom at the local county college. While NJAIM has yet to organize an event in Burlington County, they
have conducted outreach in other locations in South Jersey, including Camden City and Atlantic City.
Burlington County Bicycle Safety Program
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Children and their parents

Burlington County Sheriff's Department
Local law enforcement agencies; community organizations; local bike shops
Distribute bicycle safety equipment
Burlington County Sheriff's Department: http://www.co.burlington.nj.us/sheriff
Program currently exists
85
June 2014
The Burlington County Sheriffs Department currently runs a bicycle safety program for children. The program
involves distributing essential bicycle safety equipment to children and their families, including helmets,
reflective safety lights, and brightly colored banners that can be fixed to the rear wheel of the bike, in order to
make young riders more visible to motorists. Providing children with this safety equipment, and educating
them on its benefits, at a young age can help foster future generations of safe bicyclists. Burlington County
should encourage the Sheriffs Department to continue to operate this program, and perhaps, expand the
scope of this initiative through coordination with municipal police departments, community organizations,
and local bicycle shops.
Encouragement Programs
Bicycle Helmet Giveaways
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Bicyclists of all ages

Burlington County Sheriffs Department
Local law enforcement agencies; community organizations; schools; local bicycle
shops; Cross County Connection TMA
Distribute bicycle helmets
New Jersey Bicycle Helmet Law Fact Sheet: http://www.nj.gov/oag/hts/downloads/
Helmet_%20FactSheet_Eng.pdf
Giveaway events are currently organized in Delanco and Willingboro.
Distributing bicycle helmets promotes safety and may encourage bicycling in a Bicycle Safety Event
with Cross County
community. The Burlington County Sheriffs Department runs a bicycle safety Connecon
program for children that includes bicycle helmet giveaways. The Sheriffs Department
also distributes additional bicycle safety equipment at these events such as reflective
safety lights and brightly colored banners that can be fixed to the rear wheel of the
bike and make young riders more visible to traffic. Cross County Connection TMA
also distributes bicycle helmets at Burlington County schools and community events
as part of their larger SRTS bicycle safety instruction program. At the municipal
level, Delanco and Willingboro Townships have programs established that distribute
Source: Cross County
bicycle helmets to those in need, regardless of age.
Connecon TMA
Burlington County should continue to promote bicycle safety giveaways through the program at the Sheriffs
Department and should consider coordinating efforts with local law enforcement agencies and Cross County
Connection to bolster these efforts at both a county and municipal level.
86
June 2014
Bicycle Auctions
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources

Local law enforcement agencies; community organizations
Schools; local bicycle shops; Burlington County Sheriffs Department
Provide affordable means for individuals to purchase a bicycle
Ocean City Bicycle Auction: http://www.ocnj.us/index.cfm?fuseaction=content.
pagedetails&id=3287&typeid=157
Status
Hoboken Bicycle Auction: http://www.hobokennj.org/bikeauction/

Bicycle auctions are currently held in Evesham and Willingboro.
Organizing bicycle auctions is an engaging community activity that can generate excitement about bicycling.
Auctions also provide an affordable means for individuals to obtain a bicycle. These bikes may be donated
from residents or local bike shops. Bikes could also be recovered by local police departments. Evesham and
Willingboro Townships operate yearly bicycle auctions. Municipalities, throughout the county, should be
encouraged to partner with community organizations to arrange similar events. Additionally, the Burlington
County Sheriffs Department should consider conducting their bicycle safety program at local auctions.
Bicycle Shares, Rehabs, and Co-ops
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose

Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation
Community organizations; schools; local bicycle shops
Provide affordable means for individuals to purchase a bicycle
Collingswood Bike Share: www.collingswood.com/bikeshare
Camden County Bike Share: http://www.camdencounty.com/county-news/camdencounty-bikeshare-program-expanding-east-camden
Resources
Status
Hudson TMA Bike Rehab: http://www.hudsontma.org/index.

php?page=bikerehab&option=com_content&task=view&id=215b&cat_
id=21&Itemid=54
Neighborhood Bike Works: www.neighborhoodbikeworks.org/
Bike shares, rehabs, and co-ops exist elsewhere in the region but none are established
in Burlington County.
The name bike share, rehab, or co-op are often used interchangeably. They all share the same purpose of
getting people on bikes at a low cost; however, it is useful to distinguish between these three models.
Rehabs are typically stand-alone operations that repair used bikes and either sell them at a low price, or give
them away for free. Some rehabs take on an expanded role and refer to themselves as bike shares. In this
model, bikes are rehabbed and rented for a nominal fee. Most of these bike shares require membership as
opposed to a stand-alone bike rehab program. The length of the rental can vary between a few days, a few
months, or a few years.
Some bike share models attempt to establish a network of rehab workshops, or other types of distribution
87
June 2014
points, to maximize their effective reach over a larger geography such as a county. This model functions like
the more publicized bike shares in large cities, enabling pick-up and drop-off at designated locations. These
bike shares differ from these larger systems in that they do not rely on expensive technology and officially
branded and specially designed bikes. These large-scale models are often privately owned for-profit systems,
while the rehab programs are primarily non-profit operations that rely upon volunteer support and donations.
The third model, the bicycle co-op, offers instruction to the bicyclist, from bicycle mechanics, on basic
maintenance and repairs. The potential cyclists may end up building the bicycle, or may simply receive
instruction on how to properly maintain the bike. The relationship between the co-ops and their members
is more involved since there is opportunity for repeated interactions by co-op staff and its members after the
bike has been purchased or given away.
Burlington County should consider the creation of independently operated bicycle shares with the Department
of Resource Conservation as a potential lead. The county may choose to follow Camden Countys model
and collect donated bicycles to distribute through individual rehabs and co-ops throughout the county. The
long-term vision in Camden County is to have each bike share operate as a distribution center for a larger
countywide system, where members can pick-up and drop-off bicycles. Distribution centers could be located
at trail heads or near popular destinations for bicyclists.
Bicycle Maps and Brochures
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Bicyclists and potential bicyclists

Municipalities; community organizations; local bicycle shops; bicycle clubs; Cross
County Connection TMA
Provide information about existing on and off-road bikeways to interested bicyclists
Evesham Bicycle Map: http://www.driveless.com/pdfs/EveshamBikeMap12.pdf
In progress
ood Rd
Elmw
Rd
ill
ko
ta
Trl
Geo
Da
ph
er
Main
St
Wayne Dr
Tuc
kerton
Rd
Ar
ka
n
Oh i o T rl
Ma
sa s
in
de D
w
Willo
e
Ridg
nn
Ma
rlto
n Pk
wy
MEDFORD
Marlton
E.S
lvd
n or
si
Marlton
M.S.
Ma
in Milford Rd
k Wa y
ll
Av
Rd
sR
Ev
an
nd
Chr
isto
Sag e mo re Dr
NJT 406
Sandrin
Rd
ick
Br
Willowb roo
oln
Dr
ne
to
B ro
o
Dr
e
Pik
to n e
ks
Ln
ne Dr
Peregri
in
Dr
Ma
lto
Cherokee
H.S
e
tiv
cu
m Rd
sha
Eve
451
NJT
5th
St
3rd
2n St
dS
t
$
;A+
620
Jaggard
E.S.
ar
Tr
Ha
er
Gibson
House
Exe
so
n Rd
le
619
New Rd
es
$
+
Be
Ln
Ln
Rd
low
ad
ow
Kr
erit a g e R
Jughand
Brick
W il
e
M
Dr
CHERRY HILL
Part rid ge
Evans E.S.
St
Arrow
hea
d Dr
St
w
e
Rd
ar
lo
8th
Devon
Av
Beeler
E.S.
th
10
on
m
ha
Rd
Tr
rs
n Dr
r row
te
ld
O
ffe
Long
Bl
vd
ll Rd
we
op
Dr
L ow
Medford
Evesboro
lvd
Je
Ce n tr
Cr
Ru
Av
o r ning
70
K no x B
Dow
ntow
Marlton
n
Oak Ave
Ju
nipe
600
Dr
Ram p
"
Marlton Pike
$
+
r St
O ld
NJT 406
Hibiscus
Linc
$
+
C a rl
ton
ke
Maple Ave
Greenbrook
Dr
Locust
Ave
Conestoga D
r
Cropwell Rd
Tho
rnw
o
La
ard
Fox Hill Dr
618
607
600
Orch
$
+
Sharp Rd
$
+
Demasi
E.S.
& M.S.
Dr
70
Ced
ar Rd
y Dr
G lor
Spruce Rd
d Dr
Rd
Ave
old
d Dr
rig
"
llar
Ma
Ma
dy w
Dr
Church Rd
y Dr
Rd
Bran
ilton
ine
Dr
am
Ma
rlto
n Pik
ln
co
Lin
Ln
t Rd
s Har
Rd
rk Dr
Locust
VanZant
Rd
mE.S.
rtra
nb
y
Burgun d
Annapolis Dr
ow
d Pa
woo
73
Ba
Te
674
Run
Tau
Am
St
h
rc
Yorktown Dr
H
6
T 40
NJ
ro Rd
Evesbo
"
Rd
ntree
Gree
Greentree Rd
op
616
Dr
674
616
Dr
Bi
Mill
hants
Olip
$
+
$
+
$
+
$
+
mb le
Prea
ay
erts
Dr
Dr
ivew
h St
b erfie
em
Way
ad
Dr
JT A triu
406
Churc
Ac
Distributing maps and guides that show the location of bikeways is an Evesham Bicycle Map Created by
Cross County Connecon
effective way to encourage people to ride. Bicycle maps and brochures
may also highlight other points of interest, such as recreation areas, bicycle
shops, tourist destinations, or shopping districts. Burlington County has
secured funding and is currently working on developing a bicycle map
brochure to promote bicycling and other recreational opportunities. When
the map is completed, the county should work with the local municipalities,
community organizations, local bicycle shops, and Cross County
Connection to promote and distribute this resource. Cross County Connection has created municipal bicycle
maps for Evesham Township and Voorhees Township in neighboring Camden County, which may serve as
a resource for Burlington County municipalities interested in creating their own bicycle map and brochure.
B
Ce
r Av
da
to
ar
88
June 2014
Bicycle Mobile Phone Map Application

Target audience
Primary agency
Resources

Cross County Connection TMA
Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation; community
organizations; local bicycle shops; bicycle clubs
Mobile applications provide information about existing on and off-road bikeways
that interested bicyclists can access digitally.
Cross County Connections Interactive Transportation Map: http://driveless.com/
interactivegooglemap.html
Status
Cross County Connections Bike Route Locator: http://bikeroutelocator.com

Cross County Connection TMA currently offers the mobile application.
Potential partners
Purpose
Due the immense popularity of smart phones, in addition to creating a paper bicycle map, Burlington County
should consider hosting the mapping information online in the form of a bicycle application. A bicyclist could
view existing bike trails and routes around them through the GPS capability of their phone. Cross County
Connection TMA has developed an application, www.bikeroutelocator.com, the county should promote in
tandem with the bicycle maps and brochures. Additionally, Cross County Connection currently hosts an
interactive transportation map on its website, www.driveless.com, which displays existing bikeways in South
Jersey.
Bike to Work Day and Week
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status

Cross County Connection TMA
Burlington County Board of Chosen Freeholders; community organizations; bicycle
shops; local employers; healthcare organizations; Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst
Encourage bicycling as a viable and beneficial mode of commuting
National Bike Month: http://bikeleague.org/bikemonth
Cross County Connection organizes bike month activities and contests.
Bike to Work Day is an annual event held in May, during National Bike Month, to promote bicycling
as a commuting option. This encouragement activity is an effective way to get county residents utilizing
the county bikeway network for purposes beyond recreation. The event is typically promoted by bicycle
advocacy organizations, bicycle clubs, and bike shops, and is often organized at a local level by Transportation
Management Associations (TMA). While Cross County Connection TMA can organize events and
coordinate bike to work week marketing efforts, Burlington County and other partners should assist with the
dissemination of promotional materials.
89
June 2014
Bicycle Tours and Community Rides

Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Bicyclists, bicycle clubs, and local businesses

Burlington County Board of Chosen Freeholders; Burlington County Department
of Resource Conservation
South Jersey Resource Conservation and Development Council; municipalities;
Cross County Connection TMA; bicycle clubs; community organizations; local
businesses including bicycle shops, farms, farmers markets, wineries, and nurseries
Encourage bicycling and promote tourism
Tour Des Farms: www.sjrcd.org/tourdesfarms/
Team Evesham: www.teamevesham.org
There are current annual rides in Burlington County.
Bicycle tours and community rides are healthy, fun ways to encourage the 2010 South Jersey Tour Des Farms
use of the county bikeway network and promote historical, recreational,
and cultural aspects of Burlington County. Bicycle clubs, bicycle shops,
community organizations, neighborhood groups, schools, and county
staff can work together to organize and participate in these events. The
South Jersey Tour Des Farms, organized by the South Jersey Resource
Conservation and Development Council, is a bicycling tour through
South Jersey Resource Development
Burlington Countys farmland. In addition to promoting bicycling in Source:
Council
the county, this event encourages participants to stop at various farms,
nurseries, and orchards along the route to support local businesses and promote agritourism in the region.
Additionally, the proceeds from the event funds the Farming for the Future Mini Grant Program. Burlington
County should coordinate with the South Jersey Resource Conservation and Development Council to
continue the Tour Des Farms. The county should also consider reaching out to similar organizations to
plan additional organized rides that promote agritourism, allowing visitors to experience the countys rich
collection of farms, farmers markets, and wineries in a fun and memorable way.
Open Streets Initiatives/Ciclovias
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
General public, business owners, and bicyclists

Local governments; businesses
Cross County Connection TMA; local law enforcement agencies
Demonstrate the benefits of active transportation and the need to designate space on
roadways for pedestrians and bicyclists
New Brunswick Ciclovia: www.newbrunswickciclovia.com
Resources
The Princeton Ciclovia: http://pjpbac.blogspot.com/2014/04/event-princetonciclovia-inaugural.html
Status
NACTOs Open Streets Guide: http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/smaller_open_streets_

guide_final_print_alliance_biking_walking.pdf
There are currently no open streets events in Burlington County.
90
June 2014
An open streets initiative, or ciclovia, is when a community temporarily New Brunswick Ciclovia, October, 2013
closes a street to automobile traffic and allow residents to use the space
for walking, bicycling, socializing, and other creative and active ways.
These events demonstrate the benefits of active transportation and the
need to designate space on roadways for pedestrians and bicyclists. New
Brunswick, NJ organized four separate ciclovias in 2013-2104, all of
which the city considered a success. Burlington County should consider
Source: Alan M. Voorhees Transportaon Center
coordinating with municipalities in the county and Cross County
Connection TMA to organize similar events. Ideal candidate locations
include densely developed business districts, such as downtown Mount Holly, Bordentown City, Burlington
City, and Moorestown.
Walk with a Doc
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
General public
Burlington County Department of Health; Burlington County Department of
Resource Conservation
Local governments; healthcare providers within Burlington County (Virtua, Lourdes
Medical Center); community organizations
Encourage healthy physical activity and educate people about the benefits of healthy
living
Walk with a Doc: www.walkwithadoc.org/
There are currently no Walk with a Doc programs in Burlington County.
Walk with a Doc is a program that encourages healthy physical activity in people of all ages. In this program,
a doctor leads a walk while discussing the benefits of healthy living, including reducing the risk of coronary
heart disease, improving blood pressure, and enhancing mental well-being. While such an event is not directly
related to bicycling, promoting active transportation can help to foster a culture of courtesy and acceptance
for all modes of travel, including bicycling. Additionally, these walks would promote the Burlington County
Parks system and may encourage future usage that includes bicycling. Burlington County Department of
Resource Conservation should consider working with Burlington County Department of Health and reaching
out to large local healthcare providers, such as Virtua and Lourdes Medical Center, to organize these walks.
91
June 2014
Enforcement Programs
Bicycle Safety Law Enforcement Training
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Law enforcement officers

Burlington County Sheriffs Department; local law enforcement agencies
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA); New Jersey Division of
Highway Traffic Safety (NJHTS)
Educate law enforcement officers on traffic laws that apply to bicyclists and to
motorists regarding bicyclists
NHTSA Training Program: http://www.nhtsa.gov/Driving+Safety/Bicycles/Enhanci
ng+Bicycle+Safety:+Law+Enforcement%27s+Role
A training program for law enforcement officers is not currently offered by
Burlington County Sheriffs Department.
Some law enforcement officers may benefit from specialized training on enforcement techniques associated
with traffic laws affecting bicycling safety. These laws apply to both motorists and bicyclists. NHTSA has
developed a two-hour self-paced interactive training video available for all law enforcement officers, which
contains information about understanding bicycle crashes, traffic laws that apply to bicyclists, laws regarding
bicyclists that apply to motorists, enforcement techniques, crash investigation, and more. The Burlington
County Sheriffs Department and municipal law enforcement agencies should consider developing this type
of training program.
Bicycle Patrol Units
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Bicyclists and motorists

Municipal police departments
Burlington County Sheriffs Department
Enforce traffic laws pertaining to bicyclists and provide safety education
Willingboro Township Bicycle Patrol Unit: http://www.willingboropolice.com/
bicycle_partrol.htm
Willingboro Township and Burlington City have bicycle patrol units.
Bicycle patrols units can be useful in town centers, neighborhoods, parks, and trails. These officers are more
accessible to the public and can mobilize in places where automobiles cannot. Bicycle patrol officers receive
specialized training pertaining to laws that apply to bicyclists. Employing bicycle patrol units also acts as a
way to educate the public about bicycle laws and safety. The Burlington County Sheriffs Department should
encourage local law enforcement agencies to consider creating bicycle patrol units to mobilize at appropriate
locations throughout the region. Willingboro Township and Burlington City both employ bicycle patrol
units.
92
June 2014
Speed Feedback Signs

Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Motorists
Local law enforcement agencies; Burlington County Sheriffs Department
Enforce speed limits to reduce the likelihood of crashes
SRTS Guide - Speed Trailers: http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/enforcement/speed_
trailer.cfm
Speed feedback signs are currently employed throughout the county.
Speed radar trailers and permanent speed feedback signs can help enforce speeds limits. Speed is often the
most significant contributing factor to the severity of a bicyclists injury in a crash with a motor vehicle.
Lowering traffic speeds can help to reduce the likelihood of severe injury, or fatality, if a crash between a
bicycle and motor vehicle occurs. The Burlington County Sheriffs Department and local law enforcement
agencies, with Division of Engineering approval, could set up unmanned trailers on county roads where
speeding is a problem, along segments of newly constructed bikeways, or where people are know to bike
often. These trailers function as both an educational technique and enforcement tool, advising motorists of
their current speed and allowing officers, stationed nearby, to issue citations if speeding occurs.
Evaluation and Planning

Formation of a County Bicycle Advisory Committee
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status

Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation; Burlington County
Division of Roads and Bridges; municipal staff and governing bodies
Cross County Connection TMA; Burlington County Department of Public Works,
Division of Engineering; Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation
Plan Advisory Committee (PAC) members, municipal staff, bike clubs, community
interest groups, residents, Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst
Advise county and municipal staff on bicycle-related issues and facilitate the sharing
of information and coordination on bicycle planning efforts
New Jersey Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Council: http://njbikeped.org/nj-bpac/
Princeton Joint Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee: http://www.
princetonnj.gov/bicycle.html
Arlington Bicycle Advisory Committee: http://www.bikearlington.com/pages/
biking-in-arlington/get-involved/arlington-bicycle-advisory-committee/
A statewide bicycle advisory committee exists in New Jersey, as well as municipal
committees; however, there are currently none in Burlington County.
Bicycle advisory committees advise transportation officials and governing bodies on bicycle-related issues.
Many states, counties, cities, and towns have convened such groups. These committees may include citizen
volunteers, county and municipal staff, elected officials, and bicycle stakeholder groups.
93
June 2014
A county-wide bicycle advisory committee should be formed to generate discussion about countywide
bicycling issues and coordinate regional bikeway planning efforts. The committee, which could meet
quarterly or biannually, should be comprised of current Plan Advisory Committee (PAC) members, including
Burlington County staff, municipal representatives, Cross County Connection TMA, bike clubs, and bicycle
advocacy groups. The committee could review and provide input on proposed bikeway designs, participate
in the development and implementation of the county bikeway network, and monitor goals and indices
related to bicycling in the county. Member municipalities and Burlington County could also potentially pool
resources to collaborate on multi-jurisdictional projects.
Cross County Connection has expressed a willingness to act in a management capacity for any such efforts.
Burlington County Public Works, Division of Engineering and Burlington County Department of Resource
Conservation should consider working with Cross County Connection to further explore the idea of
establishing an advisory committee.
Bicycle Road Safety Audits (RSA)
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Burlington County Department of Public Works, Division of Engineering staff;

municipal staff; community interest groups
Local law enforcement agencies; Burlington County Sheriffs Department; DVRPC;
Rutgers CAIT; Cross County Connection TMA
Conduct a formal examination of a roadway to identify and better understand safety
issues regarding bicyclists as well as develop solutions to the problems
Rutgers CAIT Road Safety Audits: https://cait.rutgers.edu/tsrc/audits
FHWAs Bicycle Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists: http://safety.fhwa.
dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/fhwasa12018/
DVRPC has performed RSAs on US 130/US 206 in Bordentown City and
Township, on Hanover Street in Pemberton Borough, on Maple Avenue in Evesham
Township from Route 70 to North Locust Avenue, at the intersection of Maple
Avenue and Main Street in Evesham Township, and around Bass River Elementary
School in New Gretna. These audits examined bicycle and pedestrian safety issues.
Road safety audits (RSAs) are a formal examination of a roadway or series of roadways by an independent,
multidisciplinary team. RSAs are typically conducted on roadways, with a demonstrated history of crashes,
to provide a community or transportation agency with a better understanding of safety issues and develop
recommendations for improvement. An audit may focus on issues that affect bicyclists and pedestrians.
DVRPC and Rutgers Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Technology (CAIT) regularly conduct road
safety audits throughout the state. DVRPC has performed numerous audits in Burlington County. Cross
County Connection can also coordinate bicycle and pedestrian audits. Burlington County should coordinate
with DVRPC, CAIT, and Cross County Connection to perform road safety audits in areas that pose safety
concerns for bicyclists. Additionally, Burlington County Division of Engineering staff should periodically
attend road safety audits that are conducted at the local level to provide their insight and expertise.
94
June 2014
Perform Bicycle Counts

Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Burlington County staff and elected officials; municipal staff and elected officials;
NJDOT; community organizations
DVRPC, Burlington County Department of Public Works, Division of Engineering
Bicycle groups, volunteers, Cross County Connection TMA
Monitor bicycle travel trends
DVRPC - Pedestrian and Bicycle Counts: http://www.dvrpc.org/webmaps/
pedbikecounts/
DVRPC currently conducts bicycle counts throughout the Delaware Valley,
including locations in Burlington County
Conducting bicycle counts is an excellent way to monitor and evaluate bicycle usage and bicycle travel trends.
Performing periodic counts can also help build an ongoing record of information about bicycle use. DVRPC
periodically performs counts in its member counties and has selected eleven pilot locations within Burlington
County, where they will perform cyclical bicycle counts every three years. The county should continue to
coordinate with DVRPC to identify locations where people bicycle often and where infrastructure investments
have recently been made in order to monitor travel trends. Burlington County should also analyze this
information to gauge progress with the implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan. This data could also be
used to demonstrate the need for bicycle infrastructure improvements and secure funding through state and
federal grant opportunities.
DVRPCs Pedestrian and Bicycle Count Website
95
June 2014
96
June 2014
9. Bicycle Supportive Policies and Ordinances

Bicycle-supportive policies are important to the construction of bikeways, bicycle safety efforts, and routine
accommodation of bicycle travel in transportation projects. These policies can provide a powerful tool for
addressing resident concerns and defusing conflicts. Ensuring that policies are consistent among jurisdictions
has been, and will continue to be, a challenge in the county. To address this challenge, coordination among
the state, county, and municipalities to create consistency in the type and application of bicycle-supportive
policies is key.
As with the programs contained in Chapter 7, municipal agencies are listed as the Primary Agency on some of
this chapters policy recommendations. This should not to be interpreted as a directive from the county to the
municipalities, rather as a suggested course of action for those municipalities that would like to partner with
the county in implementing this Plans recommendations.
Complete Streets
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Burlington County Department of Public Works, Engineering Division; Burlington

County Planning Board
Burlington County Board of Chosen Freeholders; Burlington County Planning
Board; Burlington County Department of Public Works, Division of Engineering;
NJDOT; NJ TRANSIT; municipal governments; municipal planning boards;
Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation; bicycle advocacy groups;
community interest groups; Cross County Connection TMA
Direct county staff to routinely consider the needs of all road users in transportation
projects
Complete Streets Policy Compilation: http://njbikeped.org/services/resolutions/
Camden County Complete Streets Policy: http://njbikeped.org/wp-content/
uploads/2014/01/Camden-County-Complete-Streets-Resolution.pdf
Medford Township Complete Streets Policy: http://njbikeped.org/wp-content/
uploads/2013/01/Medford-Complete-Streets-Resolution.pdf
Resources
Mercer County Complete Streets Policy: http://njbikeped.org//wp-content/

uploads/2012/05/Mercer-County-Complete-Streets-Resolution-April-26-2012.pdf
NJDOT Complete Streets Policy: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/eng/
completestreets/pdf/completestreetspolicy.pdf
Status
Cross County Connections Complete Streets Webpage: http://driveless.com/

TransportationPlanning/CompleteStreets.html
Burlington County does not have a Complete Streets policy; however, Medford
Township and neighboring Camden County have adopted such policies.
Complete Streets are roadways designed to meet the needs of all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists,
motorists, and transit riders, of all ages and abilities. Adopting a Complete Streets policy directs planners,
engineers, and other transportation officials in a municipality, county, or state to consider and balance the
needs of all road users in transportation projects. New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT)
adopted a Complete Streets policy in December 2009 to routinely consider the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists,
97
June 2014
and transit users in the planning, design, construction, maintenance, and operation of state-owned roadways.
NJDOTs policy also includes language that strongly encourages regional and local jurisdictions to adopt
and implement similar policies. The NJDOT policy, and the associated project evaluation checklist, can be
reviewed in Appendix G. Complete Streets policies are cost-effective ways to proactively design roadways for all
users and avoid expensive retrofitting projects in the future. Additionally, communities seeking funds through
NJDOTs Local Aid program have an incentive to adopt a Complete Streets policy, as it earns an additional
point in grant application scoring. Medford is currently the only municipality in Burlington County that
has adopted a Complete Streets policy. Medfords policy can be reviewed in Appendix G. Burlington County
should consider adopting a Complete Streets policy to routinely consider the needs of bicyclists in all roadway
projects to help more efficiently implement the county bikeway network.
Some Complete Streets policies call for the creation of Complete Streets Technical Advisory Committees or
Task Forces. Cherry Hill Township in Camden County recently adopted a Complete Streets policy that calls
for the establishment of a Technical Advisory Committee. The committee assesses applicable projects utilizing
NJDOTs Complete Streets checklist, also included in Appendix G, to provide recommendations on the
integration of pedestrian and bicycle facilities and determine exceptions to the policy. Burlington County and
municipalities throughout the county should consider adopting a Complete Streets policy and developing
similar committees to evaluate projects.
Bicycle Coordinator
Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status

Burlington County Planning Board; municipal staff; transportation professionals
Burlington County Board of Chosen Freeholders; Burlington County Department
of Resource Conservation; Cross County Connection TMA
Oversee the implementation of the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan,
seek funding opportunities for bicycle-related programs and projects, facilitate
the countywide bicycle advisory committee, coordinate regional efforts with
municipalities
League of American Bicyclists - Why Communities & States Need Bicycle and
Pedestrian Staff: http://www.advocacyadvance.org/site_images/content/why_bike_
ped_staff_april_2010.pdf
There is no dedicated staff to address bicycle and pedestrian issues in Burlington
County.
To assist with the planning and construction of the county bikeway network, Burlington County should
consider establishing a bicycle coordinator position, or provide an existing staff person with the responsibilities
of overseeing the implementation of the bicycle master plan and related policies and programmatic efforts,
monitoring the implementation of the plan, and facilitating the county bicycle advisory committee with
Cross County Connections assistance. This individual would also facilitate conversations between various
departments in Burlington County as well as with municipalities and other stakeholders on bicycle projects.
98
June 2014
Operation of Bicycles on Sidewalks

Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Municipal governments; general public

Municipal governments
Burlington County Department of Public Works, Division of Engineering; bicycle
advocacy groups
Prohibit bicycle travel on certain sidewalks for adults
New Jersey Bicycle Laws: http://www.saferoutesnj.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/
New-Jersey-Bicycle-Laws.pdf
Biking in New Jersey FAQ: http://www.nj.gov/transportation/commuter/bike/faqs.
shtm
New Jersey Bicycling Manual: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/commuter/bike/
pdf/bicyclingmanual.pdf
Cycling on Sidewalks in New Jersey: http://njbikeped.org/cycling-on-sidewalks-innew-jersey-part-2/
Burlington City has an ordinance prohibiting bicycling on sidewalks throughout the
entire municipality for anyone over the age of ten.
While riding a bicycle on a sidewalk is not prohibited by New Jersey statutes, some municipalities have passed
ordinances to ban bicycle travel on certain sidewalks. Despite common perception, sidewalks are not adequate
facilities for bicycle travel. Bicycling on sidewalks can cause conflicts with pedestrians and, like wrong way
riding, can lead to crashes since it places bicyclists in situations where motorists do not expect them. Except
for very young cyclists under parental supervision, sidewalks are not for bicycling.
Ordinances that prohibit bicycle travel on certain sidewalks usually specify age limits on when biking on
sidewalks is acceptable. In New Jersey, Jersey City, New Brunswick, and Burlington City have adopted
such ordinances. Burlington Citys ordinance, shown in Appendix H, prohibits bicycle riding on sidewalks
throughout the whole municipality for any bicyclist over the age of ten. New Brunswick prohibits bicycling on
sidewalks in the central business district for anyone over the age of twelve. Jersey City prohibits all bicyclists,
regardless of age, from riding on sidewalks in the central business district. Burlington County staff could
educate local municipalities on the dangers of allowing adult bicyclists to bike on sidewalks and encourage
them to look into examples of ordinances addressing bicycling on sidewalks.
99
June 2014
Annual Road Overlay Plan

Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Burlington County Department of Public Works

Burlington County Department of Public Works, Engineering Division
Burlington County Public Works, Division of Roads and Bridges; Burlington County
Board of Chosen Freeholders; municipalities
Routinely implement bikeway recommendations from the Burlington County
Bicycle Master Plan into repaving projects
2014 Burlington County Road Resurfacing Plan Press Release: http://
www.co.burlington.nj.us/Upload/Freeholders/Images/2014%20Road%20
Resurfacing%20Program.pdf
Burlington County currently has an overlay plan, but no formal policy calling upon
staff to evaluate if implementing bikeways through a restriping plan is feasible.
Funds from the New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund and Burlington County are dedicated annually to the
maintenance of county roads that are in need of repaving. Coordinating the annual resurfacing effort with the
implementation of the bicycle master plan would be a cost-effective way to install many on-street bikeways.
Restriping a roadway to include bike lanes could be expensive if the project were done in isolation. However,
if a crew will already be milling and repaving a roadway, the only additional costs to install a bike lane or mark
a bike route would be extra paint and signage, assuming that the road does not require widening or major
realignments to install bikeways. Burlington County should also consider implementing road diets or lane
diets as a part of its overlay program in order to incorporate bikeways when feasible. An overview of road diets
is provided in Figure 16.
100
June 2014
Figure 16: Overview of Rightsizing Roadways
ROAD RECONFIGURATION
AFTER
BEFORE
Reconfiguring the number and/or size of

vehicle lanes can rightsize a roadway to
better serve the needs of a community
and improve safety for all road users.
A typical roadway reconfiguration, or a
road diet, involves converting a four lane
road into a three lane street (two through
lanes and a center two-way left turn lane).
This realignment creates space for bike
lanes and pedestrian improvements.
11
11
11
1
11
44
4
4
4
Source: Virginia DOT
11
12
12
11
44
4
4
Source: Virginia DOT
APPLICATIONS
Rightsizing may be appropriate on
roads that have safety issues or excess
capacity. Reconfiguration projects should
be coordinated with roadway repaving
or reconstruction to minimize costs since
many projects only require restriping.
Good Candidates: Four lane roadways
with less than 20,000 Annual Average Daily
Traffic Volume (AADT) or fewer than 1,700
vehicles per peak hour.
Before: Undivided 4 Lane RoadSource: Pedestrian and

Bicycle Information Center
After: 3 Lane Road Bike Lanes and Center Turn Lane

Source: Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center
Traditional Road Diet in Charlotte, NC

Source: Oaks & Spokes
Rightsized Street with Planted Median in Charlotte, NC

Source: Project for Public Spaces
BENEFITS
Increase roadway safety and access
Create space for bicycle lanes and/or
on-street parking
Create space for median refuge islands
Decrease
crossing
pedestrians
distance
for
Center turn lane may reduce incidence

of rear-end and side-swipe crashes in
some cases.
Improve compliance with speed limit
Can be tested as trial projects
LANE NARROWING
The suitable width of travel lanes may vary
depending on roadway function, vehicle
speeds, traffic volumes, and adjacent land
uses. Established roadway design guides
recognize the need to tailor lane widths
to suit local conditions. Narrowing lanes
on streets with unnecessarily wide travel
lanes can calm traffic, create space for
bicycle lanes, and increase safety for all
road users.
Before: 4 Lane Road with Narrow Shoulder in Portland, OR A

After: Lanes Narrowed to Create Buffered Bike Lanes
Source: Google Maps
Source: Bike Portland
S
Typical lane widths: 9 - 12

The standards, dimensions, and applications contained in this guide are based on review of the U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) Proven Safety Countermeasures, Univerisity of North Carolina Highway Safety Research
Centers (UNC HSRC) Road Diet Conversions: A Synthesis of Safety Research, 2013 and the American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design, 2004.
101
June 2014
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities in Development Ordinances

Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Local developers
Municipal governments; municipal planning boards
Board; Burlington County Department of Public Works, Engineering Division;
Mandate or incentivize the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in land
development codes
Borough of Gibbsboro Municipal Code, Chapter 358 - Subdivision of Land, Article
VII: http://ecode360.com/10095777
Model Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Land Use Regulations: http://www.csrardc.org/
docs/planning/Transportation/ModelBicycleandPedestrianLandUseRegulationGuide.
pdf
Burlington County currently outlines standards for constructing sidewalks and
bike paths within the county right-of-way; however, neither the county nor any
municipalities in Burlington County mandate or incentivize the construction of
bicycle and pedestrian accommodations.
Burlington County and its constituent municipalities may want to enhance and expand the county bikeway
network through its land development codes. Land development codes(zoning, subdivision, etc.) can be
revised to reflect the desire of a community to supply bikeways by requiring developers to construct them as
a component of a project. Gibbsboro Borough in Camden County requires developers to build a sidewalk
or bikeway alongside new developments through its subdivision ordinance. In circumstances in which the
borough planning or zoning board determines that it is not necessary for a developer to construct a bikeway
path, the applicant is required to make a contribution to the borough, determined by a calculation based on
the frontage of the property. By mandating these provisions through their municipal code, Gibbsboro has
developed one of the largest existing municipal bikeway networks in Camden County. The referenced portion
of Gibbsboros subdivision ordinance is included as Appendix I. It can also be found at the link included
above.
Other communities have encouraged the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in other ways, such as
offering developers density bonuses or reducing minimum parking requirements if a development provides
non-motorized access. Burlington County and its municipalities should consider revising their development
regulations to require or incentivize the provision of safe accommodations for all roadway users.
102
June 2014
Bicycle Parking Ordinances

Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Local developers
Municipal governments; municipal planning boards
Board; local bicyclists; bicycle advocacy groups
Mandate or incentivize the provision of bicycle parking in land development codes
ChangeLab Solutions - Model Bicycle Parking Ordinance: http://
changelabsolutions.org/publications/bike-parking
Pennington Boroughs Policy: http://www.penningtonboro.org/ordinances/2014/
Ordinance_2014-5.pdf
Upper Deerfield Townships Policy: http://www.upperdeerfield.com/2011%20
Ordinances/ORD%20675%20Parking%20Ordinance.pdf
Neither Burlington County nor any municipalities in the county mandate or
incentivize the construction of bicycle parking in their land development code.
Providing bicycle parking is an essential component of any bikeway network. The availability of bicycle
parking helps to prevent theft and can prevent people from locking their bikes in inconvenient locations, such
as on trees and parking meters. Burlington County and municipalities throughout the county can require
or incentivize the construction of bicycle parking through their land development codes. Municipalities
throughout the county could incorporate bicycle parking requirements for new construction, such as a
specific number of bicycle parking spaces per square footage, number of dwelling units, and other measures.
Burlington County, and municipalities within the county, should consider incorporating these types of
requirements into their development codes. Pennington, in neighboring Mercer County, has incorporated
bicycle parking requirements into their zoning ordinance. This section of their zoning ordinance can be seen
in Appendix J.
103
June 2014
Develop a Bicycle Facility Maintenance Program

Target audience
Primary agency
Potential partners
Purpose
Resources
Status
Burlington County Department of Public Works; Burlington County Department

of Resource Conservation; local bicyclists
Burlington County Department of Public Works; Burlington County Department
of Resource Conservation
Local bicyclists and other residents
Maintain bikeways and encourage bicyclists to report maintenance problems and
hazards.
FHWA Lesson on Bicycle Facility Maintenance: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
publications/research/safety/pedbike/05085/pdf/lesson16lo.pdf
Model Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Land Use Regulations: http://www.csrardc.org/
docs/planning/Transportation/ModelBicycleandPedestrianLandUseRegulationGuide.
pdf
Citizen reporting website: http://seeclickfix.com/
Burlington County Division of Roads and Bridges repairs any hazards that affect the
road system; however, issues that affect bikeways are not specifically addressed.
The Burlington County Department of Public Works maintains 506 miles of county roadways by repairing
and correcting any hazards or complaints that affect the road system, such as drainage, road repair, mowing,
and snow removal. Burlington County has an existing maintenance policy in place regarding bike lanes and
park trails. The county should continue to encourage Department of Public Works staff to recognize and
respond to hazards affecting bicyclists through training. These hazards include the build up of silt, sand, and
other debris, such as tree limbs, in roadway shoulders, bike lanes, and paths. Bicyclists needs should also be
considered when plowing county roads. A path free and clear of snow and ice would greatly improve the safety
of bicyclists travelling in the winter months. Overhanging tree limbs and the overgrowth of vegetation into
the path of cyclists is also something that should be addressed. The same maintenance considerations should
also be addressed for multi-use and side paths with Burlington County Resource Conservation, Division of
Parks being responsible for maintaining these types of facilities within county parks.
Likewise, bicyclists should be encouraged to report maintenance problems and hazards. Developing a bicycle
spot improvement form and distributing it to the bicycle community could be an effective way to include
the public. Websites, such as SeeClickFix.com, that allowing citizens to report maintenance issues could also
be effective. Having an ongoing spot improvement program can help the county target specific problem
locations and improve its relationship with the bicycle community.
104
June 2014
10. Funding Sources

Funding for the planning, design, and construction of bikeways is available through a variety of federal,
state, regional, and local programs. While a significant amount of funding is available for these initiatives,
prospective applicants should note the following:
The programs listed below are competitive and receive far more funding requests than can be obligated.
Most programs have application and reporting procedures that require significant staff commitment from
applicants.
Most of these programs distribute funds through reimbursement. Therefore, a grant recipient must have
the resources to pay for a project up-front.
Several grant programs require matching funds.
This funding guide is intended to assist municipalities in Burlington County and other interested groups
with identifying appropriate funding sources for bikeway projects. The funding matrix in Table 13 functions
as an index of these grant programs and provides general program descriptions and eligibility information to
enhance the utility of this guide. While the information provided about funding programs in this document
is current in 2014, the availability of funding, application deadlines, and program eligibility requirements are
subject to change. For more information on a specific program, please contact the program administrator or
refer to the current program guidelines. For assistance determining appropriate funding sources for bikeway
projects, contact Cross County Connection at (856) 596-8228.
105
June 2014
106
June 2014
Table 13: Bikeway Funding Programs

Program
Bikeway Grant
Typical
Funding
Deadline
Programs
(Subject
to
Administrator
Change)
Program
Annual
Total
Eligible Projects
Typical
Allotments Construction
NJDOT
State
September
$2.0 M
(FY 2014)
Municipal Aid
NJDOT
State
September
$78.75 M
(FY 2013)
$150,000 $1M
County Aid
NJDOT
State
February
$78.75 M
(FY 2014)
$1.6M $6.6M
NJDOT
State
Rolling
$5.3 M
(FY 2013)
$43,000
-$450,000
February
$21.0 M
(FY 2013)
$250,000 $1 M
Program
Local Aid
Infrastructure Funds
(LAIF)
Local Bridges, Future
Needs
NJDOT
State
Planning
Eligible Entities
Other
Municipalities
$100,000 $400,000
Counties
Other
Funds projects that promote bicycling as an

alternative mode of transportation. Priority
is given to projects that include dedicated
bicycle paths.
Funds appropriated to municipalities based
on a formula for transportation projects,
including the construction of bikeways.
Funds for the maintenance and rehabilitation

transportation/business/
of county jurisdiction bridges.
http://www.state.nj.us/
localaid/localbridges.shtm
NJDOT
State
September
Green Acres Program
NJDEP
State
February
$57 M
(FY 2013)
$300,000 $975,000
Transportation
Alternatives Program
(TAP)
NJDOT
Federal
May
$15.5 M
(FY 2014)
NA
$30,000 $450,000
$1M - $20M
NJDOT
Federal
May
Transportation
Investment Generating
Economic Recovery
(TIGER) Discretionary
Grants
USDOT
Federal
May
$600 M
localaid/descrfunding.shtm
Discretionary funds to address emergency

and regional transportation needs.
Transit Village
$5.69M
(FY 2012)
localaid/bikewaysf.shtm
$1.0 M
(FY 2013)
Safe Routes to School

Infrastructure Program
Program Website
localaid/municaid.shtm
Funds formulaically appropriated to
counties for projects included on the Annual transportation/business/
Transportation Program (ATP)
localaid/countyaid.shtm
Program Description
$45,000 $295,000
Funds for the design and construction of

bicycle and pedestrian projects within 1/2
mile of transit station. A community must be
a desginated Transit Village to be eligible for
funding.
Grants and loans to fund land acquisition
projects for preservation or recreation as well
as the construction of trails, boardwalks, and
walkways.
Funds programs and projects that are defined
as transportation alternatives, including the
planning, design, and construction of onand off-road bikeways.
Funds for infrastructure projects that
facilitate walking and bicycling within 2
miles of K-8 schools.
Funds road, rail, transit, and port projects.
Each project is multimodal, multijurisdictional or otherwise challenging to
fund through existing programs. A 20%
match is required.
localaid/transitvillagef.shtm
http://www.nj.gov/dep/
greenacres/
localaid/alternatives.shtm
localaid/srts.shtm
http://www.dot.gov/tiger
107
June 2014
Table 13: Bikeway Funding Programs (Continued)

Program
Transportation
and Community
Development Inititative
(TCDI)
Congestion, Mitigation,
and Air Quality
Program (CMAQ)
Typical
Funding
Deadline
Administrator Programs (Subject to
Change)
Program
DVRPC
DVRPC
Recreational Trails
Program (RTP)
NJDEP
Municipal Park
Development Program
Burlington
County
Federal
Federal
Federal
County
Sustainable Jersey Small

Walmart,
Sustainable Jersey
Grant Program
PSE&G
Eligible Projects
Annual
Total
Allotments Construction
May
$1 M
(FY 2014 )
(NJ)
Up to
$100,000
May
$2.6 M
(FY 2013)
(NJ)
$160,000 $1 M
February
$755,000
(2013)
Up to
$24,000
June
$5M
(FY 2013)
Up to
$250,000
January
$400,000
(FY 2014)
Eligible Entities
Typical
$2,000 $20,000
Planning
Other
Municipalities
Counties
Other
Program Description
Funds planning, analysis, or design initiatives

for projects or programs that enhance
development or redevelopment and improve
the efficiency of the regional transportation
system. A 20% match is required.
Funds projects that demonstrably reduce
air pollution emissions or reduce traffic
congestion.
Funds to improve access to open space
and provide additional biking and hiking
opportunities. A 20% match is required.
Funds to assist municipalities in Burlington
County with the development and
improvement of parks for outdoor passive and
active recreation as well as the preservation of
open space and farmland.
Funds to implement Sustainable Jersey
action items, including Complete Streets
and Bicycle and/or Pedestrian Master Plan,.
A municipality must be registered with the
Sustainable Jersey program.
Program Website
http://www.dvrpc.org/
TCDI/
http://www.dvrpc.org/
CMAQ/
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/
parksandforests/natural/
trail_grants.htm
http://www.co.burlington.
nj.us/pages/pages.
aspx?cid=747
http://www.
sustainablejersey.
com/grants-resources/
sustainable-jerseysmallgrants-program/
108
June 2014
State Funding Programs

State funding for bicycle projects is provided primarily through NJDOTs Local Aid Program, which is funded
by New Jerseys Transportation Trust Fund (TTF). Annually, the TTF provides $175 million in State aid to
municipalities and counties for transportation improvements.34 Funds that may be spent on the planning,
design, and construction of bikeways are primarily distributed through the programs listed below.
Bikeway Grant Program
To promote bicycling as an alternative mode of transportation and to further New Jerseys goal of creating
1,000 new miles of dedicated bike paths, NJDOT provides dedicated funds for the construction of bikeways.
These funds can also be used for the preliminary and final design of bicycle facilities in municipalities that are
eligible for Urban Aid or are Depressed Rural Centers according to the Transportation Trust Fund Authority
Act.
The construction of bicycle paths that are physically separated from motorized vehicle traffic are given priority
in the selection process; however, the proposed construction of any bicycle facility will be considered for
funding. Proposals are also evaluated based on the creation of new bikeway mileage, connectivity to existing
bikeways, and community support. Additional consideration is given to communities that have adopted a
Complete Streets policy, are designated Transit Villages or Urban Coordinating Council (UCC) communities,
or formally participate in the implementation of the State Development and Redevelopment Plan (SDRP).
In Fiscal Year 2013, 95 applicants applied for funding through the Bikeways Grant Program. Twelve
communities received funding totaling $2 million, including allotments up to $350,000 for the construction
of bike paths, trails, and on-street bikeways.35
Eligible Activities: Construction
Eligible Entities: Municipalities, Counties
Program Website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/bikewaysf.shtm
Program Contact:
Division of Local Aid and Economic Development, District 4
New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT)
Phone: (856) 486-6618
Fax (856) 486-6771
Municipal Aid Program
Municipal Aid funds are distributed by NJDOT for roadway and bridge improvements. Each county is
appropriated funds for their constituent municipalities based on a formula. A municipality must submit an
application, detailing a potential project, to their local NJDOT District Office. NJDOT has set a goal to
distribute 10% of the competitive Municipal Aid funding to bicycle and pedestrian projects. Municipal Aid
funds are also often used for routine roadway resurfacing and restriping, which can incorporate bikeways to
maximize the effectiveness of these funds at little additional cost.
34
New Jersey Department of Transportation. (2014). Local Aid and Economic Development: Funding Programs. < http://www.
state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/funding.shtm>
35
New Jersey Department of Transportation (2014). State and Federal Aid Programs for Communities [Power Point presentation].
2014 New Jersey Bike & Walk Summit, New Brunswick, NJ.
109
June 2014
Over $78 million in Municipal Aid projects were funded for FY 2013, in which 370 of 677 applications
received funding.36
Eligible Entities: Municipalities
Program Website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/municaid.shtm
Program Contact:
Phone: (856) 486-6618
County Aid Program
NJDOT distributes funds for the construction of roadway and bridge improvements on county roads through
the County Aid Program. These funds are distributed on a formulaic basis, which considers factors such as
population and county roadway mileage.
A project must be included in a countys Annual Transportation Program (ATP) to be considered for funding.
The ATP is an annual list of transportation projects that are eligible for funding and includes a brief summary
of the project and the estimated cost of construction. The ATP is approved by the Countys Board of Chosen
Freeholders before it is submitted to the local NJDOT District Office. County Aid funds are often used
for routine roadway resurfacing and restriping. Incorporating bikeways into these projects can maximize the
effectiveness of these funds at little additional cost.
Over $78 million in county aid was awarded in FY 2014, $4,962,100 of which was allocated to Burlington
County.37
Eligible Entities: Counties
Program Website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/countyaid.shtm
Program Contact:
Phone: (856) 486-6618
Local Aid Infrastructure Fund (LAIF)
The Local Aid Infrastructure Fund is administered by NJDOT to address emergency and regional needs
throughout New Jersey. Projects are selected at the discretion of the NJDOT Commissioner, and applications
for funding may be submitted at any time.
High volume arterial and collector roadways that serve as bus routes are given the highest priority for funding,
36
New Jersey Department of Transportation (2014). State and Federal Aid Programs for Communities [Power Point presentation].
2014 New Jersey Bike & Walk Summit, New Brunswick, NJ.
37
New Jersey Department of Transportation. (2013). FY 2014 County Aid Allotments. < http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/
business/localaid/documents/FY2014Allotments2010cesusandCenterLine.pdf>
110
June 2014
whereas dead end streets, parking lots, street lighting, and non-roadway related projects receive the lowest
priority. LAIF funds have been used to fund bicycle and pedestrian projects that are roadway-related.
In FY 2013, $5.3 million in Local Aid Infrastructure Funds were distributed to municipalities in seven
counties to advance pavement reconstruction and road safety projects.38
Program Website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/descrfunding.shtm
Program Contact:
Phone: (856) 486-6618
Local Bridges, Future Needs
NJDOT provides funds for the improvement of bridges under county jurisdiction, including preventative
maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement. The construction of a bikeway on a county-owned bridge
could be incorporated into a project that is funded by the Local Bridges, Future Needs program.
In FY 2013, 25 projects were awarded a total of $21 million. The grants ranged from $250,000 rehabilitation
projects to $1 million dollar bridge replacements.39
Eligible Entities: Counties
Program Website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/localbridges.shtm
Program Contact:
Phone: (856) 486-6618
Fax (856) 486-6771
Transit Village Grant Program
New Jerseys Transit Village Initiative is a joint project by NJDOT and NJ TRANSIT to incentivize transitoriented development and revitalization around New Jersey rail stations. Municipalities that are designated
Transit Villages may apply for funds to be used for the construction and design of bicycle and pedestrian
projects within the Transit Village area (within mile of a transit station). Municipalities that are served by
rail stations may apply for Transit Village status to become eligible for funding through the grant program.
Currently, Burlington City is the only designated Transit Village in Burlington County. In FY 2013, 14
38
New Jersey Department of Transportation. (2013) Christie Administration announces grants through the Local Aid
Infrastructure Fund program: nearly $2 million supports pedestrian safety and road reconstruction projects. < http://www.state.
nj.us/transportation/about/press/2013/111813.shtm>
39
New Jersey Department of Transportation. (2013). FY 2013 Local Bridges, Future Needs Program Recipients. < http://www.
state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/documents/1stPrirityApprovedProjectsReciepients.pdf>
111
June 2014
municipalities that were designated Transit Villages applied for funding through this program and 10 were
awarded a total of $1 million.40
Eligible Entities: Municipalities that are designated Transit Villages
Program Website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/transitvillagef.shtm
Program Contact:
Phone: (856) 486-6618
Fax (856) 486-6771
Green Acres Program
The Green Acres Program provides grants and loans for the acquisition and development of land for
preservation and recreation. Funds from this program can be used to acquire open space that will be used
for public outdoor recreation or conservation purposes and to build recreational facilities, such as bike paths,
trails, and boardwalks.
Funding amounts vary depending on the type of project and other factors, such as whether a municipality has
an open space tax. Projects are divided into the following categories:
Land Acquisition
Planning Incentive: Local governments with an open space tax and Open Space and Recreation Plan
(OSRP) are eligible for a 50% matching grant for land acquisition.
Standard Acquisition: Local governments without an open space tax may qualify for a 25% grant and the
balance as loan, at 2% interest over 30 years
Urban Aid: Acquisition projects in designated Urban Aid municipalities may qualify for a 75% grant with
the balance as a 30-year, 0% interest loan.
Development Projects
Standard Development: For local governments in rural, less developed municipalities and counties,
funding is available for the development projects in the form of 20-year, 2% interest loan.
Densely/Highly Populated: For local governments in more urbanized municipalities and counties,
funding is available for development projects in the form of a 25% matching grant with the balance as a
2% interest loan.
Urban Aid: Development projects in designated Urban Aid municipalities may be eligible to receive a
50% matching grant with the balance as a 20-year, 0% interest loan.
Nonprofit Funding: Nonprofit organizations may be eligible for 50% matching grants for land acquisition or
recreation development.
40
New Jersey Department of Transportation (2014). State and Federal Aid Programs for Communities [Power Point presentation]. 2014 New
Jersey Bike & Walk Summit, New Brunswick, NJ.
112
June 2014
Eligible Activities: Construction, Other (Land Acquisition)

Eligible Entities: Municipalities, Counties, Other (Nonprofits)
Program Website: http://www.nj.gov/dep/greenacres/
Program Contact:
Terry Caruso, South Central Team Leader, Green Acres Program
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP)
Email: Terry.Caruso@dep.state.nj.us
Phone: (609) 984-0500
Fax: (609) 984-0608
Federal Funding Programs

Federal funds for transportation projects in New Jersey are awarded through a competitive process by NJDOT
or one of the regions three Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). The MPO for Burlington County
is the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC).
Federal funding for transportation projects is primarily provided by programs established under the latest
surface transportation legislation, titled Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). Map21 was signed into law in July 2012 and went into effect on October 1st of the same year. This legislation is
set to expire October 1, 2014, so these programs are subject to change. MAP-21 replaces the previous surface
transportation legislation titled Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (SAFETEA-LU).
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
Transportation Alternatives is a newly created program under MAP-21. The program is designed to foster
more livable communities and promote alternative modes of transportation, such as bicycling and walking.
The program encompasses activities that were previously funded separately by Transportation Enhancements
(TE), Safe Routes to School (SRTS), and the Recreational Trails (RTP) programs.
Eligible projects for TAP funds include the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and the preservation
of abandoned rail corridors, including the conversion and use thereof for trails. While TE funded safety and
education programs, these activities are no longer eligible candidates for TAP funding.
Eligible Activities: Construction, Other
Program Website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/alternatives.shtm
Program Contact:
Phone: (856) 486-6618
113
June 2014
Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Infrastructure Program

SRTS funds are intended to enable and encourage children in grades K-8 to walk or bicycle to school. Eligible
infrastructure projects may include the design and construction of sidewalks, crosswalks, signals, trafficcalming and bicycle facilities within two miles of K-8 school.
Local and regional governments, school districts and individual schools are eligible to be project sponsors and
receive direct funding. Non-profit organizations are no longer eligible to receive direct funding; however, they
may partner with a Local Public Agency (LPA) that obtains and administers the grant.
In FY 2012, twenty-five municipalities received a total of $5.69 million in SRTS infrastructure funds.41
Eligible Entities: Municipalities, Counties, Other (School Districts)
Program Website: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/srts.shtm
Program Contact:
Phone: (856) 486-6618
Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Discretionary Grant Program
TIGER grants may be used to build and repair critical pieces of our freight and passenger transportation
networks. Since 2009, Congress has dedicated more than $4.1 billion for six rounds to fund projects that have
a significant impact on the nation, a region or a metropolitan area. In South Jersey, Camden City obtained a
TIGER grant in 2010 to help construct its bicycle and pedestrian network.
Eligible applicants for TIGER grants include state, local, and county governments, transit agencies, and
metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). Applicants must detail the benefits their project would
deliver for five long-term outcomes: safety, economic competitiveness, state of good repair, livability and
environmental sustainability.
Eligible Entities: Municipalities, Counties, Other
Program Website: http://www.dot.gov/tiger
Program Contact:
Office of Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
U.S. Department of Transportation
Email: TIGERgrants@dot.gov
Phone: (202) 366-0301
Transportation and Community Development Initiative (TCDI)
TCDI is a DVRPC grant program that supports smart growth efforts in communities in the Delaware Valley.
41
New Jersey Department of Transportation. (2012). 2012 Safe Routes to School Recommended List. < http://www.state.nj.us/
transportation/business/localaid/documents/SRTS_2012_Recommended_Allotments.pdf>
114
June 2014
These initiatives must help implement Connections 2040, the regions long-range transportation plan.
The TCDI grant program supports planning, ordinances, design, preliminary engineering, market analyses,
feasibility studies, and capacity building activities that lead to public or private sector investment in smart
growth. Bicycle and pedestrian plans, mobility elements, and bikeway feasibility studies are eligible activities
for TCDI funding.
In FY 2012, sixteen projects in New Jersey were awarded a total of $960,000.42
Eligible Activities: Planning
Program Website: http://www.dvrpc.org/TCDI/
Program Contact:
Karen P. Cilurso, Manager, Community Revitalization
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission
Email: kpcilurso@dvrpc.org
Phone: (215) 238-2876
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ)
The CMAQ program funds projects that improve air quality and reduce congestion. Bicycle projects that
will lead to a reduction in the use of single occupancy vehicles are strong candidates for CMAQ funding, as
opposed to those that are primarily recreational facilities. The program is flexible and features a wide range of
eligible projects including bicycle paths, education and outreach programs. Recently, the CMAQ program has
also been utilized to implement and operate bike share programs throughout the nation. It has also funded
numerous local transportation projects, such as a bike trail in Lawrence Township and roadway improvements
in Camden City.
While matching funds are not required by the CMAQ program, project funding requests that are 80 percent
or less of the total project cost will be considered more favorably in the evaluation process. Additionally,
DVRPC requires applicants to directly fund all pre-construction (i.e. environmental clearance, engineering,
design, utilities, right-of-way) or pre-acquisition activities (i.e. vehicle specifications, lease arrangements). The
construction or acquisition phase of the project could then be funded with 100 percent CMAQ funds. For
non-construction projects, such as marketing or educational programs, applicants may request funding of
up to 100 percent federal CMAQ funds for any or all phases; however, project funding requests that are 80
percent or less of the total project cost will also be considered more favorably in the evaluation process for
these projects.
In FY 2012, five projects in three municipalities in New Jersey obtained a total of $2.7 million in CMAQ
funding.43
Eligible Activities: Construction, Planning, Other (Marketing and Outreach Programs)
42
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. (2012). 2012 New Jersey TCDI Projects. < http://www.dvrpc.org/TCDI/
pdf/2012_NJ_TCDI_Awards.pdf>
43
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. (2012). FY 2011-2012 DVRPC Competitive CMAQ Program Project Awards
for New Jersey. < http://www.dvrpc.org/CMAQ/pdf/2012_CMAQ_NJ_Projects.pdf>
115
June 2014
Program Website: http://www.dvrpc.org/CMAQ/

Program Contact:
Sean Greene, Senior Transportation Planner
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission
Email: sgreene@dvrpc.org
Phone: (215) 238-2860
Recreational Trails Program (RTP)
The Recreational Trails program, administered by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
(NJDEP) funds the development and maintenance of trails, including bicycle paths. Project costs may be
funded up to an 80% federal share with a 20% local match. The 2013 Recreational Trails Program awarded
$755,054 to 39 applicants in 15 counties throughout New Jersey.44
Eligible Entities: Municipalities, Counties, Other (Non-Profits)
Program Website: www.state.nj.us/dep/parksandforests/natural/trail_grants.htm
Program Contact:
John Flynn, Trails Coordinator, Green Acres Program
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP)
Email: john.flynn@dep.state.nj.us
Phone: (609) 984-0628
Other Funding Sources

Municipal Park Development Program
Burlington Countys dedicated Open Space, Recreation, Farmland and Historic Preservation Trust Fund
provides funding to municipalities to assist with development and improvement of parks for outdoor passive
and active recreation and the preservation of open space and farmland.
Program Website: http://www.co.burlington.nj.us/165/Resource-Conservation
Program Contact:
Burlington County Department of Resource Conservation
Phone: (856) 642-3850
Sustainable Jersey Small Grant Program
Sustainable Jersey is a statewide certification program for municipalities that want to go green, save money,
44
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protect. (2013). Christie Administration announces distribution of $755,054 in
Recreational Trail Grants. <http://www.nj.gov/dep/newsrel/2014/14_0030.htm>
116
June 2014
and take steps to sustain their quality of life over the long-term. Participating local governments voluntarily
complete and document actions to earn points toward certification.
Sustainable Jersey offers small grants ranging from $2,000 to $20,000 to assist communities with completing
Sustainable Jersey action items. Over 100 communities have received grants since the program began in
2009. To be eligible for a Sustainable Jersey Small Grant, a community must be registered or certified with
Sustainable Jersey and have an active Green Team. The funds can only be used to implement actions that earn
points in the Sustainable Jersey program.
Several Sustainable Jersey action items are related to providing sustainable transportation options. Safe Routes
to School (10 pts), Complete Streets Program (20 pts), Bicycle and/or Pedestrian Audit (5 pts), and Bicycle
and/or Pedestrian Plan (10 pts) are actions that support the planning and development of a regional bicycle
network and can be funded with a Sustainable Jersey small grant.
Eligible Activities: Planning, Other
Eligible Entities: Municipalities (that are registered with the Sustainable Jersey program and have active
Green Teams)
Program Website: http://www.sustainablejersey.com/
Program Contact:
Jane Rosenblatt, Program Assistant
Sustainable Jersey Small Grants Program
Email: grants@sustainablejersey.com
Phone: (609) 771-2836
117
June 2014
118
June 2014
Appendix A: Public Outreach

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Web Based Survey
Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Survey

Burlington County is developing its first countywide Bicycle Master Plan, and we need your input!
The purpose of the Plan is to develop a strategy for creating a countywide bikeway network. The
project will focus on building a safe, convenient and connected bikeway network that county
residents and visitors can use for daily transportation including commuting and recreation. Much
of this survey is based on the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commissions Shifting Gears
survey, conducted in 2009, in order to build on findings gained through that effort.
Phase I of this two-phase Plan, which includes this survey, will concentrate on where bikeways
should be considered for construction in the County. Phase II, to be completed in 2014, will focus
on how the bikeway network can be constructed. For more information on this project and to keep
informed of its progress, please visit driveless.com/BurlingtonCountyBikePlan.
We appreciate your input!
Name:
________________________________________________________________________
___________________________
Address: ________________________________________________________________________
___________________________
City:
________________________________________________________________________
___________________________
Zip
________________________________________________________________________
Code*: ___________________________
Email: ________________________________________________________________________
___________________________
*response required
Q1
How would you classify yourself as a cyclist?

Experienced
Moderate
Beginner
Infrequent / Never
Q2
Do you feel there are adequate bicycle facilities in Burlington County?

YES
NO
If no, what
________________
additional facilities ________________
would you like to
________________
see?
________________
A-1
Q3
June 2014
Do you feel bicycle facilities in Burlington County are adequately maintained?

YES
NO
Please
_______________________
explain: _______________________
_______________________
_______________________
_______________________
_______________________
_______________________
_______________________
_______________
SECTION A - Questions for Infrequent / Non-Cyclists

A1
Why dont you ride a bicycle or ride infrequently? (select all that apply)
Don't own a bike
Safety concerns
Lack of time
Nowhere to ride
Lack of bicycle facilities
A2
What might motivate you to ride a bicycle? (select all that apply)
More bicycle parking
Increased security on bike paths
Stricter enforcement of traffic laws
More striped bike lanes on major roads
More separated, independent paths
Lights along existing bikeways
A3
What type of trip would you like to use a bicycle for? (select all that apply)
Shopping, appointments, etc.
Work commute
Social visits
Recreation / exercise
School
A4
How do you currently get to work?

Car
Carpool / Vanpool
Bus
Train
Walk
Work from home
A5
Please rank the reasons you feel bicycle facilities should be improved:
Encourage cycling
Access to employment
Access to recreation
Access to universities /
colleges
Access to grade /
middle / high schools
Most Important
Moderately
Important
Least Important
A-2
June 2014
Access to transit
Access to major
shopping destinations
Access to local tourism
destinations
SECTION B - Bicycle Use

B1
Why do you choose to ride your bicycle instead of using another form of transportation?
(select all that apply)
Fitness / health
No public transportation
Don't have a car
Avoid traffic congestion
Saves time
Environmental concerns
Saves money
Enjoyment / recreation
Other
Describe_________________________
other _________________________
reasons: _________________________
_________________________
_________________________
_________________________
_________________________
________________________
B2
What type of trips do you make via bicycle? (select all that apply)
Recreation / exercise
School
Work
Shopping
Social Visits
Other
Describe________________________
other ________________________
trips: ________________________
________________________
________________________
________________________
________________________
________________________
_______
How far per week do you travel for certain trip types?
Under 10 - 25
10 miles miles
Recreation /
exercise
School
Work
Shopping
Social Visits
Other
25 - 50 50 - 100
100
miles
miles miles or
more
A-3
June 2014
How frequently do you make certain trip types?

Less than 1 - 2 times 3 - 4 times 5 - 7 times
once per per week per week per week
week
Recreation /
exercise
School
Work
Shopping
Social Visits
Other
B3
Why don't you ride a bicycle to work? (select all that apply)
I do ride a bicycle to work
Too much traffic / Driver behavior
I prefer to walk
No safe storage facility

Poor roadway conditions
No shower / change facility
Too long to commute
No bike lanes/routes
B4
If you commute by bicycle to work or school, how long have you been doing so?
Less than 6 months
6 months to 1 year
More than 1 year
More than 5 years
B5
What is the estimated travel time for your work / school trip? (please round)
15 minutes
30 minutes
45 minutes
60 minutes
90 minutes
120 minutes
B6
What is the estimated travel distance for your work / school trip?
Less than 1/2 mile
1/2 mile to 1 mile
1 to 2 miles
2 to 5 miles
5 to 10 miles
10 to 25 miles
25 to 50 miles
More than 50 miles
B7
How frequently do you bike to work/school during different periods of the year?
Never Once Once 2 - 3 4 - 5 6 - 7
a
a
Days Days Days
Mont Week
a
a
a
h
Week Week Week
June to August
September to
November
December to
February
March to May
A-4
June 2014
SECTION C - Bicycle Facilities

C1
Please rank your preference for the following types of bicycle facilities:
Most
Preferred
Streets with bike

route signs or
sharrows
Streets with bike
lanes
Off-street paths on
greenways or park
paths
Off-street paths
(even if it is a
detour)
C2
Please rank the reasons you feel bicycle facilities should be improved:
Encourage cycling
Access to employment
Access to recreation
Access to universities /
colleges
Access to transit
Access to grade /
middle / high schools
Access to major
shopping destinations
Access to local tourism
destinations
C3
Least
Preferred
Most Important
Moderately
Important
Least Important
Please rank which bicycle facility design features you would like to see implemented in
the region:
Buffered Bicycle Lanes
(link to example)
Painted Bike Lanes
(link to example)
Shared-use sidewalks
More bicycle-specific
street or route signs
Bike Boxes (link to
example)
Road Diets (link to
example)
Most Attractive
Moderately
Attractive
Least Attractive
A-5
C4
June 2014
Please identify roadways or other

locations where cycling
accommodations should be
improved and state reasons why.
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
_______________
Thank You!
A-6
June 2014
Public Comment Form

COMMENT FORM
Thank you for attending this public meeting for the Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan. Please fill out
this form to help make sure that this Plan is successful in making Burlington County a safe and bicyclefriendly place.
Bikeway Network
1.
Please list streets that should be added to the county bikeway network and why.
2.
Should any of the streets currently in the existing or proposed bikeway network be removed as
bikeways or relocated? Why?
3.
What significant barriers do you think this Plan should address? This could be a roadway,
intersection or anything else that you think prevents safe and convenient cycling in the county.
Page 1 of 2
A-7
4.
June 2014
Creating streets that are safe for bicycle travel often requires trade-offs, such as reducing or
restricting parking, reconfiguring or reducing the number of vehicle travel lanes, or slowing down
vehicle traffic. Do you have any comments or concerns about these trade-offs? Please note specific
streets or corridors if possible.
Goals & Objectives

5.
Do you have any comments or additions to the goals and objectives shown on the display?
Additional Comments
Please feel free to refer your friends, relatives, neighbors or others to the project website:
driveless.com/BurlingtonCountyBikePlan to submit their comments, or email them to:
newman@driveless.com.
Your comments are extremely important, and will be incorporated into the Draft Burlington County Bicycle
Master Plan. The first phase of this Plan is expected to be released for public comment in May 2013.
Please submit all comments by February 14th.
Page 2 of 2
A-8
June 2014
Appendix B: Burlington County Existing Bikeway Network

Bikeway Name
Type
Classification
Mileage
Data Source
Municipality
Chatsworth Rd (CR 679)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
5.3
Bass River Twp
Bass River Twp
Delaware River Heritage Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.1
Bordentown City
Bordentown City
New Jersey Ave
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.5
2004 Inventory
Bordentown Twp
Delaware River Heritage Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.6
Field Verified
Burlington City
Bromley Blvd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.9
2004 Inventory
Burlington Twp
Bustleton Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.9
2004 Inventory
Burlington Twp
Jacksonville Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
Field Verified
Burlington Twp
Lake Ave
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
2004 Inventory
Burlington Twp
Neck Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
Field Verified
Burlington Twp
Old York Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.0
Field Verified
Burlington Twp
Oxmead Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.6
Field Verified
Burlington Twp
Oxmead Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.6
Field Verified
Burlington Twp
Ridgewood Wy
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
2004 Inventory
Burlington Twp
Old York Village Bikeway
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.5
Chesterfield Twp
Chesterfield Twp
Burlington Ave
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.2
Delanco Twp
Delanco Twp
Rancocas Creek Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.3
DVRPC
Delanco Twp
Buttonwood Park Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
Eastampton Twp
Eastampton Twp
Dawn Drive Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.6
Eastampton Twp
Eastampton Twp
Knightsbridge Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.9
Field Verified
Eastampton Twp
Smithville County Park Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
2.6
Eastampton Twp
Eastampton Twp
Abington Av
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.3
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Annapolis Dr
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.3
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Arrowhead Dr
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.2
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Barton Drive Blvd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
4.3
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Barton Run Blvd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
2.3
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Braddock Mill Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.7
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Brick Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.6
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Brick Road and Sunnyside
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Carlton Av
On-Road
Bicycle Route
1.6
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Columbia Dr
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.2
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Commonwealth Dr
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.7
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Connecting Way
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.2
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
B-1

Bikeway Name
June 2014
Type
Classification
Mileage
Data Source
Municipality
Cooper Av
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.2
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Coventry Cir W
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.5
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Crown Royal Pkwy
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
3.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
East Main St
On-Road
Bicycle Route
2.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Elmwood Rd N
On-Road
Bicycle Route
1.8
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Evans Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
1.5
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Evesboro-Medford Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.5
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Evesboro-Medford Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
2.5
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Forestview Ct
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.0
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Four Crown Royal Cir
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Fox Chase Road
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Greentree Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Hewlings Dr
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.5
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Kettle Run Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
4.7
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Kings Grant Dr
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
2.0
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Knox Blvd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.2
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Lady Diana Cir
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.6
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Lexington
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.1
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Locust Ave
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Longhurst Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Longhurst Road
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.2
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Marlton Pkwy
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
1.6
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Marlton Pkwy West Bound
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
1.6
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Masters Cir
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Merchants Way
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.1
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
N Locust Ave
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Olympia Dr
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.1
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Omaha Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.1
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Parkdale Place
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.2
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Phoenix Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.3
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Picadilly Cir
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.5
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Pineview Dr
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Plymouth
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Radnor Bvld
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.5
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
S Locust Av
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.3
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
B-2

Bikeway Name
June 2014
Type
Classification
Mileage
Data Source
Municipality
S Maple Av.
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.1
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Taunton Lake Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
1.9
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Tenby Lane
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.4
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Tomlinson Mill Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
1.8
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Tuckerton Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
1.0
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Two Crown Royal
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.5
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Two Crown Royal
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.4
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Wellington Drive
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.2
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Wescott Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.5
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Willow Bend Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.8
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Willow Ridge Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.6
Evesham Twp
Evesham Twp
Yarmouth Cir
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.7
Field Verified
Evesham Twp
Old York Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.5
Florence Twp, Field

Verified
Florence Twp
Old York Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.8
Florence Twp, Field

Verified
Florence Twp
Bortons Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
Medford Twp
Medford Twp
Dixontown Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
1.4
Medford Twp
Medford Twp
Estaugh Way
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Medford Twp; Field

Verified
Medford Twp
Fairview Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.1
Medford Twp
Medford Twp
Off Church Road
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.8
Medford Twp
Medford Twp
Off Hartford Road
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.1
Medford Twp
Medford Twp
Dixontown Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.1
Medford Twp
Medford Twp
Borton Landing Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
2.3
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Centerton Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Church Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.3
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Creek Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Garwood Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
Moorestown Twp;
Field Verified
Moorestown Twp
Hartford Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
2.1
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Marne Highway
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
Moorestown Twp;
Field Verified
Moorestown Twp
Marter Ave
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
New Albany Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.3
Moorestown Twp;
Field Verified
Moorestown Twp
B-3

Bikeway Name
June 2014
Type
Classification
Mileage
Data Source
Municipality
Riverton Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.7
Moorestown Twp;
Field Verified
Moorestown Twp
Salem Crossing Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Salem Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.0
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Sheffield Dr
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Tom Brown Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.1
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Westfield Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.1
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Young Ave
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
Moorestown Twp
Moorestown Twp
Mt Holly to Birmingham Rail

Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.5
DVRPC
Mount Holly Twp
Mt Holly to Medford Rail Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
DVRPC
Mount Holly Twp
Bishop's Gate Blvd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.7
Mount Laurel Twp
Mount Laurel Twp
Briggs Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.3
Mount Laurel Twp;

Field Verified
Mount Laurel Twp
Centerton Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.8
Mount Laurel Twp
Mount Laurel Twp
Duffy's Dr
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.6
Mount Laurel Twp;

Field Verified
Mount Laurel Twp
Hovtech Blvd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.2
Mount Laurel Twp
Mount Laurel Twp
Leadenhall Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.7
Mount Laurel Twp
Mount Laurel Twp
Marter Ave
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Mount Laurel Twp
Mount Laurel Twp
Midlantic Dr
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.7
Mount Laurel Twp
Mount Laurel Twp
Walton Ave
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.9
Mount Laurel Twp
Mount Laurel Twp
Ft. Dix Rd (Rt. 616)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.8
New Hanover Twp
New Hanover Twp
Birmingham to Pemberton Rail

Trail
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.6
DVRPC
Pemberton Twp
Juliustown Rd (Rt. 616)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.7
Pemberton Twp
Pemberton Twp
Pemberton-Wrightstown Rd(Rt
616)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
1.0
Pemberton Twp
Pemberton Twp
Pemberton Rd (Rt. 616)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.7
Pemberton Twp
Pemberton Twp
Rt 616
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.3
Pemberton Twp
Pemberton Twp
Rt 646 (Four Mile Rd)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
4.7
Pemberton Twp
Pemberton Twp
Carranza Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
2.2
Field Verified; 2004

Inventory
Tabernacle Twp
Chatsworth Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
0.8
2004 Inventory
Tabernacle Twp
Chatsworth Rd (Rt. 532)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
5.5
2004 Inventory
Tabernacle Twp
Medford Lakes Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
1.3
2004 Inventory
Tabernacle Twp
Batsto Bridgeport Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
4.6
Washington Twp
Washington Twp
B-4

Bikeway Name
June 2014
Type
Classification
Mileage
Data Source
Municipality
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
1.6
Washington Twp
Washington Twp
Greenbank Chatsworth Rd (CR

563)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
11.2
Washington Twp
Washington Twp
Westampton
Path
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Westampton Twp
Westampton Twp
Willingboro Bicycle Route
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.7
Willingboro Twp;
Field Verified
Willingboro Twp
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.6
Willingboro Twp;
Field Verified
Willingboro Twp
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.4
Willingboro Twp;
Field Verified
Willingboro Twp
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
1.0
Willingboro Twp;
Field Verified
Willingboro Twp
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.7
Willingboro Twp;
Field Verified
Willingboro Twp
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
3.6
2004 Inventory
Woodland Twp
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
4.1
2004 Inventory
Woodland Twp
New Gretna Chatsworth Rd

(CR 563)
On-Road
Bicycle Lane
7.9
2004 Inventory
Woodland Twp
Saylor's Pond Rd
Off-Road
Bicycle Path
0.4
Field Verified
Wrightstown
Borough
Saylor's Pond Rd
On-Road
Bicycle Route
0.3
Wrightstown Borough
Wrightstown
Borough
Township
Bike
B-5
June 2014
B-6
June 2014
Appendix C: Burlington County Proposed Network

Project Prioritization Criteria Ranking Results
Project Location
ID#
49
Prince St
Bridgeboro St
185
County
Road
N/A
613
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
On-road
On-road
Burlington St
Fairview St (CR 605)
W Park St
Silverwood Dr
0.4
1.4
Primary
Secondary
79
Madison Ave
N/A
On-road
Rancocas Creek
Creek Island Park
0.1
Bordentown City
Riverside Twp.;
Delran Twp.
Mount Holly Twp.
10
Washington St
N/A
On-road
Hunterdon Ave
High St
0.8
183
Fairview St
605
On-road
River Rd (CR 543)
US 130
1.5
53
River Rd
N/A
On-road
Hornberger Ave
Assiscunk Creek
5.5
23
High St
N/A
On-road
Garden St (CR 626)
1.0
69
Pavilion Ave
N/A
On-road
Mount Holly Bypass (CR

541)
Rancocas Ave
River Rd
0.4
132
Crosswicks St
528
On-road
Farnsworth Ave (CR 545)
Chesterfield Arneytown Rd
(CR 664)
5.7
9
182
21
Mill St
Chester Ave
Cinnaminson Ave
N/A
604
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
High St
US 130
Bank Ave
Mill St (CR 621)

River Rd (CR 543)
US 130
0.4
1.5
1.8
167
Maple Ave
607
On-road
Church Rd (CR 616)
Arrowhead Dr
2.1
145
141
Columbus Rd
Jacksonville Rd
655
670
On-road
On-road
US 130
US 130
Assiscunk Creek
Hunter Dr
0.4
2.5
19
Church St
N/A
On-road
Moorestown Township Line
Church Rd (CR 616)
5.9
114
227
Pine St
Madison Ave
612
691
On-road
On-road
Mill St (CR 537)

Creek Island Park Bike Path
South Ave (CR 683)

NJ 38
0.7
0.6
54
Pearl St
N/A
On-road
Assiscunk Creek
Wood St
0.7
Mount Holly Twp.;

Hainesport Twp.
Riverside Twp.;
Delran Twp.
FlorenceTwp.;
Burlington Twp.;
Burlington City
Mount Holly Twp.
Delanco Twp.;
Riverside Twp.
Bordentown Twp.;
Chesterfield Twp.;
Bordentown City
Mount Holly Twp.
Delran Twp.
Cinnaminson Twp.,
Palmyra Borough
Mount Laurel Twp.;
Evesham Twp.
Burlington City
Burlington Twp.;
Burlington City;
Springfield Twp.
Cinnaminson Twp.;
Moorestown Twp.,
Mount Laurel Twp.
Mount Holly Twp.
Mount Holly Twp.;
Lumberton Twp.
Burlington City
Trail
Designation
DRHT
None
Utility
Score
59
61
Feasibility
Score
20
17
Total
Score
79
78
Implementation
Phase
Immediate
Immediate
64
13
77
Short-Term
Primary
Rancocas
Greenway
None
64
11
75
Short-Term
Secondary
None
61
13
74
Short-Term
Primary
DRHT
61
12
73
Short-Term
Primary
None
59
14
73
Short-Term
Primary
DRHT
66
72
Short-Term
Secondary
None
59
13
72
Short-Term
Primary
Secondary
Primary
None
None
None
59
56
58
12
15
12
71
71
70
Short-Term
Short-Term
Short-Term
Secondary
None
52
18
70
Immediate
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
56
66
14
3
70
69
Short-Term
Medium-Term
Primary
None
50
17
67
Immediate
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
54
57
13
10
67
67
Short-Term
Short-Term
Primary
DRHT
66
66
Short-Term
Primary
C-1
June 2014
Project Location
ID#
41
Rancocas Rd
County
Road
N/A
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
On-road
High St (CR 541)
Amara Ln
2.1
163
Main St-Tuckerton Rd
620
On-road
Stokes Rd (CR 541)
Maple Ave (CR 607)
8.6
202
Delanco Rd
624
On-road
Mt Holly Rd (CR 626)
Burlington Ave (CR 543)
1.9
70
River Rd
N/A
On-road
Pavilion Ave
Market St
4.7
22
84
85
High St
N/A
Pemberton-Browns Mills Rd N/A
Four Mile Rd
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
Mill St (CR 537)

Trenton Rd (CR 545)
Mt Misery Rd (CR 645)
0.2
3.8
0.8
121
15
40
Delaware Ave
E Main St
High St
656
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
Garden St (CR 626)

Pemberton Bypass (CR 530)
Pemberton-Browns Mill Rd
(CR 530)
Hornberger Ave
Church St (CR 607)
US 130 SB
Burlington Twp.;
Willingboro Twp.;
Westampton Twp.
Medford Twp.;
Evesham Twp.;
Medford Lakes
Borough
Edgewater Park
Twp., Delanco Twp.
Riverside Twp.;
Delran Twp.;
Cinnaminson Twp.;
Riverton Borough;
Palmyra Borough
Mount Holly Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
US 130
Marter Ave
Rancocas Rd (CR 635)
0.7
1.6
0.8
20
46
80
N/A
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
Off-road
US 130
Memorial Field
Pine St
Moorestown Township Line

US 130
Route 206
1.2
1.1
1.0
178
Church Rd
Cooper St
Mt Holly Pemberton Rail
Trail
Mt Laurel Rd
603
On-road
Main St (Moorestown)
Church Rd (CR 616)
4.5
171
Greentree Rd
616
On-road
Church Rd (CR 616)
0.2
99
113
48
229
65
Broadway St
South Ave
W Park St
Public Rd
Cooper St
667
683
N/A
543
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Evesboro-Medford Rd (CR
618)
W Lakeshore Dr (CR 667)
Pine St (CR 612)
RiverLine tracks
West Broad St (CR 543)
Memorial Field
Trenton Rd (CR 545)

Madison Ave (CR 691)
Prince St
New River Rd (CR 543)
Warren St
0.4
0.7
0.1
0.2
0.5
220
14
Polk St
W Main St
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
N Fairview St
Kings Hwy (CR 611)
Monroe St
Church St (CR 607)
0.5
0.3
Florence Twp.
Moorestown Twp.
Burlington Twp.;
Burlington City
Cinnaminson Twp.
Edgewater Park Twp.
Eastampton Twp.;
Mount Holly Twp.
Moorestown Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
Evesham Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Mount Holly Twp.
Bordentown City
Palmyra Borough
Edgewater Park
Twp.; Beverly City
Riverside Twp.
MoorestownTwp.
Primary
Trail
Designation
None
Utility
Score
49
Feasibility
Score
17
Total
Score
66
Implementation
Phase
Immediate
Secondary
None
55
10
65
Short-Term
Secondary
None
50
15
65
Short-Term
Primary
DRHT
60
64
Short-Term
Primary
Primary
Primary
None
None
None
59
52
50
5
12
14
64
64
64
Short-Term
Immediate
Short-Term
Secondary
Primary
Primary
DRHT Alt
None
None
48
50
61
15
13
2
63
63
63
Short-Term
Short-Term
Short-Term
Primary
Primary
Primary
None
None
None
42
47
47
20
15
15
62
62
62
Immediate
Short-Term
Immediate
Secondary
None
50
12
62
Medium-Term
Secondary
None
38
24
62
Immediate
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Primary
None
None
DRHT
DRHT
50
47
59
53
48
12
15
2
9
13
62
62
61
62
61
Long-Term
Short-Term
Short-Term
Medium-Term
Short-Term
Secondary
Primary
DRHT Alt
None
61
49
0
12
61
61
Short-Term
Short-Term
C-2
June 2014
Project Location
ID#
18
Church Rd
County
Road
N/A
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
Primary
Trail
Designation
None
Utility
Score
42
Feasibility
Score
19
Total
Score
61
Implementation
Phase
Immediate
On-road
Hainesport Mt Laurel Rd
(CR 674)
Mt. Holly to Medford Rail

Trail
5.5
31
203
High St
Mt Holly Rd
N/A
626
On-road
On-road
Pearl Blvd
US 130
US 130 SB
Bridgeboro Rd
0.7
1.0
192
Pemberton-Arneys Mill Rd
668
On-road
Monmouth Rd (CR 537)
Fort Dix Rd (CR 616)
3.8
50
Burlington-Bordentown Rd
N/A
On-road
US 130
Prince St
1.9
16
Camden Ave
N/A
On-road
Township Line
Kings Hwy (CR 611)
1.7
37
Mill St
N/A
On-road
Branch St (CR 537)
Jennifer Ct
0.6
38
225
146
190
River Line Trail Extension

Main St
Trenton Rd
Pemberton Rd
N/A
541
545
616
Off-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Farnsworth Ave
Mt Holly Bypass (CR 541)
Pemberton Blvd
Main St (CR 616)
W Park St. (DRHT)

Reeves Station Rd
Juliustown Rd (CR 530)
Elizabeth St (CR 687)
0.2
2.9
1.5
4.9
208
Sunset Rd
634
On-road
Charleston Rd (CR 630)
3.3
144
17
205
Neck Rd
W Main St
Warren St
658
N/A
543
On-road
On-road
On-road
River Rd (CR 656)

County Line
Edgewater Ave
Burlington-Mt Holly Rd
(CR 541)
US 130
Township Line
Eagle Ln
0.7
1.4
2.4
89
Mt Holly to Medford Rail

Trail
N/A
Off-road
Madison Ave. (CR 691)
N. Main St. (CR 541)
6.7
100
60
232
64
68
120
180
W Lakeshore Dr
Louis Kite Field
Evesham Rd
Roosevelt Park
Burlington Ave
Florence-Columbus Rd
Chester Ave
667
N/A
544
N/A
N/A
656
603
On-road
Off-road
On-road
Off-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Bayberry St (CR 667)

Lincoln Ave
Route 73
Roosevelt Ave
Eagle Ln
US 130
Main St (Moorestown)
Broadway St (CR 667)

Woodlane Rd
Camden County Line
Cooper St
Rancocas Ave
Old York Rd (CR 660)
Bridgeboro Rd (CR 613)
0.8
0.1
0.3
0.5
1.4
1.1
0.8
Evesham Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.;
Medford Twp.
Burlington City
Edgewater Park Twp;
Willingboro Twp.
Springfield Twp.;
Pemberton Twp.
Bordentown Twp.;
Bordentown Twp.;
Fieldsboro Borough
Maple Shade Twp.;
Moorestown Twp.
Eastampton Twp.;
Mount Holly Twp.
Bordentown City
Lumberton Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Pemberton Twp.;
Southampton Twp.;
Pemberton Borough
Burlington Twp.;
Willingboro Twp.
Burlington Twp.
Maple ShadeTwp.
Edgewater Park
Twp.; Beverly City;
Delanco Twp.
Mount Holly Twp.;
Lumberton Twp.;
Medford Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Edgewater Park Twp.
Evesham Twp.
Edgewater Park Twp.
Delanco Twp.
Florence Twp.
Moorestown Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
Primary
Secondary
None
None
61
52
0
9
61
61
Short-Term
Medium-Term
Secondary
None
47
14
61
Medium-Term
Primary
DRHT
54
60
Short-Term
Primary
None
44
15
59
Medium-Term
Primary
None
44
15
59
Medium-Term
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
None
None
59
43
50
46
0
16
9
13
59
59
59
59
Medium-Term
Immediate
Long-Term
Long-Term
Secondary
None
48
11
59
Long-Term
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
None
None
None
45
43
46
14
15
12
59
58
58
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
Primary
Mount Holly
to Medford
Rail Trail
None
DRHT
52
57
Medium-Term
45
41
47
46
50
43
45
12
15
10
10
6
13
11
57
56
57
56
56
56
56
Long-Term
Immediate
Long-Term
Short-Term
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
DRHT
DRHT
DRHT Alt
None
C-3
June 2014
Project Location
ID#
181
Riverton Rd
County
Road
603
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
On-road
Bank Ave
Bridgeboro Rd (CR 613)
4.7
172
Church Rd
616
On-road
Greentree Rd (CR 674
Tam Oshanter Rd
1.2
200
177
Landing St
Hainesport-Mt Laurel Rd
641
674
On-road
On-road
Municipal Dr
Church Rd (CR 616)
Chestnut St (CR 641)

Marne Hwy (CR 537)
0.2
6.3
3
11
Main St
Marne Hwy
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
NJ 70
Moorestown Centerton Rd
(Cr 537)
Trimble St
Hunterdon Ave
0.8
5.6
29
Beverly Rd
N/A
On-road
US 130
Main St
3.1
30
Levitt Parkway
N/A
On-road
Springside Dr (CR 635)
2.5
138
Levitt Pkwy
629
On-road
US 130
1.0
197
51
Main St
US 130
681
N/A
On-road
On-road
Mill St (CR 616)

Burlington-Bordentown Rd
Buddtown Rd (CR 642)

Hornberger Ave
0.5
1.9
230
52
71
221
New River Rd
Hornberger Ave
Market Street
American Legion Dr
543
N/A
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Public Rd
US 130
Tacony Palmyra Bridge
Amico Island Park
Camden County Line

Delaware Ave (CR 656)
W Broad St
River Rd (CR 543)
0.3
1.3
0.7
1.0
72
N/A
Off-road
Rhawn St
Pennington Farm
0.4
42
47
Newton's Landing Trail

Connector
Springside Rd
Charleston Rd
Cinnaminson Twp.;
Riverton Borough;
Moorestown Twp.
Evesham Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
Lumberton Twp.
Mount Laurel Twp.;
Hainesport Twp.;
Evesham Twp.
Medford Twp.
Moorestown Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.;
Hainesport Twp.
Edgewater Park
Twp.; Willingboro
Twp.
Willingboro Twp.;
Westampton Twp.
Edgewater Park
Twp.; Willingboro
Twp.
Southampton Twp.
Bordentown Twp.;
Florence Twp.;
Mansfield Twp.
Palmyra Borough
Florence Twp.
Palmyra Borough
Riverside Twp.;
Delran Twp.
Delanco Twp.
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
Woodlane Rd (CR 630)

US 130
Springside Rd (CR 635)

Levitt Parkway (CR 630)
0.8
0.8
187
206
Westfield Rd
Salem Rd
614
633
On-road
On-road
Haines Mill Rd
Salem Rd (CR 688)
Borton Landing Rd
Mill Rd
2.4
1.4
Westampton Twp.
Edgewater Park
Twp.; Willingboro
Twp.
Moorestown Twp
Burlington Twp.
Secondary
Trail
Designation
None
Utility
Score
44
Feasibility
Score
12
Total
Score
56
Implementation
Phase
Long-Term
Secondary
None
40
16
56
Medium-Term
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
42
38
14
18
56
56
Long-Term
Immediate
Primary
Primary
None
None
37
42
18
13
55
55
Immediate
Medium-Term
Primary
None
52
54
Long-Term
Primary
None
44
10
54
Long-Term
Secondary
None
44
10
54
Long-Term
Secondary
Primary
None
DRHT
30
53
24
0
54
53
Immediate
Medium-Term
DRHT
DRHT
DRHT Alt
48
53
53
53
6
0
0
0
54
53
53
53
Medium-Term
Short-Term
Short-Term
Short-Term
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
45
53
Immediate
Primary
Primary
Rancocas
Greenway
None
None
41
44
12
9
53
53
Long-Term
Long-Term
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
38
48
15
5
53
53
Medium-Term
Long-Term
C-4
June 2014
Project Location
ID#
124
Old York Rd
County
Road
660
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
Secondary
Trail
Designation
None
Utility
Score
38
Feasibility
Score
15
Total
Score
53
Implementation
Phase
Medium-Term
On-road
Florence Twp.
Main St
Main St
Landing St
691
616
641
On-road
On-road
On-road
Jacksonville Rd/Cedar Ln
Ext (CR 693)
Mt Holly Bypass (CR 541)
Pemberton Rd (CR 616)
Municipal Dr
0.2
226
189
199
Burlington-Bustleton Rd
(CR 661)
NJ 38
Mill St (CR 616)
Church Rd (CR 616)
0.7
0.2
3.2
201
Lumberton Rd
641
On-road
Marne Hwy (CR 537)
Landing St (CR 641)
1.9
168
Greentree Rd
674
On-road
Lincoln Dr
1.0
119
693
On-road
0.7
55
Jacksonville Rd/Cedar Ln
Ext
W Broad St
N/A
On-road
Commerce Square Blvd
Evesboro-Medford Rd (CR
618)
Burlington-Columbus Rd
(CR 543)
Devlin Ave
Lumberton Twp.
Southampton Twp.
Lumberton Twp.;
Southampton Twp.
Hainesport Twp.;
Lumberton Twp.
Evesham Twp.
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
None
43
30
37
10
22
15
53
52
52
Short-Term
Immediate
Medium-Term
Secondary
None
38
14
52
Long-Term
Secondary
None
40
12
52
Medium-Term
Florence Twp.
Secondary
None
38
14
52
Medium-Term
0.3
Burlington Twp.,
Burlington City
Burlington Twp.;
Edgewater Park Twp.
Edgewater Park Twp.
Pemberton Twp.;
Pemberton Borough
Evesham Twp.
Florence Twp.;
Burlington Twp.
Pemberton Twp.;
Pemberton Borough
Westampton Twp.;
Mount Holly Twp.;
Hainesport Twp.
Westampton Twp.;
Mount Holly Twp.
Delran Twp.;
Moorestown Twp.
Florence Twp.;
Mansfield Twp.;
Burlington Twp.
Bordentown Twp.
Delran Twp.;
Moorestown Twp.
Mount Holly Twp.;
Hainesport Twp.
Primary
DRHT
51
51
Medium-Term
57
Beverly Rd
N/A
On-road
Devlin Ave
Woodlake Park
1.1
Primary
DRHT
43
51
Medium-Term
61
90
N/A
N/A
Off-road
Off-road
0.3
1.5
N/A
661
On-road
On-road
Beverly Rd
Pemberton Rail Trail North
Branch
Lincoln Dr
Equestrian Dr
York Dr
Magnolia Rd.
169
125
Woodlake Park
Pemberton Rail Trail South
Branch
Greentree Rd
Burlington-Bustleton Rd
Primary
Primary
41
46
10
5
51
51
Short-Term
Medium-Term
Secondary
Secondary
DRHT
Pemberton Rail
Trail
None
None
County Line
0.8
1.4
50
38
1
13
51
51
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
191
Pemberton-Browns Mills Rd 687
On-road
Pemberton Bypass (CR 530) 1.6
Secondary
None
36
15
51
Medium-Term
78
Rancocas State Park Trail
N/A
Off-road
NJ Turnpike
King St
5.4
Primary
Rancocas
Greenway
47
50
Medium-Term
24
Burlington Mount Holly Rd N/A
On-road
0.4
104
Haines Mill Rd
N/A
On-road
US 130
Mount Holly Bypass (CR

541)
Westfield Rd
Primary
None
32
18
50
Long-Term
1.6
Secondary
None
50
50
Long-Term
209
Columbus Rd
543
On-road
Neck Rd
Florence Rd (CR 656)
3.4
Secondary
None
35
15
50
Medium-Term
133
186
Farnsworth Ave
Bridgeboro Rd
545
613
On-road
On-road
US 130
Riverton Rd (CR 603)
US 206
Rancocas Greenway
0.3
3.7
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
37
37
13
13
50
50
Long-Term
Immediate
222
Remer St
N/A
Off-road
Arch St
Rancocas Greenway
2.7
Secondary
Rancocas Alt
47
49
Long-Term
C-5
June 2014
Project Location
ID#
13
Marne Hwy
County
Road
N/A
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
On-road
Marter Ave
0.8
179
Lenola Rd
608
On-road
Church St (CR 607)
(CR 537)
NJ 38
3.6
204
Bridgeboro Rd
626
On-road
Mt Holly Rd
Warren St (CR 543)
0.8
8
219
Branch St
Union St
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
Mill St (CR 621)

Washington St
Garden St (CR 617)

Dunns Mill Rd
0.4
0.8
73
Off-road
Pennington Farm
US 130
0.3
88
115
Holiday Lakes Trail

N/A
Connector
Medford Mt Holly Rd
N/A
Burlington Mount Holly Rd 541
Moorestown Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
Cinnaminson Twp.;
Moorestown Twp.;
Maple Shade Twp.
Edgewater Park
Twp.; Beverly City
Mount Holly Twp.
Bordentown Twp.;
Fieldsboro Borough
Delanco Twp.
On-road
On-road
Church Rd
Elbow Ln
NJ 70
0.8
2.4
207
John F Kennedy Way
633
On-road
Salem Rd (CR688)
2.1
62
63
74
Lincoln Ave
Roosevelt Ave
Rt. 130 Bridge
N/A
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
Off-road
Beverly Rancocas Rd (CR

626)
Louis Kite Field
Lincoln Ave
Holiday Lakes
Roosevelt Ave
Roosevelt Park
S Bridgeboro St
0.2
0.1
0.4
75
Anderson Farm Trail
N/A
Off-road
S Bridgeboro St
Anderson Farm
1.0
143
Neck Rd
N/A
On-road
US 130
1.6
153
Batsto-Bridgeport Rd
542
On-road
Green Bank Rd (CR 563)
34
39
87
101
134
Kinkora Trail Phase I

Columbus Rd
East Main St
Bayberry St
Chesterfield Crosswicks Rd
N/A
N/A
N/A
667
667
Off-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Greenbank-Chatsworth Rd
(CR 563)
US 130
Mill Ln
US 206
E Lakeshore Dr (CR 667)
184
154
Fairview St
Green Bank Rd
N/A
563
On-road
On-road
Columbus Rd (CR 543)

US 206
Mansfield Twp Park
W Lakeshore Dr (CR 667)
Bordentown Chesterfield Rd
(CR 528)
Hartford Rd
County Line
US 130
Batsto-Bridgeport Rd (CR
542)
Medford Twp.
Burlington Twp.;
Westampton Twp
Burlington Twp.;
Willingboro Twp.
Edgewater Park Twp.
Edgewater Park Twp.
Delanco Twp.;
Willingboro Twp.;
Delran Twp.
Delran Twp.
Primary
Trail
Designation
None
Utility
Score
40
Feasibility
Score
9
Total
Score
49
Implementation
Phase
Medium-Term
Secondary
None
43
49
Long-Term
Secondary
None
38
11
49
Long-Term
Primary
Secondary
None
DRHT Alt
36
47
12
0
48
47
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Primary
45
47
Long-Term
Primary
Secondary
Rancocas
Greenway
None
None
37
36
10
11
47
47
Immediate
Long-Term
Secondary
None
42
47
Long-Term
Primary
Primary
Primary
DRHT
DRHT
Rancocas
Greenway
46
46
46
0
0
0
46
46
46
Short-Term
Short-Term
Long-Term
Primary
41
46
Medium-Term
45
46
Medium-Term
Secondary
0.1
Burlington Twp.;
Springfield Twp.
Washington Twp.
Rancocas
Greenway
None
Secondary
None
36
10
46
Long-Term
3.6
0.1
0.2
0.2
1.4
Mansfield Twp.
Mansfield Twp.
Mansfield Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Kinkora
Kinkora
Kinkora
None
None
40
30
30
30
24
5
15
15
15
21
45
45
45
45
45
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Immediate
0.3
0.6
Delran Twp.
Washington Twp.
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
41
31
3
13
44
44
Long-Term
Long-Term
C-6
June 2014
Project Location
ID#
107
Cookstown Rd
County
Road
616
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
On-road
Jacobstown Cookstown Rd
(CR 665)
Cookstown Wrightstown Rd 0.2

(CR 616)
56
66
94
Devlin Ave
Cooper St
Pemberton to Wrightstown
Rail Trail I
N/A
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
Off-road
W Broad St
Warren St
Hanover St (CR 616)
Beverly Rd
Broad St
Juliustown-Browns Mill Rd
25
Woodlane Rd
N/A
On-road
Irick Rd (CR 637)
215
Bordentown-Georgetown Rd 545
On-road
US 206
Burlington Mount Holly Rd 1.4

(CR 541)
Chesterfield Rd
4.9
217
Fort Dix St
545
On-road
Main St
Wrightstown-Georgetown
Rd (CR 545)
0.3
176
Church Rd
616
On-road
NJ 73
County Line
1.7
188
Church Rd
616
On-road
Main St (CR 681)
3.9
111
Jacksonville Rd
628
On-road
Clover St
Medford-Mt Holly Rd (CR

541)
Burlington Jacksonville Rd
(CR 670)
223
Shreeve St
N/A
On-road
Pine St
W. Railroad Ave
1.1
Stokes Rd
N/A
On-road
Trimble St
Tabernacle Rd (CR 532)
2.2
4
83
Pemberton Rd
Pemberton Bypass
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
US 206
Hanover St (CR 616)
224
Medford Mt Holly Rd
541
On-road
Reeves Station Rd

3.1
Pemberton-Browns Mills Rd 2.1
(CR 530)
Church Rd (CR 616)
1.4
164
Taunton Lake Rd
544
On-road
Kings Grant Dr
Taunton Blvd (CR 623)
2.2
218
Evesboro-Medford Rd
618
On-road
Delancey Wy
Route 70
1.1
108
Jacobstown Cookstown Rd
665
On-road
Chesterfield Jacobstown Rd
(CR 528)
Cookstown Rd (CR 616)
2.4
0.4
0.3
2.6
3.6
Municpalities
Corridor
Trail
Designation
None
Utility
Score
29
Feasibility
Score
15
Total
Score
44
Implementation
Phase
Long-Term
North Hanover
Twp.; New Hanover
Twp.
Burlington Twp.
Beverly City
Pemberton Twp.
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Primary
43
43
37
0
0
6
43
43
43
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Primary
DRHT
DRHT
Pemberton to
Wrightstown
Rail Trail
None
Westampton Twp.
31
12
43
Long-Term
Bordentown Twp.;
Chesterfield Twp.;
Mansfield Twp.
North Hanover
Twp.; Wrightstown
Borough
Mount Laurel Twp.;
Maple Shade Twp.
Southampton Twp.;
Medford Twp.
Springfield Twp.;
Westampton Twp.;
Mount Holly Twp.
Eastampton Twp.;
Mount Holly Twp.
Medford Twp.;
Medford Lakes
Borough
Pemberton Twp.
Pemberton Twp.;
Pemberton Borough
Medford Twp.;
Lumberton Twp.
Medford Twp.;
Evesham Twp.
Medford Twp.;
Evesham Twp.
North Hanover Twp.
Secondary
None
32
11
43
Long-Term
Secondary
None
29
14
43
Long-Term
Secondary
None
30
13
43
Medium-Term
Secondary
None
30
13
43
Medium-Term
Secondary
None
31
12
43
Long-Term
Secondary
Rancocas Alt
42
42
Long-Term
Primary
None
37
42
Immediate
Primary
Primary
None
None
32
41
10
1
42
42
Long-Term
Long-Term
Secondary
None
22
20
42
Immediate
Secondary
None
32
10
42
Long-Term
Secondary
None
32
10
42
Long-Term
Secondary
None
29
13
42
Long-Term
C-7
Project
ID#
58
59
45
139
140
112
Location
June 2014
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
Woodlane Rd
York Dr
Bridge St
Woodlane Rd
Woodlane Rd
Woodlane Rd
County
Road
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
630
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
York Dr
Woodlane Rd
Main St (CR 635)
US 130
York Dr
Burlington Mount Holly Rd
(CR 541)
Louis Kite Field

Woodlake Park
Creek Rd (CR 636)
York Dr
Warren St (CR 543)
0.1
0.1
1.5
0.9
0.1
2.0
195
214
Buddtown Rd
Old York Rd
642
660
On-road
On-road
Main St (CR 681)

US 206
1.8
3.6
67
N/A
Off-road
Broad St
1.5
123
Beverly-Riverside Riverfront
Trail
Old York Rd
Ridge Rd (CR 642)

(CR 677)
Burlington Ave
660
On-road
Brookside Dr
US 206
3.4
109
Monmouth Rd
537
On-road
Provinceline Rd (County
Line)
11.8
103
Brownsmills Cookstown Rd
667
On-road
4.3
Woodlane Rd
N/A
On-road
Cookstown Wrightstown Rd Township Line

(CR 616)
Monmouth Rd 9CR 537)
US 206
Edgewater Park Twp.

Edgewater Park Twp.
Westampton Twp.
Edgewater Park Twp.
Edgewater Park Twp.
Westampton Twp.;
Eastampton Twp.;
Mount Holly Twp.
Southampton Twp.
Bordentown Twp.;
Chesterfield Twp.
Beverly City;
Delanco Twp.
Bordentown Twp.;
Florence Twp.;
Mansfield Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.;
North Hanover
Twp.; Springfield
Twp.; Eastampton
Twp.
New Hanover Twp.
147
92
Lakehurst Rd
Odd Fellows Rd
530
N/A
On-road
On-road
Trenton Rd (CR 545)

Fort Dix Rd.
5.5
1.8
228
N/A
Off-road
BCC Agricultural Center
0.8
12
Rancocas Creek Greenway BCCAC Connector

NJ 70
Rail Trail
Creek Rd (CR 636)
N/A
On-road
Marne Hwy (CR 537)
Marne Hwy (CR 537)
0.2
198
131
Main St
Jacobstown-Chesterfield Rd
N/A
528
On-road
On-road
162
Medford Lakes Rd
532
On-road

US 206
Chesterfield - Arneytown Rd Streeker Rd
(CR 644)
Stokes Rd (CR 541)
US 206
EastamptonTwp.;
Pemberton Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Springfield Twp.;
Pemberton Twp.
Moorestown Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
Moorestown Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
Southampton Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.;
North Hanover Twp.
Medford Twp.;
Tabernacle
Twp.;Medford Lakes
Borough
1.7
0.2
3.5
4.0
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Trail
Designation
DRHT
DRHT
None
None
None
None
Utility
Score
41
41
33
41
41
26
Feasibility
Score
0
0
8
0
0
15
Total
Score
41
41
41
41
41
41
Implementation
Phase
Long-Term
Short-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
26
27
15
14
41
41
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Primary
DRHT
40
40
Long-Term
Secondary
DRHT Alt
27
13
40
Long-Term
Secondary
None
30
10
40
Long-Term
Secondary
None
31
40
Long-Term
Primary
None
26
13
39
Long-Term
Secondary
Primary
None
Kinkora
35
27
4
11
39
38
Long-Term
Long-Term
Secondary
38
38
Long-Term
Primary
Rancocas
Greenway
None
33
38
Medium-Term
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
35
24
3
14
38
38
Long-Term
Long-Term
Secondary
None
23
15
38
Short-Term
C-8
June 2014
Project Location
ID#
166
Taunton Blvd
County
Road
623
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
Secondary
Trail
Designation
None
Utility
Score
26
Feasibility
Score
12
Total
Score
38
Implementation
Phase
Long-Term
On-road
Hartford Rd
2.5
Medford Twp.
160
Flyatt Rd
648
On-road
Carranza Rd (CR 648)
1.2
161
117
Carranza Rd
Jacksonville -Jobstown Rd
648
670
On-road
On-road

Island Rd
142
Old York Rd
660
On-road
Tomlinson Mill Rd (CR

544)
Old Indian Mills Rd (CR
648)
Flyatt Rd (CR 648)
Hedding Jacksonville Rd
(CR 628)
Mill Ln
Tabernacle Twp.
Secondary
None
25
13
38
Long-Term
0.1
3.6
Tabernacle Twp.
Springfield Twp.
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
25
25
13
13
38
38
Long-Term
Long-Term
Neck Rd
0.2
Secondary
None
22
15
37
Medium-Term
Township Line
Bayberry St (CR 667)
0.3
Secondary
None
25
12
37
Long-Term
Front St. (CR 672)
1.8
Secondary
None
24
13
37
Long-Term
On-road
Bordentown - Chesterfield
Rd (CR 628)
Shelmore Dr
Burlington Twp.,
Springfield Twp.
New Hanover Twp.;
Pemberton Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.
102
E Lakeshore Dr
667
On-road
129
Buttonwood St
672
On-road
Monmouth Rd
N/A
0.5
Primary
None
26
10
36
Medium-Term
36
156
Powell Rd
Stokes Rd
N/A
541
On-road
On-road
Jennifer Ct
US 206
Smithville Rd (CR 684)

Trimble Rd
1.2
7.5
Primary
Secondary
None
None
21
28
15
8
36
36
Medium-Term
Long-Term
216
Georgetown Rd
545
On-road
Wrightstown Sykesville Rd
Bordentown Rd (CR 545)
3.5
Secondary
None
24
12
36
Long-Term
231
32
Springdale Rd
Kinkora Trail Phase III
673
N/A
On-road
Off-road
Church Rd (CR 616)

Columbus-Jobstown Road
Camden County Line

0.4
3.3
Kinkora
25
30
11
5
36
35
Medium-Term
Long-Term
95
Rancocas Creek Greenway
N/A
Off-road
Pemberton By-Pass
30
35
Long-Term
7
35
210
165
86
Garden St
Smithville Rd
Columbus Rd
Himmelein Rd
Birmingham to Country
Lakes Rail Trail
N/A
N/A
543
623
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Off-road
Garden St (CR 617)

Powell Rd (CR 621)
Florence Rd (CR 656)
Hartford Rd
Four Mile Rd (CR 646)
New Lisbon (JCP&L Right

of Way)
Shelmore Dr
Mill Ln W
Stokes Rd (CR 541)
County Line
26
26
20
32
29
9
9
15
3
5
35
35
35
35
34
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
1.7
EastamptonTwp.;
Mount Holly Twp.
Eastampton Twp.
Medford Twp.;
Medford Lakes
Borough; Shamong
Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.;
North Hanover
Twp.; Mansfield
Twp.; Springfield
Twp.
Mount Laurel Twp.
Springfield Twp.;
Wrightstown
Borough; Pemberton
Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Primary
0.2
1.5
1.9
0.7
8.6
Mount Holly Twp.

Eastampton Twp.
Mansfield Twp.
Medford Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Rancocas Creek
Greenway
None
None
None
None
Birmingham to
Country Lakes
Rail Trail
C-9
June 2014
Project Location
ID#
1
Jacksonville Jobstown Rd
County
Road
N/A
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
On-road
Island Rd
Multi-use trail connector
0.4
Springfield Twp.
Primary
116
Elbow Ln
N/A
On-road
1.2
Burlington Twp.
157
211
158
122
Willow Grove Rd
Mt Pleasant Rd
Old Indian Mills Rd
Axe Factory Road
648
543
648
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Stokes Rd (CR 541)

Gaunts Bridge Rd
US 206
1.0
2.9
1.3
1.9
26
77
Irick Rd
Leaf Compost Trail
N/A
N/A
On-road
Off-road

Creek Rd
Burlington Mount Holly Rd

(CR 541)
US 206
Cherry Ln
Tuckerton Rd
Crystal Lake Park Entrance
(Park Connector)
Rancocas Greenway
175
110
Ramblewood Pkwy
Jacksonville Hedding Rd
N/A
628
On-road
On-road
NJ 73
0.1
4.1
33
Kinkora Trail Phase II
N/A
Off-road
Brentwood Dr
Burlington Jacksonville Rd
(CR 670)
East Main St (CR 543)
3.4
105
193
Upper Mill Rd
Ongs Hat Rd
N/A
642
Off-road
On-road
Mile Rd
Ridge Rd (CR 643)
Jacksonville Jobstown Rd
(CR 670)
Magnolia Rd (CR 644)
0.5
3.9
155
Magnolia Rd
644
On-road
Ongs Hat Rd (CR 642)
Mile Rd
2.4
170
Academy Dr
N/A
On-road
Church Rd (CR 616)
Hainesport Rd (CR 674)
0.9
130
135
126
76
Jacobstown Rd
Chesterfield-Arneytown Rd
Creek Rd Sidepath
528
660
664
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
Off-road
Streeker Rd
Main St. (Cr 660)
Stewart Rd
Anderson Farm
Province Line Rd
County Line
Borton Landing Rd
1.5
1.1
2.0
2.1
28
Rancocas Bypass
N/A
On-road
Main St
Bridge St (CR 635)
0.4
127
Chesterfield-Arneytown Rd
664
On-road
Stewart Rd
0.9
27
194
44
152
173
Rancocas Rd
Ridge Rd
Main St
NJ 72
Tam Oshanter Rd
N/A
542
N/A
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Chesterfield-Jacobstown Rd
(CR 528)
Bridge St (CR 6350
Buzzard Hill Rd
Church Rd (CR 616)
Irick Rd
Bridge St (Cr 635)
Main St (CR 563)
Brentwood Dr
2.0
0.7
0.3
0.4
0.0
Shamong Twp.
Mansfield Twp.
Shamong Twp.
Bordentown Twp.;
Mansfield Twp.
Westampton Twp.
Moorestown Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
Mount Laurel Twp.
Mansfield Twp.;
Springfield Twp.
Mansfield Twp.;
Springfield Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Pemberton Twp.;
Southampton Twp.
Pemberton twp.;
Southampton Twp.
Evesham Twp.;
Mount Laurel Twp.
North Hanover Twp.
Chesterfield twp.
North Hanover Twp.
Delran Twp.;
Moorestown Twp.
Willingboro Twp.;
Westampton Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.;
North Hanover Twp
Westampton Twp.
Southampton Twp.
Westampton Twp.
Woodland Twp.
Mount Laurel Twp.
0.6
1.2
Utility
Score
25
Feasibility
Score
9
Total
Score
34
Implementation
Phase
Long-Term
Secondary
Trail
Designation
Kinkora Trail
Phase III
None
34
34
Long-Term
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
None
DRHT Alt
21
20
21
32
13
13
12
0
34
33
33
32
Long-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Primary
Primary
None
None
21
28
11
3
32
31
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
31
19
0
12
31
31
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Primary
Kinkora
30
30
Long-Term
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
25
15
5
15
30
30
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Secondary
None
20
10
30
Medium-Term
Secondary
None
27
29
Immediate
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
14
14
14
28
15
15
15
0
29
29
29
28
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
Primary
None
None
None
Rancocas
Greenway
None
28
28
Long-Term
Secondary
None
14
14
28
Medium-Term
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
None
None
None
26
16
26
26
26
1
11
0
0
0
27
27
26
26
26
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Medium-Term
C-10
Project
ID#
174
233
106
159
Type
Segment Start
Segment End
Mileage
Municpalities
Corridor
Brentwood Dr
Jackson Rd
Mile Rd
Old Indian Mills Rd
County
Road
N/A
534
N/A
648
On-road
On-road
Off-road
On-road
Tam Oshanter Rd
Stokes Rd (CR 541)
Magnolia Rd (CR 644)
Tuckerton Rd
Ramblewood Pkwy
Camden County Line
Upper Mill Rd
Flyatt Rd (CR 648)
0.4
2.8
0.3
1.4
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
118
Burlington-Jacksonville Rd
670
On-road
Hunter Dr
2.6
213
196
136
School House Rd
Ridge Rd
Main St
543
643
660
On-road
On-road
On-road
Gaunts Bridge Rd (CR 543)

Church St (CR 660)
0.6
0.6
0.2
93
Arney's Mt.-West Trail;

Fairgrounds Connector
Rail Trail II
N/A
Off-road
County Fairgrounds
Hedding Jacksonville Rd
(CR 628)
Chesterfield Rd (CR 545)
Crosswicks Chesterfield Rd
(CR 660)
Pemberton Rail Trail
Mount Laurel Twp.

Shamong Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Tabernacle Twp.;
Shamong Twp.
Springfield Twp.
6.8
N/A
Off-road
Main St (CR 669)
Pemberton Browns Mills Rd. 4.5

(CR 530)
82
Indian Trail
N/A
On-road
Birmingham Rd
Railroad Ave
1.9
96
98
148
151
137
128
Ephraim Rd
Three Bridge Rd
Upper Mill Rd
Buzzard Hill Rd
Church St
Front St.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
660
672
Off-road
Off-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
Atsion Rd
Stokes Rd (CR 541)
Shinns Rd
County Line
Buttonwood St (CR 672)
0.7
2.0
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.3
212
43
81
97
149
Gaunts Bridge Rd
Springside Rd
Railroad Ave
Atsion Rd
Deep Hollow Rd
543
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
On-road
School House Rd (CR 543)

Smithville Lake
Three Bridge Rd
Upper Mill Rd
County Line
Atsion Rd
Deep Hollow Rd
NJ 70
Ward Ave
Chesterfield-Crosswicks Rd
(CR 660)
Mt Pleasant Rd (CR 543)
Main St (CR 635)
Hand Ln
Ephraim Rd
Shinns Rd
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.4
1.4
150
Shinns Rd
N/A
On-road
Four Mile Rd
Buzzard Hill Rd
2.0
91
Location
June 2014
None
None
Utility
Score
26
16
20
10
Feasibility
Score
0
10
5
15
Total
Score
26
26
25
25
Implementation
Phase
Medium-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Secondary
None
20
24
Long-Term
Mansfield Twp.
Southampton Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
None
10
11
9
13
12
14
23
23
23
Long-Term
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Pemberton Twp.
Primary
Arney's Mount
17
22
Long-Term
Springfield Twp.;
Wrightstown
Borough; Pemberton
Twp.
Eastampton Twp.;
Pemberton Twp.;
Southampton Twp.
Shamong Twp.
Shamong Twp.
Pemberton Twp.
Woodland Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.
Chesterfield Twp.
Primary
Pemberton to
Wrightstown
Rail Trail
22
22
Long-Term
Primary
None
22
22
Immediate
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
None
None
None
None
16
16
21
21
9
4
5
5
0
0
12
15
21
21
21
21
21
19
Long-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Long-Term
Medium-Term
Medium-Term
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
None
None
None
None
None
5
16
16
16
16
12
0
0
0
0
17
16
16
16
16
Long-Term
Long-Term
Immediate
Long-Term
Long-Term
Secondary
None
16
16
Long-Term
Mansfield Twp.
Westampton Twp.
Eastampton Twp.
Shamong Twp.
Pemberton Twp.;
Woodland Twp.
Woodland Twp.
Trail
Designation
None
C-11
June 2014
C-12
June 2014
Appendix D: Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network Map

Atlas
MERCER COUNTY
MONMOUTH COUNTY
A6
A7
A8
PENNSYLVANIA
BORDENTOWN
B4
B5
CHESTERFIELD
B6
B7
B8
B9
FLORENCE
MANSFIELD
BURLINGTON
CITY
NORTH HANOVER
BEVERLY
C2
C3
DELANCO
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
D6
D7
D8
E6
E7
C9
OCEAN COUNTY
BURLINGTON
SPRINGFIELD
WILLINGBORO
DELRAN
D1
PALMYRA
D2
NEW HANOVER
WESTAMPTON
D3
D4
D5
D9
D10
E8
E9
E10
F7
F8
F9
F10
F11
G7
G8
G9
G10
G11
MT.
HOLLY
CINNAMINSON
MOORESTOWN
HAINESPORT
PEMBERTON
LUMBERTON
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
MOUNT LAUREL
SOUTHAMPTON
F2
F3
EVESHAM
G3
F4
F5
F6
G5
G6
MEDFORD
G4
WOODLAND
TABERNACLE
H3
H4
H5
H6
H7
H8
H9
H10
H11
I6
I7
I8
I9
I10
I11
J6
J7
J9
J10
J11
SHAMONG
CAMDEN COUNTY
I5
WASHINGTON
J8
BASS RIVER
K7
ATLANTIC COUNTY

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
K8
K9
K10
K11
L9
L10
L11
Map Atlas Scale = 1:30,000
D-1

BR
TO
NA
V
TT
AD
TE
FE
EN
PS
HE
M
62
0
DE
NC
E
AV
E
EC
ON
DA
RY
HA
RC
OU
RT
DR
AR Y
US
20
6S
DR
CO ND
NJ 129 SE
EP
RP S
LN
LD
ERFIE
CO PP
EX
AV
US
20
6
SHA
CO
UN
TY
PA
V
CT
IND
AV
OP
ME
RC
ER
ER
JEREMIAH AV
JULIA AV
ST
EN
TO
RD
GR
NA
VE
RO
UT
E5
33
TO
AV
ST
LIN
RD
AD
FO
SC
LIL
LIA
N
TY 650
ANNABELLE ST
BEATTY
NJ 129
UN
ER CO
MERC
June 2014
E5
UT
RO
24
I-195 SECONDARY
NJ 29
I-195
MERCER COUNTY
AL
TH
RT
O
FR I-295 SB to I-295 SB
BE
US 206
LA
M
EA
AV
to I-195 EB
FR RT 29 SB
OV E
V
RA
HILLTOP RD
GR
GR OV
EV ILLE
RD
US 206
EAS T DR
A7
AM
BO
RD
I-29 5
BORDENTOWN TWP
US
13
0
POPLAR AV
DA RY
EC ON
662
G
H
ST
ST
CE
IN
PR
EATO N RD
ST
E
N
IO
UN
ST
CR O
S SW
ICK S
Bikeways

Proposed Municipal Bikeway
ST
528
G
H
Scale = 1:30,000
D LN
TH
BE
I ZA
EL
I 29
Primary Bikeway
B7
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
A6
SE
AV
WARD
BORDENTOWN CITY
I 295
B6
US
13
0
BA
2
I
B5
ST
AR
OR CH
I-29 5
S
NK
DR
LUCAS DR
R
PA
EC
L IP
EI
KL
DR
PENNSYLVANIA
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-2
June 2014
I-19 5
ENG LE
W
HO
N DR
RIZ O
N DA
LN
SHARPS
I-19
5S
CA
BO
DR
KER R DR
OO D BL
VD
RY
EC O
S ID
LAK E
ELTO N
AV
US
D
E B LV
OL
SZ
AK
GE
AV
DA
RY
EDG
US
UNCLE PETES RD
EA
AV
MA
AK
NJ
LN
6
15
609
DO
ED
O ROURK E DR
IO
RI
ME RC ER
DR
CO UN TY
MERCER COUNTY
RD
OD
DR
W
KLO C
K
VIL L
AG E
NE R R
D
ED
AL
TH
LENOX
AV
E WO
0
13
DA
NR
D
ID
ON
CT
DR
APOLLO
R
LE
CO
0
13
C
SE
NE
DR
ZELLEY
HO
YF
LO
ER
DR
RO UTE
524
ES
AL
ST
A8
R
IN
TE
DR
MA
ER
RD
C
ER
M
GR
OV
EV
ILL
E
O
SI
EI
KL
A6
CO
UN
TY
US
13
0
2
67
BO
CT
NE
US
13
0
NAL
BORDENTOWN TWP
RD
MIL L RD
TU
IK
E
HOGBAC K RD
L IP
EC
SE
DR
K
YO R
OLD
SA
WM
IL L
RD
CHESTERFIELD TWP
ST
WILLOW RD
IN
MA
SHA NAHAN LN
AV
WARD
672
G
H
E
AL
SD
LI
EL
660
G
H
DR
NTOWN
CO LEMA
TU
P
N
BO RD EN
TOW N
CR OS SW
G
H
B6528
Map
Tile
A7
Scale = 1:30,000
ICKS
B8
B7
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
HENGELI DR
RD
IK
E
EATON RD
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-3
June 2014
G
S
D
R
G
AT
E
AP
P
AN
OR
M
52
6
LE
W
AY
R UN
FOX
UT
RD
RO
A RY
ON D
RD
S EC
NE
I-19 5
I-19
5
EDG
E WO
OD
RD
FR CO
52 6 W B
to I-195
WB
MERCER COUNTY
R EC
ME R
K RD
5
I-9
O ROURK E DR
T
.J.
,N
UR
NP
E
IK
N
CO
SE
DA
RY
CIR C
PO
TTS
LE D R
RD
IV E
DR
ALLEN
RO
P
RN
UR
NP
TO
NJ
NB
D
ER
ON
RK
BU
HA
TU
4
52
ST
ILT
IK
D
AN R
NO L
ALE XA
N
D ER C
T
IN D
TWA
DR IAL O DR
FR
T
NJ
NB
IK
UT
53
9
28
CO
UN
TY
WN RD
TATTLETO
HERITAGE DRIVE
MO
NM
OU
TH
A7
RW
AT
ER
UT
CL
EA
RD
DR
R
RO
RM
INS FA
HAN K
OLD YORK RD
MONMOUTH COUNTY
BRE
ZA R
HEAT
HW O
O
D LN
WA
LN
FO R
DR
D
D
ER
IL L
NV
TO
EX
SAW
RO SE
TE RR
AL
E
WO OD
B7
IDGE RD
IRON BR
EL
LI
SD
LR
PO LHEM
Map
Tile
A8
Scale = 1:30,000
USTOW
N RD
B9
B8
RD
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
M IL
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-4
S
LL
FA
RD
MA IN ST
W
NE
June 2014
BRIS
TO L
PK
P
PA
ER
ST
OX
R
FO
D
EK
YR
EL
RD
RE
RAM
G
ED
EY
LL
VA
C
LIL
M
RD
GR
EE
N
LN
656
G
H
PENNSYLVANIA
NT
ST
FR
EAS
T/W
E ST
T UR
FLORENCE TWP
NP IK
BATH RD
P
PA
ER
ST
NJ
T
UR
NP
B5
IKE
PA
EX
T
NEW
RA
D
SR
DC
LI
FF
ST
ER
DG
RO
PO
ND
656
G
H
ST
BEAVER ST
PK
OL
I ST
BR
BURLINGTON TWP
RIC
OTT ER ST
RD
SR
UN
RD
RD
VE
E
AT
ST
HA
RI
DU LTYS
AV
658
G
H
0
13
US
DE
LA
WA
RE
BURLINGTON CITY
LN
0
13
US
CK
NE
RD
C3
C4
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
B4
C5
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-5
BRIS
TO L
PK
June 2014
A6
OW
BO
T
D EN
D
NR
URY RD
MA IN ST
PENNSB
PENNSYLVANIA
BORDENTOWN TWP
W TH IR
D ST
WS
EC O
ND
ST
FRO
IFT H
NT
ST
ST
OA K
ES
UT
ST
PIN
WA
LN
ST
NO
RM
AN
AV
DR
ON
LN
AV
ILT
CR E
KD
OO
M
HA
BR
MS
RA
AB
IR
FA
AR
PA
AV
MANSFIELD TWP
DR
IK
E
E
AC
LL
WA
OO D
NP
AV
EX
T
PO
OR
FL
LT W
N GA
S
TT
L
IL
R
D
O
US
NT
BR
HU
MB
LU
CO
FLORENCE TWP
CE
EN
WY
IE LS
DAN
UR
D
OA
I LR
RA
EK W
JOH
NJ
T
KS
0
13
US
NJ
TU
RN
PI
LN
ER
I MB
LT
TAL
KE
656
G
H
N
EL
LE
0
13
US
660
G
H
Y
LT
DU
I2
95
130
RID G
WAY
DR
2
I
LEFFLER CIR
UN
SD
C
RI
DR
CU
ID
RD
C IR
R
HA
B6
130
ND
V
EA
PL
MA
AV
CED
UR
NP
IKE
PA
EX
T
2
I
ER AV
V
EA
NJ
T
ST
IV
OL
678
G
H
PO
BRO
AD
ST
SUM M ER
HO RN BE RG
R
WA
LA
DE
B4
3RD AV
MA IN ST
ST
WF
LN
D
OL
R
C4
Map
Tile
B5
Scale = 1:30,000
661
G
H
BUR
LING
TON
BU S
T LE T
ON R
D
(
'
&
%
295
C6
C5
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
MA NO
R
RK
YO
I2
95
659
G
H
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-6
June 2014
PR
A6
IN
CE
ST
N
IO
UN
ST
CR O
S SW
ICK S
A7
ST
528
G
H
BORDENTOWN CITY
I
UT
N
DR
206
V
HA
(
'
&
%
RA
M
295
ST
IT
NT
T
NS
T
OR
FR
O
CO
BO
RD
NS
ON
GT
IN
RL
BU
WN
TO
EN
RD
R
FA
PENNSYLVANIA
R
O
E
G
R
D
DU
NN
S
662
M IL
LR
NG
SI
RI
0
13
US
DR
AV
130
W
TO
G
H
G
UR
SB
AM
IL L
W
E
G
AR
W
LA
DE
RAM P
FIELDSBORO BORO
SU
RU
RD
DU NN
545
G
H
L RD
S M IL
RAMP
EA
BORDENTOWN TWP
CA
TO
RY
RD
TU
RAM P
CAYUG
A RD
IK
E
RD
0
13
US
NN
EC
D
RR
TO
O
LD
JAI CH NE R
AX
YO
RK
FA
CO
HE
O
LD
YO
RK
RD
660
G
H
DD
B5
IN
(
'
&
%
B7
KI
295
NK
OR
HW
AR
660
G
H
Y6
8
D
HW
Y
68
FIR
ST
ST
206
DR
NA
95
I2
95
I2
Y
68
MANSFIELD TWP
RD
RK
YO
OLD
HW
AARONSON RD
68
678
G
H
NE
RD
US 2
06
628
G
H
IT
E
PI
MILLENIUM DR
M
AN
SF
IE
LD
EX T
PIKE PA
NJ TURN
OC
KE
HO
Y
LL
DR
L
IL
RD
LL
MI
Scale = 1:30,000
C7
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
B6
RD E
C6
LN
C5
MA N
S FIE
LD
206
DR
IN
DD
HE
N ISLAND
RD
295
RD
(
'
&
%
NH
DR
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-7
June 2014
HO GB AC K
A8
ON DR
SIN GL ET
IK
E
N
J
TU
R
ICK S CH ES
TERF
N
P
RECKLES STOWN WY
JOC KE
THORN LN
Y PL
LN
CH
ES
TE
DA
VE
NP
OR
LO
PO
BORDENTOWN TWP
RD
EN
TO
W
CR OS SW
BO
RD
AL E
RD
D
ELL IS
LN
IELD RD
FO RG E
TO
VALL EY
TD
672
G
H
ST
ICK S
FE
S SW
RD
CR O
A7
AN D ST
BERRYL
A6
RF
IE
RD
MO
NT
PE
LIE
R
LN
LD
MA
D
KR
OR
DY
OL
H AR
L RD
UM
RD
D
R
GE
TO
W
AL
N
OR
D DR
GE
660
G
H
ER
677
G
H
OR C
CLIFTO
N M IL
RG
W
N
RD
528
G
H
CHESTERFIELD TWP
545
G
H
782
G
H
B8
B6
NEW B
WHITE
CH E
ST E
R
OLD LN
STE
LL
PI NE RD
ER
FIE
LD
A RN
EYT
OW
NR
HW
Y
RV
HA
HW
ITE
PI N
RD
EN
MANSFIELD TWP
WN
TO
ILL E RD
CH E
ST E
R
BO
DR
NIU M
MIL LE
FIE L
D
G EO
68
ER
D
SV
TS SY KE
WRIGH
RG E
TO W
NR
D
ES
LN
68
WH
GE
OR
GE
TO
CO
RD
N
LI
WN
68
LN
DR
C6
C8
C7
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
B7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-8

A7
June 2014
A8
AQ UA TE
PO LHEM
USTOW
N RD
EXT
ON
EXTON VILLE RD
HAR
KE R
RD
RD
AL E
VIL L
E
RD
D
ELL IS
MERCER COUNTY
SW
LE CR OS
ICK S RD
ELLISDA
HIL L RO AD
W
AL
N
ELL ISDALE RD
ER
NG
HARKER
GI
RD
OR R RD
MONMOUTH COUNTY
RD
CHESTERFIELD TWP
B9
PR
OV
B7
INC
EL
D
NR
RD
AR
W
TE
OV
PR
664
G
H
NORTH HANOVER TWP
INC
EL
528
G
H
IN E
RISO
FIE L
D
A RN
EYT
OW
N RD
N RD
LD
EL
W
JAC O
ILL E RD
OM
CR
B STO
WN A
RN EY
TOW
SV
TS SY KE
WRIGH
N RD
HAR
CH E
ST E
R
NR
PAU
LSO
N
RD
RD
HA
O
RI S
L LA
DE
C
IRA
T
665
G
H
LAU
RE
C7
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
B8
LD
R
C9
C8
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-9
June 2014
A8
EY
RV
HA
RD
E
LH
PO
RD
OW
ST
MU
RD
FO
LN
WA
N
ME
RD
S
IR
RD
AC
ST
EY
DR
E
AN
AL
ES C
NC
FRA
HIL L RO AD
WY
GA N
TR
D
YS
LE
EM
O
LH
US
ER
RD
L
HIL
O
HO
SC
RO
MONMOUTH COUNTY
E5
UT
39
MO NM OU TH
B8
I
CO UN TY 27
N
WA L
D
FO R
RD
E
LN
LEIN
INEC
VC
IN
ORVO
PRP
RD
R
U
O
C
Y
R
ER
B
AN
R
ANREYSTOWN-C HESTER FIELD
664
G
H
II
27
TY
UN
CO
H
T
OU
NM
MO
ER
ST
OV
PR
INC
EL
IN E
RD
W MILLST
RE
AM RD
OCEAN COUNTY
TE
RO
O
PR
HANOVER DR
7
53
CE
N MAIN ST
V IN
DR
ER
C9
C8
Map
Tile
B9
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
EL
L IN
LAU
R
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-10
June 2014
RE
ST
O
W
D
AV
ET
H
R
RD
EN
D
EM
RD
BY
AD
BE
AC
L
P
RA
M
RD
AR
W
LA
DE
T IO
STA
KNIG
H TS
RD
HU
LM
EV
I LL
ER
RD
DE
RR
A
AC
EX
V
NA
PK
EL L AV
L
TO
IS
BR
MO RR
MP
PENNSYLVANIA
RD
RA
IS
NN
TE
AN
AV
GR
TA
V
RD
AV
R
VE
RI
KF
N
RA
LN
IL
RD
C3
TIE
NC
LN
IR
IE W
AV
AV
ON
GT
IN
RL
U
B
ST
DELANCO TWP
624
G
H
EX
543
G
H
N
AL
W
RE
WA
LA
DE
RD
ND
MA
V
DEL
E
AT
ST
AR
W
LA
DE
CO
SE
UT
2
I
CO OP ER
ST
ST
AY
PAVIL LIO
N
AV
625
G
H
RIV ER DR
2
I
ST
O NR OE
MO
RE
ST
RIVERSIDE TWP
543
G
H
NO
RM
DELRAN TWP
FIL
BE
ST
AN
AV
BR
D1
Scale = 1:30,000
D2
Bikeways
GE
BO
AN
RO
ST
D3

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
C2
TS
ID
GR
604
G
H
605
G
H
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-11
June 2014
B4
V
RA
DA
CE
AR
W
LA
DE
EX
HAU NTED LN
RE
ST
ET
RD
PENNSYLVANIA
E
AT
ST
RD
OA
BR
E
LIN D
PAR
EF
AV
LIN
C4
T
L
ON IA
CO L
CO
E
AR D
NB
US
LVD
US
NS
E STA L
FOR R
DR
GS T
DR
LY R
TUN
P US
H OL
E
GR E
0
13
CAM
MT
EDGEWATER PARK TWP
0
13
K WY
ER P
SC IV
VAN
AV
ST
ES
ER
OK
OP
ST
N
SL
KIN
PER
NG
RD
N LN
YS
629
G
H
L
EN P
ST
ELM
630
G
H
130
634
G
H
RD
DELANC
O COOP
ER
TOW N RD
AR
OR O RD
DR
LN
BRIDG EB
KE R
Y PA C
DR
LN
630
G
H
D3
Scale = 1:30,000
HA
PEN N
DR
EE
PLUMTR
RO CK LAN D
ST
626
G
H
D2
Bikeways
BAR N
WE
LL DR

Primary Bikeway
D4
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
C3
NG
HAWTHO RNE LN
629
G
H
WILLINGBORO TWP
BU
130
I
CK
SYL
VAN
LN
PI
625
G
H
KL
AW
TO
626
G
H
RD
LE
EE
BR
CR
633
G
H
DR
SUNSET
BRADFO
RD LN
DELANCO TWP
624
G
H
ST LN
AUT
UM
ERR
HAR VE
HU NTIN
G TON
CH
NK
130
JOH N F KEN NED

Y WY
AV
RA
CHERRIX AV
ON
GT
IN
RL
BU
AV
2
I
TN
PU
BURLINGTON TWP
RD
NE
PEN
A
OD L
WO
C2
PIN E ST
ST
LIN
DEV
ST
LN
UM
V
IA A
ST
N RD
V
KA
L
LAU RE
R
VE
RI
AN
BEVERLY RD
543
G
H
AV
LS
HO
NIC
V
S YL
TTA
543
G
H
WARREN ST
BEVERLY CITY
AD
AV
GE
CO
BRO
DS
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-12
June 2014
ERS RD
NEW RODG
B4
B5
658
G
H
PENNSYLVANIA
STR IA
EQ UE
0
13
US
N DR
130
CK
NE
LANGDON RD
RD
NE
656
G
H
ST
JO
ST
IR
RIVERBANK
W PEARL ST
ELM A AV
HIXON DR
AL S
T
ST
130
UH
632
G
H
R
LE
E
BLU
AV
VIL
DE
O
SEC
WO OD ST
543
G
H
ND
ST
JA
CK
SO
NV
I LL
ER
D
JAM
ES
MIL L ST
ST LN
AV
LL
WA
TAIN
AV
UN
FO
AV
TA
NN
ER
RD
660
G
H
ST
8TH
130
YO RK
OLD
ST
MIL L RD
WY
SS
Y PA
NB
G TO
LIN
BUR
SAL EM RD
ELM AV
HAR VE
AV
VALENTINE RD
JERRYS DR
FED
ER
YW
OR L
BURLINGTON CITY
LL OW RD
FAWN HO
AD
2
I
T
ER S
JUN IP
2
I
BRO
543
G
H
694
G
H
E BROAD ST
ST
PIN EWALD
HS
ION
COLUMB US RD
DR
HIG
41 3
N
LYN
Y
HW
UN
UP
MO HR RD
670
G
H
C5
LAK E
AV
BURLINGTON TWP
G
H
541T
OX
TU
IVY LN
RD
AV
GR E
R EE
634
G
H
DR
DR
634
G
H
SUNSE T RD
RD
P US
E NT
AD
OC
T
ME
CAM
THE
K
PAR
Y
LL
VAN
SYL
HO
ADA MS DR
T
M
AUT UMN LN
WALNU
T DR
RANCO CAS RD
C3
95
I2
RI
ZE
TT
NE
I 29
KE
PI
RN
N DR
ATTO
TU
RD
D4
Bikeways
NJ
RD
S IDE
IN G
Y
LL
SPR
HO
Scale = 1:30,000
DR
Map
Tile
C4
NORTHAMPTON
ELBOW LN
RD
CO
K LN
LN
N
TO
TON
Y BLVD
BRO M LE
N DR
G
IN
RL
BU
HADLEY LN
LN
BRENNO
HANCOC
CI R
WY
PK
RL ES
T DR
MA NH
OD
R
IVE
SC
AK
RO
VE
SIL
O
LW
VAN
CH A
D3
CO NN ETICU
541
G
H
TIM
OT H
Y
NO
RM
AN
LN
WILLINGBORO TWP
RO
635
G
H
HA
LE LN
HINSDA
RAM
LN
RAM
DR
Y
LE
IS
TA
D5
WESTAMPTON TWP

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
LN
AM HE RS T
AN
DI
IN
633
G
H
OD
W
GE
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-13
June 2014
B4
EQ U
E STR
IA N D
B5
659
G
H
661
G
H
D
OL
R
RK
YO
B6
656
G
H
RD
R
DA
CE
MP
RA
LN
ON
ET
SL
BU
543
G
H
COLUMBUS RD
FOUNTA
656
G
H
FLORENCE TWP
LOOP RD
IN BLVD
AW K DR
ARROWHEAD DR
RAMP
T
EX
TOM AH
JERRYS DR
693
G
H
HEGY I CT
MANSFIELD TWP
C
NE
LOO P
RD S
RD
JA
CK
SO
NV
IL
LE
LE R D
RECO VE
660
G
H
REC YC
RY BLVD
RD
95
I2
(
'
&
%
295
J
N
MIL L RD
J
N
R
TU
P
N
R
TU
P
N
HE
DD
IN
G
95
I2
E
IK
E
IK
LAK
EV
DR
628
G
H
C6
HU
NT
ER
C4
IEW
TE R
R
RID G
E WO
ON
N
TE
ON
VIL
LE
RD
OD W
Y
NE
BURLIN
GTON
JA CK SO
NV ILL E
NE RD
CEDAR LA
JAC
KS
RD
SI
EX
670
G
H
LA
A
ED
RD
LY
IL
BA
DR
SPRINGFIELD TWP
N
628
G
H
JAC
KS
TR
BE R
CH
DL
GIL
BEE
O
WO
ON V
ILLE
JO B
S
TO W
N
RD
BURLINGTON TWP
HU
NT
IN
TO
RD
BUR
RD
LR
RD
RD
L LY
639
G
H
D4
MT H
O
638
G
H
GIL B
WESTAMPTON TWP
J AC
AD
E RT
ME
OX
KSO
N VIL
LE
HIL
K LN
R
ILL E
SO NV
JA CK
HANCOC
VIL LE
RS
DD
GIL B
E RT
OR
H
SM IT
ITF
RD
WH
D6
D5
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
C5
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-14
B7
206
RD
SO
G JA CK
HEDDIN
MA N
S FIE
LD
NV ILL E
678
G
H
G
LE
EN
LN
DS
CIR
LL
MI
ISL A
ND
RD
BELMONT
DD
HE
LN
CT
LON
GW
O
OD
LN
RD
MA
NC
HE
ST
ER
PUB LIC RD
IN
628
G
H
P
E
IK
690
G
H
TU
WA
VE
DR
IELD
DR
R LY
SHE FF
CO
LUM
B
RD E
RD
I2
95
B6
LL
MI
B5
June 2014
US
RD
MANSFIELD TWP
E MAIN ST
N ST
HEA
THE
ATLA NT
RC
T
HOME STEAD DR
543
G
H
IC AV
W M AI
DEEP HOLLOW LN
MT
TRY LN
P LE
AS A
N
TR
ID G
RN LN
AT B
R
LAN TE
E RD
US 206
CO UN
TICO
206
C7
JAC
KS
PA
DD
OC
KD
R
PET
C5
ON
VIL
LE
JO B
S TO
HER
ITA G
E
DR
WN
RD
SPRINGFIELD TWP
CO
LU
M
L
FOLW EL
670
G
H
N RD
STATIO
BU
S
JO
BS
TO
W
RD
WA R
N
ER
RD
CR AIG DR
670
G
H
ERR IC
D5
KS ON
CT
537
G
H
D6
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
C6
D7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-15
June 2014
ON
MA N
S FIE
LD
IN
B8
LN
GT
RD E
GU
STA
DR
CHESTERFIELD TWP
RD
AU
WN
TO
GE
OR
GE
L
AR
B7
N
OW
NT
DE
R
BO
B6
DU
RH
RL
NT
DE
N
OW
HERM AN BLAC K RD
RD
TO N
D
BE
DR
ELL IN
G
AM
R
BO
AM
CH
HW
MANSFIELD TWP
O US
ER
543
G
H
GE R
D
F IE
DEE R
R
LD D
TS BR
ID
68
ASS
GA UN
543
G
H
BR
ID
OLH
AL
EV
WY
ER
ET
T
68
DR
Y
O
SCH
MT PLE ASANT
RD
IS C
U NK
DR
545
G
H
LE
APP
545
G
H
E RD
GAT
C8
GE OR
GE TO
W N-J
UL IU
HIGHL AND RD
STO W
N RD
C6
680
G
H
537
G
H
SPRINGFIELD TWP
OU
TH
RD
SPRIN GF IEL
D MEETING
HO US E RD
ON
D6
RD
68
N RD
670
G
H
L ISB
N GE ORGETOW
NEW
JUL IUS TOW
MO
NM
D7
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
LOR
O
SP
ND
RD
D8
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
C7
SAY
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-16
June 2014
B8
LAU
RE
B9
LD
R
OB
STO
W
NA
RN
EY
TO
WN
RD
B7
LA
RR
IS
ON
RD
JAC
665
G
H
528
G
H
N RD
PAULSO
HERM AN BLAC K RD
RD
ER
EK
RE
ST
CHESTERFIELD TWP
665
G
H
SCHOOL HOUSE RD
D
LV
LN
IVY
537
G
H
M OU
MO N
D
TH R
C9
GE
YR
LL
HI
OR
C7
RA
GE
WRIGHTS SYKESVILLE RD
NORTH HANOVER TWP
WN
TO
RD
AW
CR
JA
CO
RD
H
OS
VIS
BS
TO
R
CI
A
TR
CO
KS
TO
GE
OR
666
G
H
545
G
H
L RD
TZ
AA
SP
OR
GE
DR
WN
TO
RD
ND
RD
GE
HL A
ED
TL
R
LL
ES
S
SPARTA
N
WR
680
G
H
VI LL
DEF E
N SE A
CC
HIG
AS
MI
AC
C
EC
OO
SCH
DE
FE
NS
E
GE
S
NE
JO
SPRINGFIELD TWP
RD
ST
TO
VI
LE
ESS R
D
IGH
TS
CO
WN
OK
OW
NR
ST
TO
DR
616
G
H
RD
AUGU ST
A
NEW HANOVER TWP
ST
D
BLV
IRE
GU
MC
PLAT T AV
ST
ST
BL
OC
E AIR
Bikeways
MA N
AV
ES
EC
ON
DS
ST
D9

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
FORT DIX
E GE
TUS K
AV
Scale = 1:30,000
D8
D
OL
Map
Tile
C8
616
HA
N
AR
LV
OB
G
FAR
D7
G
H
WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
E MAIN ST
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-17

B8
LAU
R
EL
FA
I
MONMOUTH COUNTY
RW
AY
C
DR
June 2014
B9
OV
PR
ST
INC
N M AIN
V
RVO
E PR
LA
RR
IS
O
L IN
RD
E
INC
EL
IN E
E5
RO
37
UT
EK
RE
ST
DR
EEN RD
EVERGR
E
NC
RE
W
LA
ER
RD
RD
537
G
H
M OU
MO N
D
TH R
FIE LD CR
BR
EST DR
IG
HT
RD
28
TE 5
MEANY RD
APP LEGATE
528
G
H
RO U
LN
FORT AV
NORTH HANOVER TWP

TY
UN
640
CO
KE
LA
EW
VI
DR
CED AR ST
N
EA
OC
OCEAN COU
NTY
6
61
OCEAN COUNTY
616
G
H
C8
YM
BR
CARTERS LN
ST
NE
AR
OK
RD
CO
EG
ER
OR
OAK LN
PT
ST
INMAN
RD
BUNTING BRIDGE RD
MALLOY RD
HANCE
DR
665
G
H
SOUTH DR
BUNTING BRIDGE RD
P RD
SWA M
LON G
NEW HANOVER TWP

RDWN
LE TO
WN
IND
BRTO
BRIND LE
667
G
H
HOCK AMICK RD
RD
MOUNT RD
D8
D10
D9
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
C9
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-18
June 2014
CO
C2
RD
AV
AW
RH
FO
AV
NK
N
MA
TT
ST
FRA
TY
N
SO
AV
E
AT
ST
RD
PR
IN
V
LE
CE
IC
ST
TO
AV
LE
DA
ES
RR
O
T
AV
E
AT
ST
PENNSYLVANIA
RD
CO
Y
ML
LA
ST
E
AR
W
LA
DE
DR
FE
EX
543
G
H
2
I
AV
NK
BA
ND
LA
ST
OU
RIVERTON BORO
DR
IA AV
RT
ST
TH
OM
ST
2
I
AS
LAU
RE
MA
AV
IN
L RD
ST
NT
ST
PALMYRA BORO
HI
GH
LA
ND
A MIN
RD
SL
LE
G
H
CO
GO
LF
602
SO N
AN
73
RG
AV
MO
RY
AV
R
PA
AV
R
PA
MA
AV
HW
X
FA
DR
R
GE
LIN
VIL
IR
FA
73
2
I
D2
AV
CIN N
73
HW Y
601
G
H
603
G
H
AV
2
I
WF
FR
PA
RK
HS
T
BLV
ST
NN
BA
RB
U
FO
PL E
AR
ST
ND
HA
DR
VIR G
IN
TEM
ES
O
EC
O
LT
NT
RO
RF
E
RIV
IFT
ST
FU
C
TA
NY
YS
LA
RR
AV
RC
BA
NO
TO
LL
130
CINNAMINSON TWP
RD
HI
BR
C
AN
54
3
E
606
G
H
KE
ST
UT
0
13
PI
HYLT ON RD
RO
AM
AD
US
CAMDEN COUNTY
W
608
G
H
ST
O
LN
SUC KL
US
E HW Y
0S
13
O
EC
ND
Y
AR
RD
AV
RD
S
TI
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways
R
FO
LN
G
IN
OL

Primary Bikeway
E2
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
D1
RO
YA
L
E1
ND
LA
607
G
H
N
LE
73
NJ
NJ
90
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y
H
AL
ON
TI
NA
EDE
N
NJ
90
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-19
June 2014
ST

ST
EV
CL
O
BR
ST
BL
VD
RV
ST
D
AN
EL
CH
613
G
H
AV
O
LE
AV
R
TE
ES
ST
PA
NC
OA
ST
FA
I
IE
543
HE
NR
YS
RIVERSIDE TWP
ST
TH
NG
FIF
C3
HO
OK
E
TH
ST
RD
CH
AR
G
H
TO
W
AS
HI
M
ST
C2
LD
IE
IH
AV
L
DE
CIN
605
G
H
HI
TM
ST
RD
ER
EE
BAYLOR
ST
DR
OR
V
RI
CR
RD
OO
DV
IE
US
RD
0
13
W MILLSIDE DR
S
OR
YL
TA
ASH
LE
0
13
HA
RT
DELRAN TWP
FO
ILL
E
SID
RD
RD
Y DR
RD
DR
130
AN
RB
BU
SU
LN
D
O
O
NW
O
G EB
RD
Y
AS
RD
CH
TT
IL L
NB
VE
D3
ED
R
YN
W
W
CO
DO
RA
DR
DO
OO
LL
HI
V IN
RD
KE
RD
DR
DIA
RG
FO
MA
DEVON CT
V
EA
EL
RY
ER
RT
FL
EL
EE
TR
RD
DR
614
G
H
RD
WE
ST
FIE
LD
RD
BRANCH PIKE
TAIT S LN
W
WN
DR
OR
NC
RD
N CT
RD
MO
CO
NA
K
IC
RI
DI
NG
ALL IS
O
PO
DR
HS
FER
N
SE
E2WOOD RD
TI
NE
LR
E3
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
RC
603
G
H
RD
AV
AN
HU
DS
H
RC
BI
LE
E
GI
Scale = 1:30,000
HERITAGE RD
OR
Map
Tile
D2
OC
MOORESTOWN TWP
GE
NC
E1
DS
OM
IN
RD
O
BR
AN
ST
G
H
607
BERG EN DR
DR
606
G
H
FO
T
WA
RD
VE
ON
DR
DR
OD
WO
R
PA
RI
SE
AV
LS
FEL
DE
VO
LTO
HA
NE
FO
RD
DR
D
PR
HIL
XC
LN
OD
WO
R
LAU
YN
WA
613
G
H
AV
UT
N Y RD
JUG HAN DLE
ICIA
N
ES
A LB A
DR
R
PAT
CH
DR
NEW
SL
LE
OW
LL
WI
R
OR
O AV
SM
TE
DO
BU
ECH
INE
R
HD
RT
AN
CINNAMINSON TWP
DR
NR
UE
OW
RD
HA
NO
RD
PU
VD
BL
D1
DR
BRID
NN
PE
CO
VD
BL
EL
IN
DU
ST
RI
AL
H
CE
LA
AL
W
I AG
RR
OR O
CA
RD
LA
ND
IN
G
NM
ST
UN
IO
N
US
LN
AR
PE
2
I
604
G
H
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-20
C3
130
US
US
0
13
630
G
H
PI
N
DELANCO TWP
C4
ET
RE
E
C2
June 2014
LN
626
G
H
0
13
LA
K
PA
G
EA
NT
633
G
H
LN
ES
RO O
K
R LN
DY
IE
DR
RD
CL
UB
RD
GE N
626
G
H
E SE
BEV
HO
US
E
ER L
Y RA
N CO
DR
R IN
SP
CLE
AR
636
G
H
613
G
H
TYL
WAT
ER D
R
TEN
NY
BE
CA S
RD
EC
HN
LN
RY
BE R
LN
UT
ER
DR
SO N
LN
LN
O LN
VE
ND
LE
RU
CO
FAN
YL
D4
LN
TW
IG
TR
AY
NO
R
TL
Y
RD
CO
BE
VE
CO
RD
LN
RD
KE
D2
TIF
RD
TOLED
TU
RD
DO
W
SNO
E LN
GC
RE
SS
DR
LN
IE
GR AN
DE BL
VD
EN N
E
TV
OR O
FK
ES
EN
GL
RD
EV
EW
VI
B
LU
DG
LN
IEL
BR
GA
CR
YC
TR
UN
CO
BRID
G EB
LN
JOH
N
WINDSOR LN
OR
AT
RC
ME
D LN
WILLINGBORO TWP
RI
DELRAN TWP
FIEL
636
G
H
GA R
WY
WIN
DO V
E
Y
KW
TP
V IT
LE
MIL L
B
626
G
H
613
G
H
630
G
H
DR
PLA
CI D
LN
OO
GA
RW
636
G
H
RD
VD
BL
BO
RT
ON
MC
EL
LAU R
KB
CR EE
LVD
R
N
RD
IO
IN
UB
CL
RY
SA
LE
BR
RD
RAM
CT
KS
OO
CO
636
G
H
DR
T
UN
RD
RD
95
I2
RD
TO
BRAM LEY
I NE
NT
SE
614
G
H
L
AI
NS
AI
M
WE
ST
FIE
LD
EE
RD
LA
ND
IN
G
EL
WE
TF
ER
HA
MOORESTOWN TWP
AL
BU
RY
CR
T
ES
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
95
I2
R
TE
CE
LR
686
G
H
Y DR
BO OTHB
KE
PI
EF
SH
DR
CE
N
Scale = 1:30,000
C
LAR
LV D
NT B
E4
E3
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
E2
Map
Tile
D3
H MO
EL
RT
O
FI
TE
POND VIEW RD
PI
KE
RD
NJ
N
UR
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-21
June 2014
C4
C3
HO
TON
IS
LL
NE
RD
LN
LEV
ITT
CA
ST
PK W
Y
LE
C5
LN
637
G
H
BURLINGTON TWP
NOTTINGHAM DR
RL ES
VAN SCIVER PKWY
CH A
NH
ILL D
R
637
G
H
CK
LN
NC
EN
HA
DW
EL
LN
541
G
H
WO O
D
RD
RN
TU
NJ
AC
AD
EM
RD
630
G
H
MM
STE
H DR
NW IC
RD
DR
G
H
SH
ER
W
RD
P
M
RA
OO
D
637
G
H
LN
KA
GE
ST
626
C AS
E PA
RK
DR
RAN
CO
GR EE
H IL L
626
G
H
D DR
IN S
WESTAMPTON TWP
IRIC K
NA
BRID
BE
TALL
OW O
O
TW IN
MA
DR
D3
YL
N
TU
RN
E
P IK
CH UR
I2
95
635
G
H
LN
R
T D
OL M
OR
AN
AC
RD
TASKER AV
CR
RD
WA LN UT
AV
537
G
H
Scale = 1:30,000
HW Y 38
E AV
HWY
SYLON
MA IN
BLVD
E4
674
G
H
Y
HW
Bikeways
38
E5

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
LN
D
OR
ST
RA
TF
MA RN E
Map
Tile
D4
RD
641
G
H
OAK RD
CORAL AV
E3
DEACON
HAINESPORT TWP
ELM AV
EE
ST
LN
635
G
H
AD
OA K
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
BRO
ME
LO
DI
E
KN
CH
CEDAR LN
R
LA
N
LE L
MA P
636
G
H
WASHIN GTON ST
OT
TY
CT
OA
KD
R
WO
H
LIG
RN
STE
NJ
D5
CH ST
FA
N
I2
95
TIF
YD
E RS
R
AD
GA
IKE
RFIE
LD
E DG
LN
EL
N
AV
EVE
RG
SHA
RP
RE E
N
LE S
S
DR
R
EAS TB
KE
630
G
H
BLV
D
O OK LN
LA NE
PI
LN
SPR
IN G
WILLINGBORO TWP
IND
EL
Y
FN E
GA F
S IDE
RD
LL
ST
EA
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-22
June 2014
C5
C4
C
RD
BE R
T
CO
LN
GIL
C6
638
G
H
HA
RO
BE R
TS
639
G
H
DR
SPRINGFIELD TWP
AD
RD
G
IN
RL
BU
BUR R
S
RD
ME
E
ILL
NV
SO
CK
JA
LE
VIL
ITH
SM
OX
N
TO
RD
SA
W
G
RD
Y
LL
RA
HO
SS
DR
WESTAMPTON TWP
YC
RD
CLU B DR
LN
E COU NTRY
MO
KE
WO
OD
LA
C
AN
HS
BR
EASTAMPTON TWP
DR
NE
IC
RU
ON
DIS
SHREVE
MW
NG
HV ILLE
RD
RD
ST
PINE ST
DEB
BIE
RA
779
G
H
BB
DR
IT
RU
HWY 38
AN
D LIN
GR
DEER RUN RD
E5
Bikeways
O AD
AV
E6

AILR
Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
LE
E
DL
ND
RAM
SAV O
RY W
Y
WR
LUMBERTON TWP
691
G
H
ST
683
G
H
38
HA
G
JU
G
JU
691
G
H
DR
TTI
612
G
H
682
G
H
RY
MT HO
LLY SM
IT
621
G
H
MA
G
H
CYP RESS DR
ST
HW
HAINESPORT TWP
537
ST
AV
MA R
MIL L
DR
H IN
WA S
N
GTO
EN S
PAR K
KIN G ST
541
G
H
GR E
NO
MOUNT HOLLY TWP
HA
KNIG
ST
JENNIFER CT
GR
EN
RD
GA
AN T ST
H TS
BR ID
DA
WN
RD
617
G
H
GE
HS
626
G
H
Scale = 1:30,000
630
G
H
IS
DS
HIG
K RD
Map
Tile
D5
D6
NE
RD
LE
V
MT
H
OA
CR EE
BER
RD
537
G
H
DR
ST
BR
E4
TH
OL
LA
M
LY
B
BE
RT
DR
RD
YP
AS
S
FRO NT
C AS
OU
LN
D4
RAN
CO
NM
U RS T
NR
ASH H
DD
HIL
TO
TIN
LN
MF
I EL
691
G
H
HO L
LY
BL
OO
SAWY
RD
ER AV
MT H
O
LN
SM IT
H
L LY
J AC
NO RWYN
RD
TAR NSF IELD
KSO
N VIL
LE
KIN GS RD
CO
UN
TR
PIO
NE
ER
BLV
D
H OLL
OW D
JUG HAN DLE
QU AIL
628
G
H
LU
B
638
G
H
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-23
June 2014
670
G
H
C6
C5
C7
WA RN ER
RD
537
G
H
ON
TI
TA
LS
EL
US 206
LW
FO
RD
AIRPORT RD
E
PIN
EN
GL
DR
E
ILL
NV
SO
CK
JA
LE
VIL
ITH
SM
668
G
H
MO
NM
OU
TH
SPRINGFIELD TWP
RD
RD
669
G
H
206
JUL IU
S TO W
N RD
LITECKY DR
R
ER D
WYNWOO D DR
TOW
684
G
H
LINA LN
D7
SM ITH VIL
RD
RD
CO MPASS
S
EY
RN
-A
AM
GH
RM
IN
DR
BI
P US
CAM
R
SD
CY
PR
ES
630
G
H
NP
BE R
TO N
RD
BIRMIN
621
G
H
RD
PEMBERTON TWP
RD
BRANDYWIN
GHAM
779
G
H
NO RTH
WR
AILR
O AD
FI
R
AV
RD
AE
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
Map
Tile
D6
Scale = 1:30,000
AV
LN
E7
E6
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
AM L
N
EM
206
E RD
PO WE LL
E5
TR
EASTAMPTON TWP
DU N
H
UN
MO
YS
AR
IE
L
NE
NE
RD
AR
WO
OD
LA
LE RD
D5
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-24
June 2014
68
PO N
D RD
FL
IN
TR
BERG EN
670
G
H
BS
JO
TO
AIRPORT RD
AV
68
HW Y
663
G
H
FLO RIDA AV
SAY L
OR S
C8
NEW LISBO
N RD
C7
C6
W
N
ST
L IU
JU
OW
N
RD
RAN CO CAS
CAMP ST
RD
D
IX
SPRINGFIELD TWP
Y
HW
FO
WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
68
JUL
W
TO
E
NG
IN
ST
4T
H
NEW JER SEY AV
IUS
MA
ST
GE
OR
TO
LEW
IS
WN
TOW
N
RD
RD
DI
8TH ST
T
R
FO
JULIU
MA
S TO W
IN
ST
NEW HANOVER TWP
669
G
H
N RD
W 9T
H ST
H
10T
D6
LI
US
G
H
TO
663
RD
WE
ST
YS
DI
EL
M
LE
RD
ST
AS
SV
IL
T
XS
FO
OD D
LN
NE
DY
ND P
LZ
CA
TE
F EL LO
WS R
D
616
G
H
KE
N
ST
D8
JU
ST
JUNIP ER
FIR ST
PEMBERTON TWP
668
G
H
630
G
H
IL LE RD
PO INTV
YS
U
MO
NT
RD
SH
EL
DO
NR
NE
AR
E6
E8
E7
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
D7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-25
June 2014
616
G
H
C8
C9
E
VAN D
C7
ND
NB UR
WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
GU
IR
RD
H IR
ARN
ST
ST
ID
RO
O LD
AV
D
YR
R
SE
VI
RA
MC GU IRE BLV
D
FL
IN
TR
LO
O
DS
WT
G AV
MC
RADIN RD
545
G
H
ST
CO
SE
WO NN AC
MELLYS WY
T
R
DEL AWARE AV
FO
LOW ST
PEN NSYLVAN IA
V
SA
XA
TE
MARYLAND AV
V
AA
AM
AV
AB
AL
NEW JER SEY AV
OT T AV
D
IX
CAMP ST
SEV ER AV
NO
SUN
RISE
RD
T
HS
NEW HANOVER TWP
RT
8TH ST
E
OD
RH
W 9TH
H
11T
ST
DO
D
DR
AN
IS L
ST
UG
ST
OY
D9
AV
GH
OP
T
19
T
HS
PE
AR
LS
ST
PLZ
MO
NT
PE
LIE
R
PO
LE
IL
TV
IN
RD
RA
NG
ER
AS
ZS
ST
RD
A KE
ER L
UR
LO
W END
TH
16
WB
NE
HB
H
10T
D7
E
PIO N
YS
PL
E
OO
EL
M
A
ELB
D
NR
TO
EN
ITH
TR
AC
OA K
ST
JU
LI
PEMBERTO N BLVD
REE D
PAR DEE BLV
545
G
H
PEMBERTON TWP
IS
NN
DE
PHIL
LI PS
B LVD
E RS
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways
E LA
HU NT
IN
RL
EA
E8
AV

AV
AV
BR
E7
667
G
H
DR
I AN
Primary Bikeway
E9
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
D8
AV
RD
ED
R
TO
K ES
HOR
US
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-26
June 2014
NS
BRO W
C8
C9
C OO KS
MILLS
RD
TOW N
EN
GL
MO UN T RD
RD
CO O
KS C
OR N
ER R
RD
MO UN T
OCEAN COUNTY
NEW HANOVER TWP

HA
NO
VE
RR
D
D10
D8
RANGE RD
667
G
H
TAFT ST
HAN O
T
AV
WATE
R AV
RAD
E8
Map
Tile
D9
Scale = 1:30,000
E9
PEP
PE R
Bikeways
RD
E10

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
GO OD
DO VE
HOR
K ES
E LA
L ST
AS
GE
AN
DR
HY
ED
R
RO
CAR
PEMBERTON TWP
H AV
LAR C
F AV
IP S
LVD
VER B
CL IF
TUL
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-27
June 2014
C9
39
TE 5
RO U
OCEAN COUNTY
D9
RD
Map
Tile
D10
Scale = 1:30,000
E10
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
RANG E
E9
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-28
June 2014
D1
CINNAMINSON TWP
54
3
WY ND AM
UN
TY
HAR VE
AR
ND
CO
73
NS AV
CH
AR
V
DA
US
OR
G
IN
W LINW
AV
OOD AV
OA
US
BR
MAPLE SHADE TWP
MD
CA
ST
EN
GILMOR
AV
SE
AV
S COLES
RO
NN P
AV
A
RI
TE
TI
D RD
ST
N
HW Y 38
CA
M
DE
TO N AV
CA
MD
AV
MO NM OU
EV
OS
RO
TH DR
ST
CAM D
EN
LA
FF
AC
TY 6
26
ER
TY
DR
TI
NJ
70
CO
UN
TY
62
7
AR
ST
VAL
L
EY
RU N
D
Bikeways
41
NJ
UR
CA
MD
RA
Y
EN
AV
Scale = 1:30,000
HL
CO UN
N CO
UN
CO
TY 644
CAM
DE
SU
IVY LN
NJ
70
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y

Primary Bikeway
F2
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
E1
RR
EY
RD
TH
IR
AV
OA K AV
ELT
DR
MA PL
E
EN
CO
UN
TY
616
V
LI
O
62
8
AV
DELW OO
CO
UN
TY
62
3
MO NR OE
613
CAM DEN COUNTY
IS
AR
KIN G AV
CO
UN
TY
AV
PRINCE
AV
EN
AV
E2
CU
TL
ER
WO
OD
LA
ND
AV
STA
TE
ST
ST
CAMDEN COUNTY
EL
M
TT AV
YALE AV
LIP PIN CO
KENT RD
537
RD
PROS PECT
OAK TER
VO LAN ST
LENAPE
FIELD AV
RO UTE
610
G
H
MA IN ST
537
G
H
615
TY
UN
CO
E AV
SPRING
49TH ST
45TH ST
DARY
NJ 38 SECON
CA
MD
609
G
H
RD
AV
NJ 38
DR
EX
EL
V
EA
PL
MA
ND
R
LE
OS
AV
AV
IRVI NG
LA
DE
AV
EL
TH
BE
T
NU
AL
W
RK
FO
M
CA
AV
AN
1
62
ND
LA
RO
GR
TY
UN
CO
S
LE
CO
AV
V
NA
AV
E
AV
AV
AY
W
13
0
HS
73
SE
HIG
AV
13
0
ER
W
LA
FIN
RN
GIT HE
Y
DW
GLA
HO
AV
LL
HW
RD
0
61
NE
Y AV
R
PA
GR AN T AV
TT
TY
UN
CO
ON
30 N
B
E
RB
CO
EN
MD
CA
OD
US 1
76
0
CO
N B to
RD
RD
AV
UT
HWY 90
OL
EN
LN
N
LE
RO
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y
FR R
T 90
RO
YA
L
D2
608
G
H
73
CA
M
B
W
0
13
US
90
RT
LD
HW
VE
FR
to
HW
LE
CK
SU
NJ
90
SB
73
NJ
NJ
90
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-29
June 2014
D2
M
BA
RD
DR
PO
603
G
H
RD
LA
O
R
RD
NY
NE
W
M
O
DEVO N RD
EM
ST
AIN
ST
CO
AL
BA
ST
OR
E
ST
ND
ST
AV
IN
MA
ST
SE
603
G
H
ST
TH
RD
U
PA
CO LLINS
AV
HU
RC
H
MOORESTOWN TWP
PI
N
NC
FLYNN AV
N
LE
GL
EN
AV
R AV
LS
CR IDE
MIL
DR
WA
LN
UT
AV
PE
RR
YA
AV
AK
ST
EO
V
TA
NU
AL
W
M
EL
RD
73
IE
DR
OL
R
IC
M
JA
ME
N
LE
ON
ST
CE
613
G
H
IR
GL
EN
HW
Y
RD
SO
607
G
H
LA
N
RA
OD
RT
WO
RD
AR
O
TW
FO
ST
ER
RN
D
ST R
AN
ST
DEM
D3
FE
RD
D1
CINNAMINSON
TWP
D
R
SC
HS
38
Y AV
S SHIR LE
SO
I NE
SD
HA
TR
R ES
HO
FO
HW
ES
OT
EN
RD
673
G
H
38
AV
W
O
ER
DD
SL
AT
E
RU
E
N
RU
S
RY
AN
DR
(
'
&
%
295
AV
EP
AR
NJ
E
IT
AN
G
R
KE
NP
I
TU
R
NJ
AV
OO
L AVE
PK
W
73
ROLAND AV
OO D
Scale = 1:30,000
BEE
CH W
F2
616
G
H
673
G
H
Bikeways
SB
616
G
H

Primary Bikeway
EL
AIR
ED
F3
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
E2
CH AP
E
DR
I2
95
RD
D
O
RD
O
W
AG
IN S
TW
EN
BR
BL
EW
R CH
RA
M
PE
AM
R
RAMP
CH U
LN
DR
ER
AV
BE
PL
UE
RD
DR
AT
HE
HOLIDAY ST
D RD
ELK
RD
WO O
NO R
HE
OO
M
RA
AV
WA
VER
LY
NJ
41
CAMDEN COUNTY
RW
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
D
GR
EAT
R
RD
EY
RR
616
EN
CO
UN
TY
IA
TU
ST
CAM
D
BR
AV
KD
CH
DR
IK
E
NP
IN
H ER
M
RA
ES
TR
612
G
H
GA IT
LN
BA
ELT
EV
OS
RO
KE D
ON
I 29
UR
RV
AV
CH
GREGORY CT
O
CR O
NIX
D
OLA R
AV
HA
VA L
LE Y
RD
RA
38
DR
AN T
P
M
S LEN
DE
PLE
AS
DR
RA
AL
EX
AN
E3
GR
AV
HW Y 38
SU
FE
LL
OW
SH
IP
AV
UN
TY
CO
I
LO
YL
TR
RIN
CU
TL
ER
608
G
H
CT
RAM P
HW Y
KIN GS
UN
ST
MAPLE SHADE TWP

73
CO
EA
IL
L
ST
E1
LA
U
RE
DR
DR
RD
IN
SH
IP
AV
ER
HA
AV
ST
HWY 73
EL
M
FE
LL
O
W
CO N
ST
AV
BEA
611
G
H
G
H
537
HIG
AV
CH
CAMD EN
R
HU
N CEDAR
609
G
H
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-30

D3
SH
EF
537
G
H
CE
N
DR
O
BE
AV
TH
AK
I2
95
RD
NO
PEN
MOORESTOWN TWP
UN
ND
LE
HW Y 38
T
DA
LN
RD
TEE F
O RD
LN
IK
E
N
P
N
J
D
NR
N
IO
UN
ER
RD
L
IL
686
G
H
LN
AN
TE
AV
OT
RT
HO
AL L
MA
TU
R
AC
H
O
C
E
HI
NH
RD
DE
RD
T
AL
W
AV
FO
38
TM
AN
LEA
V
NA
DR
RT
NY
S
HA
O
LT
WA
AN
TH
ADAM S
8
Y3
I2
95
HW
686
G
H
RD
MI
RD
ST
DR
HO
TIC
BIS
N
LA
TURN
GS
RE
IG
LA
U
BR
ST
PS
RAMP
WIL LO
W
GA
TE
BLV
NJ
38
VD
O NT BL
TU
RN
PI
KE
JUG
HA
RAM P
LARCHM
615
G
H
ST
DR
K DR
D
TTA
VO
AIN
DY
V
GA
EM
M AR
AN
619
G
H
YO
D
LIN
T
NS
RM
NE
IL
S
BO
RT
ON
IC
MA RN E HW
CT
AN
ST
LA
ND
IN
G
D4
TE
614
G
H
RD
DR
RT
O
F IE
LD
686
G
H
RD
D2
June 2014
RE
DS
O
R
U
LA
LN
W
IN
RY
NT
U
CO
E2
LN
CH A
PE L
HILL
RD
E4
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

HIL
686
G
H
LS
ID
EL
N
CT
EN
GL
T
M
RT
HA
AN
PO
ES
IG
IN
PE
603
G
H
IN
612
G
H
V
SA
XA
TE
HO
LE
DD
LA
BI
RE
RD
NG
LLI
RO
R
M
ELB
OL
N
ES
674
G
H
LA
RE
BL
VD
RD
KE
LA
ST
CH
MA
SU
UR
AR
YL
LI
S
CH
KE D
CAS C
S LA
A DE
AM
GA
SK
IL
LR
D
TO
DR
TEA L
LN
CT
CA
T TA
IL D
FAIRFA
HO
RS
ST D
CT
VE
CT
SE
RE
R
CE
ME
TE
RY
RD
RD
RE
DD
AC
ON
OD
NP
BR
O
IS
R
TU
CA
DR
DR
Scale = 1:30,000
DE
DR
Map
Tile
E3
LL
WA
RN
CO
AVID
F2
VE
ES
607
G
H
DO
F4
F3
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
NORWOOD RD
PATR ICIA LN
X DR
HILLTOP DR
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-31

D3
GA RN ET
AV
June 2014
MA RN E
PARK AV
HWY
JUG H
AN D
D4
SAXONY
CR
635
G
H
EE
MERIO
D5
LE
MA RY WY
G
H
537
RD
Y
HW
N WY
641
G
H
38
DR
RY
BE
ILL
FF
AV
M
38
CR
HW Y 38
WIL LO W TU
RN
EAS TO
N WY
R
THE
HEA
LN
RD
HAINESPORT TWP
WO
BA
DH U
S DEER PL
SAN
R ST
CL
AY
PA
RR
YD
ST
ADAM S
CH
E
AS
SID
ED
R
640
G
H
RD
AY
W
LL
MI
TO
ET
BR
OD
DR
N
IO
UN
ILL
EE
RD
DR
OX
LEN
BI
SC
H
ARK R
D
N
IO
UN
RD
RD
G
H
636
K LN
ZZ
PI
CR
LAR C
BRO O
JA
RD
TH
IS
TL
E
IS
H MO
TT D
R IO
RE
FENIM ORE RD
FO
LA
ES
LN
RD
O DIL
ST
ER
DAF F
MA R
E5
LA
RT
KE
ES
PO
LLIS
LN
NG
674
G
H
CT
LI
N T BLV
AM AR
Y
OD
O
EW
PL
AP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
E3
LN
PHILLI PS RD
HA
IN
LUMBERTON TWP
612
G
H
FO
ST
ER
TO
686
G
H
RD
FT
WY
MA
RO
IN
ST
612
G
H
XC
FO
RD
D
KR
AR
RD
L LY
ES
H AIN
LTO
R
PD
O
ELB
ME
HIL
DFO
RD
MT
HO
CY
STA
LN
N
LE
AP
EC
RT
HA
FO
RD
DR
ILY
YL
DA
A
NE
CR
ES
DR
PI
RD
MEDFORD TWP
541
G
H
K
LAR
R
SD
ES
F3
HIA LE AH
Map
Tile
E4
Scale = 1:30,000
DR
F5
F4
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
DR
KN
EA
PR
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-32
D6
EASTAMPTON TWP
OV
LV
EB
D
641
G
H
DR
DR
ST
TUR
E
AT
NB R
G
RO
IDG E
R
HA
T
NU
EST
CH
DIM SD AL
WN RD
RU
E DR
BB
YS
CAN T
RY C
E BE R
684
G
H
TO
EAYRES
541
G
H
BO
38
ALL
SP
RD
HW
Y
ICE
WY
GR
LE
SA U
D
TE R
NAS
RD
P
MA
RY
ESTA
R
BE
D5
HA
V
R RU
N
BEU
LA
DEE
D4
June 2014
LA
ND
IN
MUNICIPAL DR
ST
WY
FLEMISH
NE
LUMBERTON TWP
BO
LD
CO
WN
ER
RD
Y
SW
IN
ND
LA
RN
ST
DR
SM
ITH
VIL
612
G
H
RD
AM
LS
AY
LE
RD
640
G
H
SHA
CHUR CH ST
VILLAGE DR
BA
R
NO
MP
DR
CA
DO
MA
D
AR
LL
BE
IN
ST
EA
E4
BRIDG
DR
E6
E RD
LA
N
DI N
HO
CO UN TR
YCLUB RD
GS
T
PE
W
EL
L
641
G
H
AV
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
M
DO
EA
681
G
H
616
G
H
YC
K
PA
I
CH
UR
CH
RD
EAR
YE S
RD
TO W
N RD
FOS TERTOWN
MEDFORD TWP
RED LION
RD
LN
F4
641
G
H
F5
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
E5
F6
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-33
June 2014
D6V
D5
EASTAMPTON TWP
LEN AP
E RA
IL RO
AE
E TR
D7
AD A
V
684
G
H
INDIAN TR
ST
SMITHVIL LE RD
HW
Y
M
AP
LE
38
SUNSET BLVD
AV
ES
TAT
E
SD
R
CENTER
38
S PEMBERTON RD
530
G
H
W HAM PTON ST
RICHARDS LN
PEMBERTON TWP
AM RD
VIN C
E NT
BIR MIN GH
O WN
RD
206
E7
E5
681
G
H
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
R
BU
RS
M
LS
IL
R
PEM BERTON RD
G
H
NM
AIN
ST
616
643
G
H
O NS
BRA
C
ER
D
RI
DG
681
G
H
RD
RD
EM M
MA
IN
ON GS
642
G
H
BUDDTO
ST
HAT R
D
W N RD
EA
TR
SH
EN
AN
DO
AH
HI
LL
AR
Map
Tile
E6
Scale = 1:30,000
LN
F6
Bikeways
ISA
BU D
DR
D
F7

AC
Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
F5
BED BUG HILL RD
TR
BR
ID
G
RD
US 206
RE
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-34
June 2014
D7
D6
D8
G
H
668
LD CIR
R
AD D
E ST E
HO M
DR
M IL
LS
R
V
BL
NEW
T
R
FO
ET LN
HO
UG
H
O
N
DD
VR
BU
O
G
AV
ST
WO OD FIE
PEMBERTON BORO
HO RN
KINSLE
Y RD
PEM B
ERTO
N
BRO W
N
HAN
MB
RA
NC
OC
ER
TO
BY
646
G
H
ACADAMIC DR
AS
DR
PA
DU
CK
ISL
AN
DR
IR
AV
FI
R
ST
AV
SS
SPRIN GF
O VE
R ST
PE
IEL D RD
S MIL
LS R D
W HAM PTO N ST
TH
530
G
H
687
G
H
645
G
H
RD
AK
DR
NO
SC
HA
RV
AR
RD
YAL
E
645
G
H
NEW LISBON RD
KN
RD
OW
616
G
H
PEMBERTON TWP
UN
TO
PE
RA
PI
E8
E6
W
SIM
ON
RD
TO
LI
NO
AG
M
RD
STOCKTONS BRIDGE RD
644
G
H
642
G
H
NH
P PE
IL L R
SHE E
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
BU D
DR
D
Map
Tile
E7
Scale = 1:30,000
F8
F7
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
AC
S HA
T RD
RD
F6
ON G
S
ILL
SM
RR
BU
ISA
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-35
June 2014
D8
AV
D9
LI
US
TO
T
ES
I SL
RL
CA
ED
R
JU
OW
SN
RD
E LA
K ES
HOR
D7
545
G
H
667
G
H
669
G
H
AV
AV
IEL D RD
AR
M
IL
LS
PRESS AV
OX FORD
DR
IL LE
CO V
JA
LN
SPRIN GF
RS
AS
SO
NA
V
LA
KE
HU
ME
LD
RS
T
AM
RD
DS
TH RD
T IO
RD
UN
NW
PEMBERTON TWP
BR
ID
645
G
H
E9
PO N
D
RD
AI
L
EE
Q
U
NC
JU
CO N
IF
RD
ER
ST
NR
S WOODS
WE YM OU
RD
RIDGEVIE W AV
SC
O
WO
TE
CK
RA
NC
OC
S
E7
ST
PEMBERTON BROWNS MILLS RD
LE
S
645
G
H
RE DR
PE
NS
ST
530
G
H
E
IR
SH
RK
BE
BR
O
N LAK ES HO
MT
M IS
ER
RAK
E
YR
D
AY
RD
W
IL
RA
646
G
H
DE
EP
RU
N
LN
V
SA
FOU R
MIL E
RD
W
LO
ER
LR
M IL
F7
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
E8
F9
F8
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-36

RA
HYD
D8
GO OD
June 2014
WATE
D9
R AV
D10
ER
EM
TR
A
NG E
P
PEP
ST
O
T
N LA
ST
S LA
E DR
TH
AR
E
BR
HO R
US
AA
V
K ES
RANG E RD
BER
YN
ESH
DR
O RE
HU
OD
DR
RD
S
TA
PENN ST
MA
RG
AR
E
G
TR
ER
EE L
WH
ET
ST
TI
N
AN
VANCE ST
ST
NW
G
BO
ES
HIT
PRESS AV
LN
Y
IS
DA
SR
BI
O
SH
P
ST
SPINDLES WY
W AV
RID G
RID GE VIE
AV
US
E RD
B
LUM
CO
WILKIN
W WH ITE S BOG
S AV
AD
AN
DR
SE
TR
HIG
R
WD
C TA
HL
CH O
530
G
H
LAKEHURST RD
PEMBERTON TWP
TEN
SAW
DR
E10
SA
HI
KO
E8
LG
PU
QUAIL RUN RD
S RD
IS
PHE A
S AN T
W
AY
PA
S
DR
RD
AD
EN
AR
W
IL
RA
F EA
T HE
DR
AT HE
RED FE
OG S
K EE
R TR
R TR
UM S
EH T
SEN
TEC
EC A
TR
RED
ERO
ES B
NAV
A JO
CH
WH IT
TR
WA TR
RD
CH IPPE
IL
RA
WY
MT
SP
R IN
M IS
ER
GL
AK
EB
LVD
HW
70
YR
D
BR
AN
70
PA
R
KW
AY
RA
TT
LE
R
F8
RD
F10
F9
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
E9
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-37
June 2014
D10
RD
D9
RA
NG
HAN
OV
ER
B LV
OCEAN COUNTY
LAKEHURST RD
530
G
H
NJ 70
E9
PA
S
Y
HW
AD
EN
RD
70
PEMBERTON TWP
IL
RA
WY
N BRANC H RD
F9
F11
F10
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
E10
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-38
June 2014
ES
OD D
L AVE
TR
D
HO RIZ
616
G
H
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
ON W
Y
M
ATR IU
CH
CAMD EN
CO UN TY
LIN CO
AR
ND
CO
EN
KAR
TU
EY
674
G
H
OLNEY PL
RS
JE
RD
HI
LL
NE
LY
D
73
RN
PI
DR
KE
SE
I-29
5
LN DR
E
Y
HW
KAY
AV
ER
R
ED
CR
RD
R EE
E NT
RO
CK
GR E
GE
ST
NA
DB
RID
RD
RD
E
RE
E RE
CH
OW
ST
NG
CO V
WE
UR
WY
AV
PAR
K
PA
AV
RD
GR EE NVAL
E RD
AV
O
R
EM
O
ED
G
M
TA
673
G
H
673
CH
AP
EL
E3
ARBO R WY
RR
HWO
CH AP
E
FO
E2
BEE C
NJ
41
I2
95
E1
ROLAND AV
73
674
CAM DEN COUNTY
RD
HW
NJ
70
DD
OR
BL
VD
NJ
70
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y
RD
RD
FO
XF
HWY 70
WE
LA
MP
DR
DI
IN
THO
RN
HIL
LR
D
DI
RI
LN
CR E
ST BR
OO K
AV
CAMDEN COUNTY
NG
NG
KING DR
INDIAN
F3
600
G
H
PO
ST
JUS T
A
O RC
HA R
DR
D
MA
RL
OW
RD
AN
RD
JO
LN
OLD
HAWK LN
NE
CO NESTOGA
DR
ASH
RY
DR
95
I-2
C
SE
ER
DR
RD
S
ES
LK
R
MA
R
DA
ZL
CROPWELL RD
BL
VD
NA
RI
PE
LU
C
IA RD
SEQ UO
ON
MO
R IT
ST
LA
ED
WE
ST
W IN
M
UN
N
DY
RD
AN
BR
RG
3
Y7
EVESHAM TWP
FO
CT
CA
MD
DR
E LL
RD
PAR
N
BR
CHALE T DR
RD
D
IA D
HD
FRIE
SL
N
D
ACA
E IG
DL
HA
1
56
LN
RO
Bikeways
UTE
5 44

Primary Bikeway
G3
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
RO
LL
I NG
LN
OO
CT
G
IN
NN
MA
DR
E
UT
EN
CE
SE L
N
BRIAN
RO
GA
TE
E DR
BO BW HIT
OV
MORRIS DR
Scale = 1:30,000
NN
PR
LN
RK
LA
TEA
RO
Map
Tile
F2
EN
RU
ER
N
WL
CO
RE
AND
OP
ES
V
DA
I EL
NF
HE
CO
UN
TY
DR
IN
PO
IC
67
1
67
5
UN
TY
DR
CO
ST
BRO WNING LA
HEARTWOOD RD
STARLING LN
DR
DE
MA
RY S
CA
M
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-39
June 2014
E3
UR
UN
ION
M IL
LR
CH
CH
ST
CO UN TR
Y CLUB
BR
OO
E2
DA
CE
ME
CR
674
G
H
PK WY
GR
T
AN
RD
ER
TE
RY
E4
603
G
H
RD
PA
TR
IC
IA
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
LN
616
G
H
LN
LIUM
TRIL
AD
AC
EM
607
G
H
Y
DR
R CH
CH U
MO UN TAINVI
RD
EW RD
DR
PR
LE
DR
YB
D
LV
OW
AN
I TT
N EL
M WO
ST
HAS TINGS
MB
OD R
D
EA
CT
AM BERFIELD
BR
N
TE
RD
BY
LN
WIN TE RS ET
ME
DF
3
Y7
KING AV
AL
LI
SO
N
CAM B
AP
TS
MA
ND
ME
RE
DR
ON
RD
ST
BLU E ANCHOR
F4
TRO TH
70
BLV
D
MARLBOROUGH AV
OA K
UB TR
HU NT CL
EVESHAM TWP
AV
NC
RD
RY
BA
ES
KA
TH
BL
VD
KN
FLINTS
TO NE
620
G
H
ST
E M AIN
DR
TUC K
E RTO
FIF
TH
ST
OX
HS
EV
AM
HT
LS
EIG
HA
73
A
M
LIPPINCOTT DR
R DR
LON GHU RST RD
HWY 70
LN
GAYLORD LN
NO R
DD
WEAVE
AV
AV
HA
OL
ROSS WY
R LT
RAD
600
G
H
RIG
DL
618
G
H
OVERINGTON AV
P IK E
LO
R
N RD
RD
O
W
HA
D AL E
DR
WIL
LO
W
TT R
WY
YA
LE
R
COUNTRY SQUIRE LN
SC O
O N PK
BE
ND
RD
WE
MARLT
BRYA
COMM ONWE ALTH DR
Y
RA
LU
N DR
ARDSLEY
Map
Tile
F3
Scale = 1:30,000
544
G
H
LN
DR
G4
G3
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
GLENVIE W
CT
BR
IC
K
RD
CAMDEN COUNTY
5 44
ERIN
LN
RD
HWY 73
NEW RD
NG
K RD
RI
EV
AN
HWY 73
AD
KEVIN WY
BRIC
RD
ND
S ELM WO OD
V
DA
I EL
NF
HE
M
E
SA
UTE
DR
RO
N
LDE
GO
CA
F2
RO
OR
PL
KENT AV
MP
RA
RID GE
RALEIG
H LN
VD
BL
CT
RO OK DR
LN
HW
D ALE
BO
RO
PAR K
GR EE NB
H
BIR C
ES
ANNAPOLIS DR
MAPLE AV
DR
EV
WY
KE
NI
LOW
E
LN
CO
LIN
FA
AR
BA
LTO N
TR
W CED AR AV
MA R
UN
LL D
R
CO
ROYAL DR
T AV
PH
O
N LO
C US
LN
RD
RD
EN
IX
R EE
E NT
GR E
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-40
June 2014
E4
E3
O
LIC
PIM
SARATO
GA RD
AR
WY
MOUNT LAUREL TWP
E5
CLE MENTS CT
RD
AC
BR
CH U
LIN C
H
R CH
RD
MO O
R
W
EN
CY
ING S
RE
G
JEN N
IL
NS
I
AT
ST
KI
RD
ME DFO
TFO
FOR
E EK LN
JUG HAND
LE
CED AR DR
CHEST ER AV
618
G
H
70
HW Y
CT
N RD
LD
RF
IE
LIN S
O
UI
KE
PI
O RY
TO M
HIC K
F5
LN
CH AP
LE AV
TRI MBLE ST
CO P
LR
AI
QU
P ER
RD
LD
O
N
O
LT
ST
MEDFORD TWP
TRO TH
EVESHAM TWP
AR
UN ION
BRANCH RD
MAIN ST
D RD
CH ERRY ST
LO
WE
RD
LL
DR
RD
OR
RO ME DF
EVESBO
F3
GE R
ES CR
RD
HAR
CT
WY
HAY N
UG H
H OLLY
IS
ESTA
RD MT
LL CT
MITCHE
DA
RD
ON
SHARP RD
WELLESLEY WY
BLV D
616
G
H
BEN N
ING TO
NT
TE
MIL
LS
N DR
541
G
H
TR
HIM M
E
INE
KA
NS
EG ATE
SU
NN
DR
PI
NE
OO
DR
DR
SL
DR
Bikeways
ON
N
O
NT
LA
K
KW
G4
OA
DR
TO
CK
M
EL
AK
ES
I DE
DR
G5

RD
EE
SK
KS
BL
VD
TA
VIS
VA
LL
EY
RD
PI
NE
DR
YJ
IM
G3
Scale = 1:30,000
DR
VE
RN
ET
TA
LN
MID DL
TA
U
DR
E
TR
D
BLV
ID
N
RU
ON
RT
BA
ES
ES
LA D
JAC
NEW RD
RG
EVE
TR
Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
AS
Map
Tile
F4
BARNST
AB LE DR
623
G
H
TR
SR
RD
OH IO
AR
KE
TO N
RD
STO
KE R
LE IN
GEORGIA TR
MA
620
G
H
TUC
BRA
ILLINOIS TR
NIN
RD
ST
CH RIS
TOP H
E RS M
ILL R
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-41
June 2014
RD
CH
CH
AIR
V IL
LE
RD
TO WN
FOSTER
R
HU
RD
E6
ON RD
RED LI
E5
E4
HILLARD BRIDGE RD
HA
LN
WK
HA
SE
CT
FO
LN
STO
W
N RD
S
ER
NT
HU
WILLOW LN
AUC
ER
LN
EAR
YE
616
G
H
641
G
H
CH
SANDTOWN RD
NEW
F RE
ED O
MR
D
HAY N
LIB
ER
TY
PL
ES CR
E EK LN
TOLKIEN PASS AGE
TO
ES
YR
EA
STEPHENS RISE
W
R
D
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
RY
RD
F6
RY
MEDFORD TWP
KE
70
ND
RA
YM
OL
D
RE
LIO
RD
NIN
RD
SK
EE
TR
DR
PU
HW
Y
AT
O
ILLE RD
D
IL L R
TS M
F4
K ET
PRIC
CH AIRV
RG
BRANCH RD
AL
LE
BRA
NT
OW
N
MA
PL
ES
RD
ST
OK
ES
RD
541
G
H
HA
WK
DI
XO
TO
G4
RD
G5
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
SR
G6
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
F5
AN
CT
E LS
IN
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-42
June 2014
E6
E5
ISA
AC
E7
BU D
RE
TR
LN
OS B
PHIL
BED
B UG
EA
TR
HILL
RD
DR
D
WIL
LO
UG
HB
Y
E
RID G
L ION
RD
RED
RD
L
FA
N
MI
ST
WE
BB
IN
S
ST
ER
WARWICK WY
ID
RO
641
G
H
WESTMIN STER DR
N
206
H
IL
L
R
D
PULHAM LN
DR
RD
R
RD
DA
AI
YF
MA
ER
AV
BI
G
BE
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
KING
HA M
DR
ST
DO
RC
US 206
ES
YR
EA
GR
TO
F5
CT
HE
DU CH ESS
ER
DR
BUC
F7
AM
HU
CY
PL
ON
GT
LVD
LY B
HO L
IN
NT
RD
DR
FAR M
685
G
H
HO G
DR
OL
N
LIO
ED
RD
ER
70
PL
YM
LA
LEE
OU
TH
CT
HWY 70
70
ALL E
N
FIRE LN SOUTH
TOW
N RD
NE
RD
206
FRIE
N DS
HIP
RD
PO W
E LL
PL A
C
ER
D
TABERNACLE TWP
WK
IN S
RD
Map
Tile
F6
Scale = 1:30,000
648
G
H
U
M
G6
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
T
C
G7
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
HA
G5
E
LB
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-43
June 2014
MA
ON G
E7
S HA
T RD
E8
GN
E6
IA
CB
U DD
OL
ISA A
RD
RD
642
G
H
PEMBERTON TWP
644
G
H
RD
E AT
RET R
SERENI
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
TY CT
ST M
IC HA
EASTO
CT
ELS
N WY
LL S RD
BURRS MI
FIR E LN
BE
EB
E
DR
AYT
O
F8
OXFORD CIR
LN
D
LR
HIL
BIG
F6
NORTH
HW Y 70
NL
N
FIR E LN
70
SOUTH
FIRE LN SOUTH
UN
RS
R
BU
LS
IL
U
AVE N
ST
CR
RY
FIF TH
E
NB
EC
G
PE
AVENUE RD
N
SL
GY
WOODLAND TWP
LOG RD
ACO RN DR
TABERNACLE TWP
RD
Scale = 1:30,000
E LL
PO W
OY
PL
AC
RD
G8
G7
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
F7
LN
NS
G6
VE
STE
U
M
OAK LN
E
LB
T
C
SO
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-44
June 2014
E8
E9
PE
PA
TC
RD
E7
W
LO
IDA
ER
HO
RD
ILL
TR
RD
EY
TUR K
A RD
B UZ Z
GE
BR ID
CO
NS
IN
646
G
H
RD
LE
MI
GN
OL
RD
MA
LOU ISIANA TR
IA
NE
W
DE
EP
HO
LL
O
PEMBERTON TWP
YO
R
KR
WIS
DR
CA
RO
RD
FOU
P
DEE
LO
H OL
L IN
D
WR
N
IG A
IC H
IL E
RM
RD
UPP ER MILL
AT
R
TE
RD
IA
GIN
VIR
DA
KO
DR
TA
T
644
G
H
SH
IN
NS
70
RD
IR E
EF
SID
UTH
SO
LN
FOU
IL E
RM
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
SE
RE
NI
ER
RD
CT
MIL
TY
AY
MI
KE
HE
AD
CR
QU
N
SO
HN
JO
F9
SW
Y7
2
OS
HW
RD
70
SH
IN
NS
RD
ST
ER
ST
GI
LB
ER
NO
TS
RL
EM
ON
RD
KE
EM
PL
OY
EE
DR
NORTH
ILIT Y CT
TRANQU
FIR E LN
EL
S RD
RS
FIR
SHINN
RD
F7
O
NN
70
AT
E
Y
HW
H
RT
SRP
WOODLAND TWP
ST
EM
ER
GE
NC
Y
G7
G9
G8
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
F8
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-45
June 2014
RA
TT
E9
E8
LE
R
MT
M IS
E10
RD
ER
DR
MO
PIT M
A
PEMBERTON TWP
NT
AN
IS
ER
PI
NE
S
AT
NA RD
W
H
MT M IS
SADE
ERY PA
TR
D
TS
ET
SS
AC
FO
RR
ES
HU
S
RD
UT
IC
EC
T
MA
UN
CO
NN
RD
IS
PE
R
RD
ID
AT
IN
G
FL
OR
OW
BUTTERW ORTH RD
IN
KW
AY
NS
PA
R
CO
BL
VD
WIS
N RD
YR
D
KN
RE
EV
ES
RD
0
Y7
HW
MA
PL
E
DR
FOR RE
IS
ER
RD
ST RD
LAKE DR
W
D
O
E
HA
SI
AN
EG
RD
RB
OR
R
LE
O
N
R
D
RD
F10
N
O
F8
EG G
H AR
BO R
RD
WOODLAND TWP
CO
O
PE
MU D
DY R
R
D
Y
DR
PO
ND
RD
ST
TU
RK
EY
SA
LL
SHI NN S RD
BU
ZZ
BI
RD
AR
RD
AR
ST
E RD
S
S H OU
GLA S
TE
PAT
ST
SO N
563
G
H
G8
Scale = 1:30,000
G10
G9
72
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
F9
HW
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-46
E9
PEMBERTON TWP
June 2014
GLASS WORKS RD

E10
RD
MT MISERY PASADENA
OCEAN COUNTY
IS ER
Y RD
ES
TR
MT M
RR
O
E
SI
FO
AN
EG
G
F11
RD
F9
HA
RB
OR
WOODLAND TWP
RD
W
D
O
E
SI
AN
M
W
D
TL
ER
SA
V
HA
OR
O
AN
RD
SI
BU
RB
PL
AC
HR
ER
RT
O
Y
WO
LV
D
TE R
GL
AS
SH
OU
SE
RD
RD
AV
RD
D
ON
YP
DR
T
BU
EG
ROGE RS RD
RD
G9
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
F10
G11
G10
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-47
June 2014
N
LI
A
LV
VD
BL
SY
NN
LN
PE
CO
E10
A
NI
AV
MC
MA
539
HO
N
AV
E
RO UTE
BO
CA
T
AV
N
LI
PP
ZE
AV
AM R
ING H
BUC K
D
OCEAN COUNTY
F10
G10
G11
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
F11
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-48
DR
73
CO
UN
TY
67
1
ON
LA
KE
RD
BL
VD
544
G
H
HWY 73
EN
HWY 73
M
TO
DUTCH RD
N
LI
SO
RD
RU
L
IL
M
ELK INS LN
TO
N
CA
MD
NT
LN
TA
U
BA
R
DR
IA
544
G
H
DR
Y
LE
CK
BU
E DR
ARDSLEY
F4
LN
NEW RD
AD
Y
RA
LU
G RIN
PER
SANDPI
AC
F3
PER E
F2
June 2014
AX
L IF
CT
HA
KIN
GS
GR
AN
TD
ROYAL CROWN PKW

Y
NI
OR
TH
DR
RD
D
TR
RE
EG
DU TCHT
BATTERY HILL DR
SUM MIT CT
CIR
IAN A
RD
IC
ST
MA
TOM LINSON MILL

RD
LW
MI
LL
V IEW
KE
CK
PIN E
CO
LO
NY
NJ 73
SE CO
ND
85
Y6
NT
OU
NC
BR
AD
DO
D
LAD Y
E
MD
CA
TE
RR
ARY
LINDEN AV
JE
EVESHAM TWP
LN
LL
PA
R
HARWOO
5
67
TY
UN
CO
EN
CAMDEN COUNTY
D DR
MI
MD
CA
OWN RD
G4
A
WIL LI
ATH
M FE
L DR
RT
ON
RD
LE R
UN
RD
CO UN TR
KET
T
D
E
AS
TE
N
HO
PE
WE
LL
RD
BY
CH
PENN RD
693
TY
UN
CO
EN
D
M
CA
S DR
Y LAKE
E BLVD
KINGS CROFT LN
SUNSET
TERRAC
BO
R
ER D
DR
SIG NA L HIL
FOREST HILLS DR
CH
AM
MT VERN
RE
AV
ON AV
SIM SBURY DR
Scale = 1:30,000
TN
UT
SY
NJ 73
H3
Bikeways
AV
AV
H4

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
G3
DE
ER
FI
EL
D
ES
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-49
BLV
D
F4
AK
CA
ES
I DE
RO
DR
DR
CK
N
LE
RD
HER
TALL OW OO
D DR
ON C
DR
A
WE
TR
NT
AS
LL L
N
LS DR
FORESTHIL
RD
LA
WE
HINCHMAN RD
HO
CA
T
N IA
BAN
IO
PO
EN
S
AT
DR
CT
IA
TIAC
OL
GN
PO N
RD
MA
CT
AM ES
SL
AB
RD
FO
AD
IM
RS
ST
D
E B LV
B RID G
TO
PE
CT
SQ
HIG H
JA
ME
SG
AT
E
M
ON
CT
SR
D
ER
GOTLIEBS FIELD RD
BR
ON
PA RK
NR
D
SO
RT
BU RY
KS O
CT
BR
AN
CH
HE RO
N
JAC
GO LDE N CLU
B DR
CT
G5
ON
ON AV
T DR
CH
AN
BR
ND
ABINGD
CATA MO
UN
AB
SL
HO
PE
WE
LL
RD
O
LL
WY
BLU E
RD
RD
HO
MEDFORD TWP
DR
LN
BO
TH
PA
Y
LL
INT
H PO
PAR
K
NL
DR
HIG
LL
OL
KN
MIL L
ETO
LS
AL
RF
DA
CE
EVESHAM TWP
G3
E
AV
CO
GR
SE
D
EL
DR
MA
S
JE
C
TI
R
LA
C
AC
M
DR
I
SF
LE
K IH
H
LT
NT
TR
ET
R
ON
CE
RK
PA
AD
AN
T
SG
R
RD
BREAKNECK RD
YAR MO UTH CIR
AP
MM
KIN
G
CO
IE W
V
FAIR
DR
M DR
OD
544
G
H
I DE
TR
TH
HO
TU
TO
ES
OS AG E TR
BIN
ER
TR
RD
NANTUC
KET
ES T
SH
AK
OY
N TH A
RO
LJ
SL
620
G
H
RD
HEATH
RD
RD
LS
BRACKEN RD
FOR
LA
KE
F5
SL
AV
LVD
PI
NE
BL
VD
FA
L
NB
NTO
NT
ON
DR
LITTLE JOHN
DR
TAU
TA
U
M
EL
623
G
H
BA
RT
ON
RU
N
F3
June 2014
WR E
LAK ESID E DR
MILFORD DR
IL
AW
KR
ID
H3
H5
H4
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
G4
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-50
June 2014
HA
F5
F4
WK
IN
F6
SR
DI
XO
TO
RD
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
O
S
N
W
OQ
UO
TR
S
ON
H
O
NT
W
SHA
NE
ST
BL
VD
LE
TABERNACLE TWP
C
WH IN
IT
HIG H
TR
TA
NG
M
GA
US
TR
ICA
OO
CH
AG
W
H
AT
DR
AW
HI
TR
R
AD
HA
AC L
E
RD
NA
TAB
E RN
T
ER C
HE ST
AV
BE
L AN D
RD
C
LD
FI E
OD
WO
L
MIL
DR
BE
EN
GL
AC
620
G
H
S
ET T
ICK
PR
RE
FO
TR
IEF
DR
FOX HILL DR
GLE N LAKE DR
CH
RD
BIG
AC L
E
MEDFORD LAKES BORO
AP
TAB
E RN
O
M
N
LE
TR
IO
AS S
EP
OA
KD
UT
H IA
HA
TIT
DR
TR
IS
E
IS
IR
SUMM IT
N DR
NEL SO
CR E
E TR
EE
ND
541
G
H
GR
ER
AK
EV
DO
RE
620
G
H
DR
RD
ER
TO
RD
G6
KE
IELD DR
WAKEF
ND
QU EE NS
DR
MC
LN
SW
LE
BB
PE
CK
DR
CT
TB
ER
H
AT
WP
AR
RI
EE
MEDFORD TWP
CT
RD
EDE N CIR CLE
CO
G4
TU
AT
AD
HE
VI
LL
AG
IM
EN
RD
G
R
ER
NK
DI
AN
M
IL
LS
BU
IN
KS
HA
DE
RD
D
LR
HIL
OA
Y
NW
DO
LN
SHAW NE E
RD
RD
BAY
RD
IO
O
LL
MID
TR
T LN
CT
RIDG E
QU AIL
DR
H
NA
VE S
M
ED
FO
E
BR IDG
KE
HO
LLY
D
ES
S
AT
LILAC LN
Y
LL
OK
ST
E
AV
HAR
C
PA
TT
YA
FL
SHAMONG TWP
OD
620
G
H
E RD
E
ON
ST
LL
MI
HA
R
GRASSY LAK
RD
622
G
H
DR
E
BR
CK
EN
BR
ID
D
RE
RD
N
IO
ON
AN
TL
RU
ED
OW
ST
DC
CT
STO
Map
Tile
G5
Scale = 1:30,000
NY
534
G
H
T
KC
EE
CR
H6
H5
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
H4
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-51
June 2014
PO
F6
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
MA
RK
TH
AL
W
AM
DR
LN
FOX HILL
DR
H
XC
ANN DR
HA
WK
IN S
RD
PA
TT
LA
KE
V IE
W
WO OD
DR
US 206
RD
SIDE DR
RD
ZA
DR
AN
SUMM IT
AS
RR
CA
BO
RICHTER RD
CRAMER RD
FOREST CT
TR
KE
ASHLE Y WY
ME D
FO R
OL LO
LN
D LA
K ES
RD
L
MIL
SLE E
PY H
S
ET T
ICK
PR
SAN
DR
A
W DR
NEW
RD
NYO
DA
RD
ZIMMERM AN RD
AC L
E
RD
MILLS
DIAN
OLD IN
TAB
E RN
RD
FO
MOORE RD
DR
LEE
M IL L
ED
F7
PL
AC
SAW
PIN
W
EL
L
RD
F5
G
H
CH ATSWO
RTH RD
RD
532
TABERNACLE TWP
HI
DD
EN
AC
TT
YA
FL
RD
RE
DR
RD
G7
OA
KS
HA
DE
G5
648
G
H
NO
RT
206
DR
MC
EY
NL
HA
CT
KE
ND
IM
EN
RD
TT
YA
FL
RD
648
G
H
BR
AC
EL
D
NR
OW
HT
RT
ZA
DR
BO
N
DR
OLD INDIAN MILLS RD
TO
CE
US 206
IN
PR
BRADFORD
SHAMONG TWP
GAT
E RD
622
G
H
RD
SH
TUC
KE R
TO N
RD
H5
H7
H6
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
G6
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-52

F7
F8
DEE
RT
R IN
SHE R
OAK LN
F6
June 2014
G WAY
RD
POWELL PLACE
SO OY PLAC
AD O
SE W
AY
R
OR
ELD
E RD
KS
C AU
DR
SO
BO
KE
PA
R
IRIC
WA SHINGTON
PA
TT
WOODLAND TWP
UT
RD
WY
SHEARER CT
TE
BUT
TABERNACLE TWP
G8
SR
GO
BO G
OS
EP
ON
RD
HS
ORT
RW
G6
CH ATSW
O RTH RD
LN
H ES
BIR C
MO
OR
ES
ME
AD
OW
RD
BO
ZA
RT
HT
OW
NR
E RR Y
TEA B
532
G
H
RD
H6
H8
H7
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
G7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-53
June 2014
F8
F7
F9
SO OY PLAC
JOH
NS O
NP
LA C
E
RD
E RD
SO
H
UT
K
R
PA
RD
ES ME
AD
OW R
D
WOODLAND TWP
G9
MO OR
G7
WHITE HORSE RD
CH A
TSW
O RT
HO
RD
RS
T
HI
HR
D
SO
H
UT
R
PA
TABERNACLE TWP
ER
RD
TE
I
WH
HO
RS
RU
SS
AN
DE
RS
ON
BL
VD
532
G
H
C HAT
SW O
RT H
RD
W
HI
D
EE
TE
SP
HO
SE
RS
R
HO
RD
TE
HI
TABE
RN AC
LE
EL
H8
Scale = 1:30,000
H9
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
G8
D
LR
H7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-54
June 2014
F9
F8
F10
E
US
S
LA
RD
HO
COOPERS RD
MB
PE
T
ER
HW
ON
72
TU
AV
EY
RK
D
CE R
BU
ZZ
Y P LA
BUTLER
PLACE
RD
AR
SO O
RD
CEDAR
DR
OA
V
KA
T ES
GA
LN
LAUREL
563
G
H
RD
WOODLAND TWP
G10
ST
A RD
AL
CAN
PAN AM
E ST
WHITE HORSE RD
WIN
G8
CE
ST
IN
PR
RD
RS
G RE
HO
NEW
TN A
TE
HI
SW O
C HAT
RTH
RD
Y
VD
BL
VO
SA
N
AR
TH
EG
R
AT
OR
TS
HA
MA IN
ST
532
G
H
NG
RI
H8
Map
Tile
G9
Scale = 1:30,000
LAK E
AV
532
G
H
H10
H9
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
LE
AV
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-55
June 2014
ROGERS RD

F10
F11
O
W
F9
O
AN
M
E
SI
RD
CO
OP E
RD
BU
TL
ER
PL
AC
E
RS
CO
OP
ER
RD
EX
PLO W ED
RD
I NC
PR
ES
T
R
IL
RA
R
IL
RA
AD
O
AD
O
AV
AV
VD
BL
WOODLAND TWP
VO
SA
G11
G9
HW
Y
CH ATSW
O RTH
BA RN EG
72
AT R D
532
G
H
CR AW LE
Y RD
BAI LEY RD
H9
H11
H10
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
G10
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-56
June 2014
F11
ROUTE 539
F10
LAURIES RD
OCEAN COUNTY
G10
WOODLAND TWP
CR
AW
Y
LE
HW
Y
72
H10
H11
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
G11
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-57
June 2014
ARY

NJ 73 SE
CO ND
G3
DE
ER
FI
EL
D
ES
AV
TN
AV
AM
RE
UT
G4
AV
SY
CL
EA
K
PAR
RF
IE
LD
COMMER CE
LN
BEN JAMIN WES
BLAIN E AV
CH
AV
AV
OL W
A RH
YW
AND
T WY
MINCK AVE
TA
U
NT
KELLY DR
HI
CK
OR
YR
HA
R
KE
1
56
RA
V
AV
UT
LN
WA
E
UT
E.
RO
TA
UN
TO
AV
E
RD
HO
PE
WE
LL
RD
Y
HO LL
STRATFORD AV
SIN
HN
GE
AR
RS
NT
GE
WY
JO
EVESHAM TWP
M
THO
AS
EA
KIN
Y
SW
AK
AV
MA PLE AV
AV
MD
CA
MAN
CU SH
DO
CK
RD
EN
AV
RO B
IN
LN
TL
KET
5
67
TY
UN
CO
V
LA
RA
NT
CE
M
AR
SH
AL
L
E RU
MO
N RD
RAY
EA
V
PIN
Y LN
NAV
AV
HO
PE
WE
LL
RD
ND
V
YA
RO
LE
MIL L
RD
RA
V
DA
DO
H4
ST
CAMDEN COUNTY
MIL L RD
N
LO
AV
RO UT
STA
TE
EVANINE DR
30
CE
CAMDEN COUNTY 720
US
E 5 34
JOANS LN
B
S3
LE
IT
Z
0E
AV
ST
ST
TY
TH
ST
FR
1
69
FIF
RT
73
N
TH
N
U
V
SA
O
C
NT
UR
AV
FO
EN
FR
EN
RD
AM
C
Bt
oU
RA
MI
AL
GA
BRIGG S AV
CO
LG
AT
E
BU
LA
RD
NN
AV
MILL R
D
ST
HAY ES
ST
ON D
FIR
3
NJ 7
RO
UT
E5
EN
CAMD EN CO
UN TY 713
T IC
AN
TL
WA
61
TE 5
MD
CA
PR
0
71
TY
UN
CO
FOX T
NN
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
H3
AV
BA
V
NA
AU
BR
I AR
YN
36
SP
UR
BR
U SE
RO U
N
PE
L HO
CL
IFF
R
OO
SCH
RA
RT
RD
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-58
June 2014
G4
G5
OA
KR
I
DG
E
RD
JA
CK
SO
N
RD
G3
K
LA
DR
CROWFOOT RD
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
H5
H3
BLUEBERR
Y
DR
CT
ILE NE
LN
AV
LN
ME D
FO R D
N
LOU DE
RA
RO UTE 534
714
DR
WOO
D AVE
ATSIO
O LN
N RD
RIC H
FER N
ST
ST
TH
TH
FIF
SIX
A RD S
LIN D
NU E
E N AV
O NY
N CO
UN TY
ANT H
LIN C
NN
GE
CAMDEN COUNTY
AV
AV
OR
I FF
CL
LW
EL
V
DA
D
OO
CAM D
E
MI
AL
RD
ATC O
AV
FOX
AV
V
EA
SE
ES
CAM
D
EN
THIRD ST
CO U
N
LIN CO
TY
713
LN AV
ND
AV
OA KW
ASH
LA
RAR
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways
LN
AV
I5

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
H4
ITA N
OO D
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-59
June 2014
G5
G4
ST
G6
ON
YC
RE
EK
CT
O
SI
AT
541
G
H
620
G
H
N
RD
SHADO WLAKE DR
KV
IE
RD
C
TI
D
OL
C
LO
US
HO
E
US
RD
HO
OA
NA
TR
KE
DE
HA
KS
MEDFORD TWP
SC
V
TA
ES
OK
ST
RD
R
PA
KD
R
648
G
H
AU
ST
IN
CS
SHAMONG TWP
R
TD
ET
LL
DE
534
G
H
H4
N
LO
IL
W
RD
E
OV
GR
RD
H6
SO
RD
LD
FIE
I LS
PH
CK
JA
RD
SO
CK
JA
RO UTE 534
SH
EN
BR
RD
ID
GO
SH
EN
HO
US
RD
RD
LD
FIE
THREE
I LS
PH
BRID GE
RD
CAMDEN COUNTY
OLD
AT S
IO
I5
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways
I6

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
H5
NR
D
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-60

648
G
H
G6
G7
TUC
NE
D
KE
R
RD
FO
MI L
LS
RD
NZ
AN
DI
IN
CT
OL
D IN
DI A
N
RD
RA
RD
206
TO N
R
CA
WALLING FORD WY
FO
ED
M
TABERNACLE TWP
KE R
RD
GUM DR
CK
MU SK IN
MILL RD
G5
June 2014
RD
ME
ET
I NG
RD
HO
US
E
LS
IL
M
TAL
R
MA NO
FO
RK
ED
NE
CK
OR IE
N
TR
TOB A
SHAW NE
ED
NE
CK
E TR
RD
K
OR
RID
SB
RD
BA
GE
RD
648
G
H
R
PA
KD
US 206
620
G
H
BR
OO
RD
SHAMONG TWP
ER
H5
NG
H7
RI
SP
206
541
G
H
AN
DI
IN
N
AN
ES
OK
TR
ST
RD
ST
ES
RD
I5
HAM P
TON R
D
THREE
BRID GE
RD
OK
I6
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
H6
I7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-61
June 2014
G7
G6
O
MA L
G8
D
NE R
D
WR
MO
OR
ES
ME
AD O
WH
ITE
HO
RS
ER
TABERNACLE TWP
H8
H6
CA
RR
AN
ZA
RD
TO
ER
CK
TU
N
SHAMONG TWP
GL
OS
SY
SP
UN
RD
RD
MP
RD
TO
C
IG H
RO
SS
IN G
RD
HA
I6
I7
Scale = 1:30,000
ES
UN
RD
I8
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
H7
IN
SP
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-62
June 2014
G8
G9
WH
ITE
H
OR
SE
R
RINGLER AV
G7
WOODLAND TWP
WH
ITE
HO
E
RS
W
D
EE
SP
L
EL
RD
TE
HI
W
HO
E
RS
SP
EE
DW
EL
L
RD
H9
TABERNACLE TWP
H7
ER
GL
EA
D
CA
RR
AN
ZA
RD
I7
I9
I8
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
H8
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-63

G8
June 2014
2ND AV
G9
LAK E
AV
G10
532
G
H
MA IN
ST
LE
NG
RI
R
AV
CH
O
SW
AT
RT
RT
KE
UC
HT
ON
RD
ST
BAP TI
RD
563
G
H
D
OL
N
TO
ER
CK
TU
WOODLAND TWP
RD
TE
HI
W
HO
H10
RS
E
H8
SP
L
OR
EL
TH
DW
RD
EE
NE
WG
RE
TN
AC
HA
TSW
RD
TABERNACLE TWP
EAG LE
RD
LIT T
LE H
AW
KIN
RD
WASHINGTON TWP
SP
R
U
N
Map
Tile
H9
Scale = 1:30,000
I10
I9
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
I8
HA
W
KI
NS
M
IL
EE
DW
EL
LR
FRIENDSHIP SPEEDWELL RD
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-64
June 2014
G10
G11
BA
I LE
YR
D
G9
BA
PT
I ST
RD
WOODLAND TWP
H11
H9
RD
CR AW
LE
Y RD
EWAY
LON G CA US
D
OL
N
TO
ER
CK
TU
RD
LA
KE
OS
WE
GO
RD
LO
S
TL
AN
ER
W
O
LL
O
I9
Map
Tile
H10
Scale = 1:30,000
STAVE RD
I11
I10
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
RD
DE
EP
H
KIN
RD
WASHINGTON TWP
LIT T
LE H
AW
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-65
June 2014
HW
Y
G10
G11
72
NJ
72
STE VE
NS ON
RD
OCEAN COUNTY
WOODLAND TWP
RED RD
H10
AI
PL
S
C
AN
BR
H
R
D
LO
NG
CA
US
EW
AY
RD
BASS RIVER TWP

WASHINGTON TWP
R
VE
A
BE
M
LA
I10 NE RD
Scale = 1:30,000
RD
Map
Tile
H11
I11
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
DA
LO
S
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-66
June 2014
H5
H4
H6
OLD
AT S
IO
NR
D
NR
SI O
AT
D
LR
M IL
TLE
LIT
D
SHAMONG TWP
SWAMP RD
CAMDEN COUNTY
I6
RO U
TE 5
36
SAN D
Y CA
US
EWAY
ATLANTIC COUNTY
J6
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
I5
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-67
June 2014
H6
H7
THREE
BRID GE
RD
H5
MP
D
NR
TO
HA
HA
M
RD
ON
TO
ES
OK
ST
RD
206
SHAMONG TWP
ATSIO
N RD
AS
W
IN
G
TO
AT
SI
ON
N
RD
QU
AK
ER
RA
IL
R
US
20
6
I5
O
AD
BR
ID
GE
RD
AV
I7
US
20
6
CAMDEN COUNTY
CA
LLI
MU
RD
RD
ER
RIV
FIRELINE
BATS TO
WASHINGTON TWP
ATLANTIC COUNTY
EE
SL
KA
V
PY
PA
R
KR
EE
CR
RO
CK
WE
LL
RD
J7
J6
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
I6
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-68
June 2014
H7
H6
H8
TABERNACLE TWP
TU
ER
CK
TO
N
RD
DEV O
UN T R
NS MO
SHAMONG TWP
L LD
BU
RD
ED
OZ
I8
SP
HI G
HC
RO
SS
I NG
RD
NE
MI
I6
UN
G
RD
ND
LO
WE
PO
RF
IS
OR
NN
GE
MA
RD
ON
SI
AT
ER
AK
QU
GE
ID
BR
WASHINGTON TWP
RD
O
ST
W
LO
ER
RD
RD
ER
RIV
RG
RD
FO
KE
CA
LLI
MU
ER
G
RI D
YR
HA
QU
AK
ER
BR
ID
G
IDG
BR
ER
AK
U
Q
DY
AN
ES
RD
D
MID
EE
SL
LE R
AT
E
PY
CR
EE
K
RD
Map
Tile
I7
Scale = 1:30,000
J8
J7
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
J6
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-69
June 2014
H8
H7
H9
ND
P
HI
SP
EE
DW
EL
D
LR
IE
FR
TABERNACLE TWP
CAR
RA N
ZA R
D
D
DR
ZE
DO
LL
U
B
EAGLE RD
I9
K IN
RID GE RD
HAW
WE ST SAN DY
SB
I7
RID
GE
WASHINGTON TWP
RD
VO
DE
NS
O
M
UN
T
R
D
NR
HAY
TO
ER
RD
CK
TU
Scale = 1:30,000
HA
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
IG H
SH
K IN
J9
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
I8
J8
HAW
KI
NS
TP
RD
J7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-70
June 2014
H9
H10
HA
W
KI
NS
SP
EE
DW
EL
LR
H8
UN
563
G
H
HA
W
KI
N
SP
EE
D
W
EL
L
IL
EAGLE RD
WASHINGTON TWP
I10
GREE NBANK CHATSWORT

H RD
I8
NS
TP
KI
ER
D
Map
Tile
I9
Scale = 1:30,000
KE
LA
J9
Bikeways
O
EG
W
OS
RD
J10

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
IG H
SH
ID G
BR
HAW
K IN
IN S
J8
WK
HA
RD
HA
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-71
June 2014
H10
H9
O
LL
O
STAVE RD
Y RD
PH
H11
D
R
CR AW
LE
EE
D
OS
WE
GO
RD
RE
D
RD
LOS T LAN E
RD
TR
AN
Q
UI
LI
TY
RD
IN
CAB
LA
KE
KIN RD
LIT TLE HAW
WASHINGTON TWP
PENN PLACE RD
DE
ER
RU
RD
E
LAK
RD
GO
WE
OS
D
INS R
JEN K
I9
K
LA
O
EG
SW
EO
I11
RD
BASS RIVER TWP
J9
J11
J10
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
I10
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-72
June 2014
H11
H10
BE
AV
ER
DA
M
RD
WASHINGTON TWP
NE RD
LOST LA
BE
AV
ER
DA
MR
D
D
DR
RE
C
O
N
EA
U
O
NT
8
60
BASS RIVER TWP

I10
J10
J11
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
I11
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-73
June 2014
I6
I5
I7
WASHINGTON TWP
US
20
6
RO
CK
WE
LL
RD
ATLANTIC COUNTY
J7
CO
UN
TY
693
AT
LA
NT
IC
LA
EV
IE
LAU REL AV
GAT
Scale = 1:30,000
DS
RIC
Bikeways
HA R
AV

Primary Bikeway
K7
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
J6
V
TO A
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-74
June 2014
I7
I6
I8
ER
RD
LE
DD
MI
E EK
Y CR
HAY RD
TE R RD
GO OD WA
EP
SLE
RD
BATSTO RIVER
QU
AK
ER
BR
I DG
RD
WASHINGTON TWP
J8
J6
ER
IV
AR
IC
LL
MU
RD
ATLANTIC COUNTY
TO
BATS
E
LA K
RD
IV
ICA R
MU LL
D
ER R
ON
AK
N
HI
S
WA
EV
I EW
TP
GT
DR
D
NR
BUL
RIC
W
LTO
HA R
DS A
V
K8
K7
Map
Tile
J7
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
EL
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-75
June 2014
I8
I7
I9
C
TU
KE
RD
O
SM
ON
ON
RT
V
DE
YR
HA
T
UN
HAWK INS HIGH RD
HA
W
K IN
ST
PK
RD
QU AK ER BR
IDG E WASH
INGTO
N RD
IR
ON
PI
PE
RD
WASHINGTON TWP
D
S
RD
ON
J7
N
HI
TP
J9
GT
S
WA
MO
D
TR
RD
PINEY POND RD
OLD MILL WASHINGTO N RD
D
PR
AM
W
NS
UN
PEN
WN
BU
LL
TO
LTO
L
BU
M
AX
W
EL
L
SM
ITH
LN
RD
Map
Tile
J8
Scale = 1:30,000
K9
K8
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
K7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-76
June 2014
I9
K
JEN
I8
SW
INS
KE
LA
O
EG
W
OS
RD
I10
AM
D
PR
K LN
BIL
LS
SW
AM
PR
HAWKINS
HIGH
RD
MIC
WA SH
IN
GTO N
JEN
T PK
S
KI N
A
SW
RD
MP
NS
KI
W
HA
G
ID
BR
E
RD
HAWKIN S BRIDGE RD
WASHINGTON TWP
IR
PI
J10
RD
RD
PE
WO
AT S
CH
CC
ON
E
ILL
ISV
RR
HA
J8
D
HR
RT
D
S
RD
MA
XW
EL
LW
AD
679
G
H
IN
VE
RD
OR
TH
RI
NK
D
LR
EL
NB
A
EE
BASS RIVER TWP
GR
TO
LL
BU
XW
MA
CH
AT S
W
RD
OLD MARTHA
OLD MILL WASHINGTO N RD
RD
BO DIN E
FIE LD RD
563
G
H
D
AS
SY
Map
Tile
J9
Scale = 1:30,000
AT
S
RT
K9
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
RD
K10
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
K8
CH
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-77
June 2014
I10
I9
AR
TH
A
RD
ALL
EN
RD
O
LD
I11
SHAM ON
BASS RIVER TWP

CC
G RD
J9
RD
J11
MA
HA
RT
RD
OS W
RD
SHA
M ON
GR
E GO
B
TU
L
IL
RD
PRINCE
RD
ALL
EN
CH RD
PLACE RD
IVE S BRAN
K9
K11
K10
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
J10
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-78
June 2014
I11
I10
BASS RIVER TWP

J10
GO
RE
RD
ALL EN RD
MU
NI
ON
RD
FIE
LD
WS
RD
WE
AND
OS
GE
RD
CO
AL
RD
MU
NIO
PU
SH
RD
LI
N
OL
DF
OR
DR
AN
ES
IT
WH
K10
K11
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
J11
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-79
June 2014
GOODWATER RD

J7
J8
RI
BAT
S TO
LA K
E
RD
BATS
TO
RD
J6
HA
RD
AV
TINMAN RD
DR
D
542
G
H
OO
UT
WASHINGTON TWP
NR
D
R ES
BAT
KS O
WIN EO TO
JAC
MO O
S TO
ELW
RO
5 42
AV
V
SA
BAT
RD
S TO
BR
IDG
EP
OR
TR
TH
UR
ST
ON
AV
FO
AT
LA
NT
IC
CO
UN
TY
64
3
K8
SE
VE
TH
AV
ATLANTIC COUNTY
CO
NN
EC
TI
CU
AV
FI
FT
AV
INDIAN CABIN RD
AT
LA
NT
IC
SI
XT
AV
CO
UN
TY
62
3
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
K7
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-80
June 2014
J8
J7
J9
WE
AX
NM
RD
LL
HAY ES
CR OS
HA
YE
RD
SC
HT
RO
AIG
SS
STR
WA
Y
OW
L LT
BU
SWAY
LA
N
SE
OU
RD
CE
RU
WASHINGTON TWP
D
OL
RD
HR
D
LN
CE
N
BE
H
AV
TH
RIV
VE
SE
ER
KC
H
AN
ID
GE
K9
NB
BR
PO
RT
EE
TO
GR
BA
TS
K7
AT
S
UT
EA
V
SO
N IC
542
G
H
VE
RT
AR
563
G
H
WO
RD
WN RD
OL H
BULLTO
NT
BUR
O
SC H
ON
GT
H IN
AS
LW
IL
M
RD
DR
563
G
H
AV
651
G
H
FI
FT
DY
LA
RD
63
3
64
ATLANTIC COUNTY
FO
RT
AV
RO
UT
E5
AV
IS
TY
UN
CO
XT
LN
AN
SP
IC
NT
LA
AT
SI
RS
VE
LO
BAC
Scale = 1:30,000
L9
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
K8
D
KR
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-81
June 2014
J9
J10
679
G
H
TH
AX
RD
J8
OR
EL
G
IN
AD
NK
CH
AT S
W
W
V
RI
R
NB
A
ER
BASS RIVER TWP
MI
LL
WA
SH
IN
GT
ON
RD
G
R
AS
SY
PO
N
RD
GR
EE
563
G
H
D
EL
FI
RD
DG
RI
WE EK S
RD
OL
D
A
AJ
M
EK
LE
RD
WASHINGTON TWP
K10
SEA F WE EKS
RD
K8
542
G
H
BR IDG
E PO R
T RD
EE
OL
D
CH
ER
RD
RIV
CH
RD
UR
TUR
TLE
CR
ISL
AN
KR
D
RD
BATS
TO
652
G
H
ATLANTIC COUNTY
L10
L9
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
K9
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-82
June 2014
J10
J11
SHAM ON
G RD
J9
RD
CHARCOAL LAND ING
ES
A
BR
NC
RD
IV
TH A
MA R
D
RR
IV E
PR
IN
SR
CE
B AS
PL
AC
RD
679
G
H
GE
CHIPS FOLLY RD
GOLDECKER RD
K9
LEE KTO WN
653
G
H
RD
ALLEN
STA
RD
RD
BASS RIVER TWP
CH
AT
S
WO
RT
RD
K11
655
G
H
N M AP LE
AV
E RD
RID G
CED
MM
LN
HA
AR
ON
EK
RD
D
NR
TO
WASHINGTON TWP
542
G
H
WE
ST
RD
L10
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
L11
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
K10
PAT
HR
MILLE RS LN
N
SL
CH
EN
FR
L9
INK
N MAPLE AV
TUR
TLE
CR
E
EM
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-83
June 2014
J11
N
MU
WH IT
E
RD
SA ND
IO N
RD
J10
CO
AL
RD
RD
E
H LIN
PUS
N
ALL E
RD
MU
NIO
N
BR
FIE
LD
RD
RD
B
TH A
MA R
GE
S
AN
ID
R
AS S
NS
E
HO R
SEARS
RD
RD
IV ER
RD
NN
RG RD
NU
NB
EN
KI
TO
FA
L
R
PA
UR
RD
FALKIN BU
DU M
BASS RIVER TWP

655
G
H
K10
TE
STA
EN
RD
GA
OD
PIL
EN
RD
GA
WG
N BU
RE E
SH
RD
RAM
E
AT
ST
PK
I PS
I LL
PH
JOH N ST
WY
MY W
AY
M RD
WO
RD
PK
RD
BIS HA
654
G
H
TONYS DR
SH
OO
RE
RD
P RD
A
RM
NS
W
PK
STA
R
EL
MA
ISH
GE
RD
STA
GE
RD
IE
LL
MI
RD
PS
LI
IL
PH
MU N
IO
E EN B
E GR
D
HR
L10
AS
N FIE
LD R
D
U SH
DR
RD
US 9
US 9
L11
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
K11
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-84
June 2014
652
G
H
K8
A NT
ATL
O UN
IC C
K9
K10
652
TY
RI
VE
RD
D
KR
EE
CR
LE
RT
TU
CLA
RK
SL
AN
D
ING
RD
WASHINGTON TWP
L10
ATLANTIC COUNTY
IL
LE
R
ST
CO
AN
LO
G
HE
IM
AV
AV
SC
H
CO
UN
TY
62
4
ST
AL
PR
SH
IL
LE
R
PE
AG
UE
AV
LE
IP
ZI
G
AV
AT
LA
NT
IC
ST
ZZ
IS
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
L9
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-85
June 2014
K10
K11
WE ST RD
US 9
TON RD
LO
ST
AT
E
HAMM ON
679
G
H
542
G
H
PK
K9
V
EL
D
GA
RD
EN
AN
SO
NR
AMASA LDG RD
BIN
OLD NY RD
LN
RO
(
/
9
DLE
RAMP
H AN
JUG
WASHINGTON TWP
BASS RIVER TWP
TE PKW Y
GA RD EN STA
L11
AN
HE
IM
AV
L9
7
16
NJ
ATLANTIC COUNTY
9
SO
OY
LA
ND
IN
RD
US
ROUTE 575
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
L10
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-86
June 2014
D
HR
654
G
H
YR
AD
ER
EV
US 9
GA
RD
EN
ST
AT
E
US 9
RE
PK
AS
K11
K10
BASS RIVER TWP
LA
CA
Y
WA
ZE
EE
BR
L10
TW
IN
LA
KE
SB
LV
D
OCEAN COUNTY
TO
MS
CT
U
LO
IS
ATLANTIC COUNTY
NA
IA
DR
OH
IO
DR
Scale = 1:30,000
Bikeways

Primary Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
E
E
Map
Tile
L11
Regional Connection
NJDOT Bicycle Tours

Tour Des Farms
0.25
0.5
0.75
1 Miles

Marlton, NJ 08053
(856) 596-8228
www.driveless.com
D-87
June 2014
D-88
June 2014
Appendix E: Project Prioritization Criteria

Bikeways proposed as Network Recommendations in Section 5 of this Plan were scored and ranked to
assist Burlington Countys Departments of Public Works and Resource Conservation prioritize project
implementation. This was achieved through the development of prioritization criteria with the assistance of
department staff and the Plan Advisory Committee (PAC).
Criteria are broken into two categories - utility and feasibility. Utility criteria measure the usefulness of a
bikeway project and feasibility criteria measures the ease of implementation. The score of each criterion is
weighted to reflect their relative importance in project prioritization. For instance, a criterion whose maximum
score is ten points is considered more important than a criterion whose maximum score is five points. The
maximum potential score for a project is 125 points -100 points for utility and 25 for feasibility.
The projects were scored with the assistance of a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) model.
Utility Criteria (100 points)

Population Density (1-5 points)
Higher population densities often correlate with a higher demand for bikeways resulting in the greatest
potential to draw bikeway network usage. High population densities are often indicative that the land use/
development patterns of a specific location are more favorable for bicycling, with the ability to link the
most people with the most destinations via short trips. The population per square mile was determined for
each census tract within Burlington County and divided into five groups using the Jenks natural breaks
classification method.1 Points were awarded on a sliding scale, between one and five, based on which natural
breaks grouping the tract fell within. For example, five points were awarded to the tracts that fell into the
grouping with the highest population densities, and one point to tracts in the grouping with the lowest
densities. Proposed bikeway projects received the score of the census tract they were located within, or if they
crossed multiple tracts, the highest scoring tract through which they crossed.
Zero Car Households (1-5 points)
Households without cars may be more likely to use a bicycle as a mode of transportation for everyday trips,
thus their presence is an indicator of potential bikeway network usage. The percentage of households that
owned zero cars was determined for each census tract within Burlington County and divided into five groups
using the Jenks natural breaks classification method. Points were awarded on a sliding scale, between one and
five, based on the natural breaks grouping the tract fell within. For example, five points were awarded to the
tracts that fell into the grouping with the highest rates of households that own zero cars, and one point to
tracts in the grouping with the lowest rates. Proposed bikeway projects received the score of the census tract
they were located within, or if they crossed multiple tracts, the highest scoring tract through which they
crossed.
Current Levels of Bicycling (1-5 points)
The presence of existing bicycle commuters identifies areas where there is existing demand for bikeways. It
may also indicate areas already conducive to regular bicycle travel, where implementing bikeways could lead
to even higher rates of bicycle usage. The percentage of adults commuting to work by bicycle was determined
1
A statistical data clustering method designed to determine the best arrangement of values that fall into a defined number of
different classes, which seeks to reduce the variance within classes and maximize the variance between classes.
E-1
June 2014
for each census tract within Burlington County and divided into five groups using the Jenks natural breaks
classification method. Points were awarded on a sliding scale, between one and five, based on the natural
breaks grouping the tract fell within. For example, five points were awarded to the tracts that fell into the
grouping with the highest rates bicycle commuting, and one point to tracts in the grouping with the lowest
rates. Proposed bikeway projects received the score of the census tract they were located within, or if they
crossed multiple tracts, the highest scoring tract through which they crossed.
Economically Insecure Population (1-5 points)
Economically insecure populations may be more reliant on travel modes other than the car. The provision of
bikeways has the potential to increase access to jobs, services and recreational opportunities, thus improving
quality of life. The percentage of the population within 150% of the poverty line was determined for each
census tract within Burlington County and divided into five groups using the Jenks natural breaks classification
method. Points were awarded on a sliding scale, between one and five, based on the natural breaks grouping
the tract fell within. For example, five points were awarded to the tracts that fell into the grouping with the
highest rates of individuals within 150% of the poverty line, and one point to tracts in the grouping with the
lowest rates. Proposed bikeway projects received the score of the census tract they were located within, or if
they crossed multiple tracts, the highest scoring tract through which they crossed.
Connection to an Existing Bikeway (0 or 10 points)
Building connections to existing bikeways would have an immediate impact on expanding the county
bikeway network. Ten points were awarded if a proposed bikeway project had a direct connection to an
existing bikeway.
Connection to a Proposed Municipal Bikeway (0 or 5 points)
Prioritizing county bikeways that connect to proposed bikeways located on municipal roadways could ensure
the development of a cohesive bikeway network that efficiently utilizes both municipal and county resources.
Five points were awarded if a proposed bikeway project had a direct connection to a bikeway, proposed in a
source other than this Plan, in one of Burlington Countys 40 municipalities.
Connection to Regional Trail Networks or Bike Tour (0 or 5 points)
Regional trail networks and bike tours are designated by state, regional and county agencies as targeted areas
for bicycle tourism and present an economic opportunity for Burlington County. Providing high quality
bikeways would open up these opportunities to a wider range of bicyclists at all skill levels. Five points were
awarded if a proposed bikeway project was designated as, or had a direct connection to: The Circuit, Greater
Philadelphias proposed regional trail network;2 NJDOTs State Bike Tours;3 or other Burlington County bike
tours.4
Connection to Employment Opportunity (0, 5, or 10 points)
Bikeway connections to jobs could boost bicycle commuter rates and improve accessibility to jobs for
individuals lacking regular access to a car, or those who may prefer to use a bicycle. It may lead to additional
commuters using a bicycle for their journey to work rather than a car, reducing congestion and lowering
harmful emissions. Points were awarded based on a proposed bikeway projects vicinity to large scale
2
The Kinkora Trail, The Rancocas Greenway and The Delaware River Heritage Trail
Explore The Jersey Shore Tour: Somers Point to Tuckerton, The Highpoint to Cape May Tour, The Pine Barrens River Ramble
4
South Jersey Resource Conservation and Development Councils The Tour des Farms
3
E-2
June 2014
employment centers which includes office parks, industrial parks or hospitals. Five points were awarded if a
proposed bikeway was within one mile of a large scale employment center and ten points were awarded if the
proposal was within a 1/2 mile.
Connection to a County or Municipal Park (0 or 5 points)
Parks are a popular draw for bicycle trips. Improving the quality of bicycle connections to parks can benefit
both park and bikeway network usage. Five points were awarded if a proposed bikeway project was located
within a 1/4 mile of county or municipal park over a 1/4 acre.
Connection to an Agritourism Destination (0 or 5 points)
Bicycle related agritourism is an important economic development opportunity for Burlington County.
Implementing high quality bikeways that provide access to destinations, such as farmers markets and wineries,
could draw dollars, from both inside and outside the county, into the local economy. Five points were awarded
if a proposed bikeway project had a direct connection to a farmers market, winery or pick your own farm.
Connection to a School or College (0, 5 or 10 points)
Implementation of bikeways in proximity to schools could improve safety and accessibility to educational
opportunities for both children and adults. Points were awarded based on a proposed bikeway projects
proximity to an elementary school, middle school, high school or college/university. Five points were awarded
if a proposed bikeway was within one mile of a school or college and ten points were awarded if the proposal
was within a 1/2 mile.
Connection to a Walkable Town Center (0 or 5 points)
Connections to walkable town centers was identified as a priority for bikeway implementation during the
Plans public involvement process. Many of these town centers are already conducive to bicycling, offering a
density of desirable bicycling destinations. Five points were awarded if a proposed bikeway project was within
one mile of a Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) identified Town Center. DVRPC
designates regional Town Centers in their long range regional plans Connections 2035 and Connections 2040.
DVRPC defines Town Centers as pedestrian and transit-friendly areas that offer a mixture of high-density
residential and commercial land uses and a distinct downtown/main street surrounded by suburban land
uses.5 Town Centers located in Burlington County are Bordentown City, Burlington City, Moorestown,
Mount Holly, Palmyra, Pemberton Borough and Riverside.
Connection to a Bus Stop (0 or 5 points)
Implementation of bikeways in proximity to bus stops would improve multimodal connections and expand
access to the regions public transit network. Five points were awarded if a proposed bikeway project was
located within a 1/4 mile of a NJ TRANSIT or BurLink bus stop.
Connection to a Train Station (0, 5 or 10 points)
Implementation of bikeways in proximity of train stations would improve multimodal connections and
expand access to the regions public transit network. Points were awarded based on a proposed bikeway
projects proximity to a NJ TRANSIT River LINE Rail Station. Five points were awarded if a proposed
bikeway was within two miles of a station and ten points were awarded if the proposal was within one mile.
5
http://www.dvrpc.org/asp/connections/planningareasandcenters.htm
E-3
June 2014
Overcomes Physical Barrier to Bicycling (0 or 5 points)

Significant barriers to bicycling within Burlington County were identified through the Plans public
involvement process. These barriers included high volume roadways, such as interstates and state highways,
as well as geographic barriers, such as rivers and creeks. Providing safe bikeways that overcome these barriers
would have a huge impact in improving the countywide environment for bicycling. Five points were awarded
if the proposed bikeway project overcomes a physical barrier to bicycling identified in Section 4 of this Plan.
Safety (0 or 5 points)
Dedicated bikeways have the potential to reduce conflicts between bicyclists and motor vehicles. The incidence
of a bicycle cash demonstrates that bicyclist are utilizing this roadway and bikeways may be needed to provide
for their safety. Five points were awarded if the proposed bikeway project was located along a stretch of
roadway where there was a reported bicycle crash between 2008 and 2012.
Feasibility Criteria (25 points)

On-road Project Criteria
Suitability for Bike Lanes (0-15 points)
Points were awarded based on the results of DVRPCs 2013 Burlington County Bicycle Level of Service Study.
DVRPC assigned a Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS) ranking of Poor, Fair and Favorable for segments of county
roads. Segments receiving a Poor ranking were given zero points. Segments receiving a Fair ranking were given
ten points. Segments receiving a Favorable ranking were given fifteen points. Each proposed bikeway project
contained multiple ranked segments, requiring that an average score, between zero and fifteen, be taken for
the entire length. Higher scores indicate that a greater proportion of the bikeway project is suitable for bike
lanes in the present state of the roadway.
Identified in County Resurfacing Plan (0-10 points)
Points were awarded based on the portion of the project identified in the Countys two year road resurfacing
plan (Overlay Plan). As was the case with the DVRPC BLOS score, proposed projects contained multiple
segments of county roadway that were either included, or not included, in the road resurfacing plan. Segments
selected for resurfacing were given a score of ten points. Segments that were not selected were given zero
points. An average score of the segments within each bikeway project was then taken to create a score between
zero and ten. Higher scores indicate that a greater proportion of the bikeway project is located along roadways
scheduled for repaving in the near future.
Off-road Project Criteria
Located within County Owned Property (0-10 points)
Points were awarded on a sliding scale between zero and ten, based on the proportion of the proposed bikeway
project located within county owned open space or parks. Higher scores indicate that a greater proportion of
the bikeway project is located within county owned property.
Potential to Require Environmental Permitting (0 or 10 points)
Ten points were awarded if the proposed bikeway project was completely located outside of environmentally
sensitive areas that could require permitting. These sensitive environmental areas include: wetlands,
E-4
June 2014
floodplains, and protected forests.

Presence of an Existing Feature Appropriate for Trail Development (0 or 5 points)
Five points were awarded if a project was located along: an abandoned rail right or way; a utility right of way,
such as the location of power lines; or a dirt road.
The GIS Bikeway Prioritization Model
Cross County Connection developed a Geographic Information System (GIS) Sum Overlay Model to
evaluate each project individually based on criteria determined by stakeholders and the general public. The
county was divided into a 10 meter by 10 meter pixel grid where each pixel has a stored value determined by
the result of the overlay model. This generated a heat map indicating the areas of greatest demand for bikeway
improvements. Individual projects were then assigned a score based on the highest scoring pixel (max value)
it crossed in the model output. The results of the GIS model showing the landmass scores can be seen in Map
31. To see the resulting project scores refer back to Map 26 and Appendix C.
E-5
June 2014
Map 31: GIS Bikeway Priorizaon Model Scoring Results (Land Values)
Bicycle Prioritization
Model Score
BORDENTOWN CITY
PENNSYLVANIA
PALMYRA BORO
MERCER
COUNTY
BEVERLY CITY
BURLINGTON CITY
DELANCO TWP
RIVERSIDE TWP
FLORENCE TWP
BORDENTOWN TWP
BURLINGTON TWP
DELRAN TWP
MAPLE SHADE TWP
CHESTERFIELD TWP
WILLINGBORO TWP
CINNAMINSON TWP
MONMOUTH
COUNTY
MANSFIELD TWP
MOORESTOWN TWP
WESTAMPTON TWP
NORTH HANOVER TWP
SPRINGFIELD TWP
MOUNT LAUREL TWP

WRIGHTSTOWN BORO
LUMBERTON TWP
NEW HANOVER TWP
PEMBERTON BORO
MEDFORD TWP
EVESHAM TWP
SOUTHAMPTON TWP
PEMBERTON TWP
MEDFORD
LAKES BORO
CAMDEN
COUNTY
TABERNACLE TWP
OCEAN
COUNTY
SHAMONG TWP
WOODLAND TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
ATLANTIC
COUNTY
2.5
10 Miles
BASS RIVER TWP
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
89
90
94
E-6
June 2014
Appendix F: Bicycle Facility Cost Estimate Formulas

The cost per linear foot for each on-road bikeway treatment includes: cost for removing and installing
necessary striping on each side. In this guide only removal of one shoulder strip on each side of the roadway
is assumed. The estimated costs also factor in the costs associated with providing the necessary supportive
details such as additional pavement markings, signage and other hardware costs such as removable traffic
bollards. These cost estimates take into account the best practices included in this and other guides.
The costs per linear foot for off-road bikeways only take into account the costs for installing the amount of
asphalt required to pave a bike path at the recommended width. It also factors in the costs of supplying the
required ADA compliant curb ramp at each end of the path to provide access for bicyclists, pedestrians,
and the disabled.1
The costs per linear foot are then translated into costs per linear mile for comparisons sake.
Cost per mile for a standard 6 ft. bike lane
Assumes:
Shoulder stripe removal
6 white stripe used to demarcate bike lane
A bike symbol placed every 300 ft.
Costs assumed:
$0.20 per linear ft. for stripe removal
$0.75 per linear ft. to paint 6 solid white line
$120.00 per bike symbol
General formula:
[Cost of shoulder stripe removal on both sides of the road] + [cost of restriping 6 white line on both sides
of the road] + [cost of placing a bike symbol every 300 ft. on both sides of the road]
[($0.20 * linear ft. removed) * 2 sides] + [($0.75 * linear ft. striped) * 2 sides] + [(($120.00/300) * linear ft.
of facility) * 2 sides]
[($0.20 * 1) * 2] + [($0.75 * 1) * 2] + [($120.00/300)* (1) * (2)] =
[$0.40] + [$1.50] + [$0.80] = $2.70 per linear ft.
$2.70 * 5280 ft. = $14,256 per linear mile
Cost per mile for a buffered bike lane featuring a 5 ft. bike lane paired with a 3 ft. buffer
Assumes:
6 white stripe used to demarcate outside edge of the buffer
4 white stripe used to demarcate inside edge of the buffer/outside edge of the bike lane
For more infrmation regarding the American with Disbalities Act and its asscoaited design standards visit www.ada.gov.
F-1
June 2014
4 diagonal striping placed every 15 ft. within the 3 ft. buffer

Costs assumed:
General formula:
[cost of shoulder stripe removal on both sides of the road] + [cost of striping 6 outside edge of the buffer
on both sides of the road] + [costs of striping 4 inside edge of the buffer on both sides of the road] +
[costs of striping 4 internal diagonal striping every 15 ft. within buffer on both sides of the road] + [cost
of placing a bike symbol every 300 ft. on both sides of the road]
[($0.20 * linear ft. removed) * 2 sides] + [($0.75 * linear ft. striped) * 2 sides] + [($0.50 * linear ft. striped)
* 2 sides] + [($0.50 * 3 ft.) / 15 * (linear ft. of facility) * 2 sides] + [($120.00/300) * (linear ft. of facility) * 2
sides]
[($0.20 * 1) *2] + [($0.75 * 1) * 2] + [($0.50 * 1) * 2] + [(($0.50 * 3)/15) * (1) *(2)] + [($120.00/300)* (1) *
(2)]
[$0.40] + [$1.50] + [$1.00] + [$0.20] + [$0.80] = $3.90 per linear ft
$3.90 * 5280 = $20,592 per linear mile
Costs per mile for a one way cycle track featuring a 7ft bike lane and a 3 ft. buffer equipped with a removable
bollard
Assumes:
A removable bollard every 25 ft.
Costs assumed:
$150.00 per bollard
General Formula:
[cost of shoulder stripe removal on both sides of the road] + [cost of striping 6 outside edge of the buffer
on both sides of the road] + [costs of striping 4 inside edge of the buffer on both sides of the road] +
F-2
June 2014
[costs of striping 4 internal diagonal striping every 15 ft. within buffer on both sides of the road] + [cost
of placing a bike symbol every 300 ft. on both sides of the road] + [cost of placing a bollard every 25 ft. on
both sides of the road]
[($0.20 * linear ft. removed) * 2 sides] + [($0.75 * linear ft. striped) * 2 sides] + [($0.50 * linear ft. striped)
* 2 sides] + [($0.50 * 3 ft.) / 15 * (linear ft. of facility) * (2 sides)] + [($120.00/300) * (linear ft. of facility) *
2 sides] + [$150.00/25 *(linear ft. of facility) * (2 sides)
[($0.20 * 1) *2] + [($0.75 * 1) * 2] + [($0.50 * 1) * 2] + [(($0.50 * (3)/15) * (1) *(2)] + [($120.00/300)* (1) *
(2)] + [($150.00/25) * (1) * (2)]
[$0.40] + [$1.50] + [$1.00] + [$0.20] + [$0.80] + [ $12.00] = $15.90 per linear ft.
$15.90 * 5280 = $83,952 per linear mile
Costs per mile for a two way cycle-track featuring a 12ft bike lane with a dashed yellow centerline and a 3 ft.
buffer equipped with a removable bollard
Assumes:
A dashed yellow centerline
A removable bollard every 25 ft.
Costs assumed:
$0.35 per linear ft. to paint a 4 dashed yellow line
$150.00 per bollard
General formula:
[cost of shoulder stripe removal on one side of the road] + [cost of striping 6 outside edge of the buffer on
one of the road] + [costs of striping 4 inside edge of the buffer on one of the road] + [costs of striping 4
internal diagonal striping every 15 ft. within buffer on one side of the road] + [ cost of painting a 4 dashed
yellow centerline to divide bike lane for two way traffic] +[cost of placing a bike symbol every 300 ft. on in
both directions of the bike lane] + [cost of placing a bollard every 25 ft. on one side of the road]
[($0.20 * linear ft. removed) * 1 side] + [($0.75 * linear ft. striped) * 1 side] + [($0.50 * linear ft. striped) *
1 sides] + [($0.50 * 3 ft.) / 15 * (linear ft. of facility) * (1 sides)] + [($0.35 * (linear ft. striped) *( 1 side)] +
[($120.00/300) * (linear ft. of facility) * 2 sides] + [$150.00/25 *(linear ft. of facility) * (1 side)]
[($0.20 * 1) * 1] + [($0.75 * 1) * 1] + [($0.50 * 1) *1] + [($0.50 * (3)/15)) * (1) *(1)] + [(0.35 * 1) * 1] +
F-3
June 2014
[($120.00/300)* (1) * (2)] + [($150.00/25) * (1) * (1)]

[$0.20] + [$0.75] + [$0.50] + [$0.10] + [$0.35] + [$0.80] + [$6.00] = $8.70 per linear ft.
$8.70 * 5280 = $45,936 per linear mile
Costs per mile 8 ft. wide Asphalt Sidepath
Costs Assumed:
$30.00 per square yard for asphalt
($26.67 per linear ft. for 8 ft. wide path)
$740.00 per curb ramp
General formula:
[(Costs per linear ft. of 8 ft. wide path) * linear ft. paved] + [ cost of placing curb ramp at each end]
[$26.67 * 5280] + [$740 * 2]
[$140,817.60] + [ $1,480.00]
$142,297.60 per linear mile
12 ft. wide Asphalt Multi-Use Path
Costs Assumed:
$30.00 per square yard for asphalt
($40.00 per linear ft. for 12 ft. wide path)
$740.00 per curb ramp
General formula:
[(Costs per linear ft. of 12 ft. wide path) * linear ft. paved] + [ cost of placing curb ramp at each end]
[$40.00 * 5280] + [$740 * 2]
[$211,200.00] + [ $1,480.00]
$212,680.00 per linear mile
F-4
June 2014
Appendix G: Complete Streets Policies

New Jersey Department of Transportation Complete Streets Policy & Project
Evaluation Checklist
G-1
June 2014
G-2
June 2014
G-3
June 2014

Background
The New Jersey Department of Transportations Complete Streets Policy promotes a
comprehensive, integrated, connected multi-modal network by providing connections to
bicycling and walking trip generators such as employment, education, residential,
recreational and public facilities, as well as retail and transit centers. The policy calls for
the establishment of a checklist to address pedestrian, bicyclist and transit accommodations
with the presumption that they shall be included in each project unless supporting
documentation against inclusion is provided and found to be justifiable.
CompleteStreetsChecklist
The following checklist is an accompaniment to NJDOTs Complete Streets Policy and has
been developed to assist Project Managers and designers develop proposed alternatives in
adherence to the policy. Being in compliance with the policy means that Project Managers
and designers plan for, design, and construct all transportation projects to provide
appropriate accommodation for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users on New Jerseys
roadways, in addition to those provided for motorists. It includes people of all ages and
abilities. The checklist applies to all NJDOT projects that undergo the Capital Project
Delivery (CPD) Process and is intended for use on projects during the earliest stages of the
Concept Development or Preliminary Engineering Phase so that any pedestrian or bicycle
considerations are included in the project budget. The Project Manager is responsible for
completing the checklist and must work with the Designer to ensure that the checklist has
been completed prior to advancement of a project to Final Design.

UsingtheCompleteStreetsChecklist
The Complete Streets Checklist is a tool to be used by Project Managers and designers
throughout Concept Development and Preliminary Engineering to ensure that all
developed alternatives reflect compliance with the Policy. When completing the checklist, a
brief description is required for each Item to be Addressed as a means to document that
the item has been considered and can include supporting documentation.

G-4
June 2014

CONCEPTDEVELOPMENTCHECKLIST
Instructions:
For each box checked, please provide a brief description for how the item is addressed, not
addressed or not applicable and include documentation to support your answer.
Item to be
Addressed
Checklist Consideration
Existing Bicycle,
Pedestrian and
Transit
Accommodations
Are there accommodations for

bicyclists, pedestrians (including
ADA compliance) and transit
users included on or crossing the
current facility?
Examples include (but are not
limited to):
Sidewalks, public seating, bike
racks, and transit shelters
Existing Bicycle and

Pedestrian
Operations
Has the existing bicycle and

pedestrian suitability or level of
service on the current
transportation facility been
identified?
YES NO
N/A
Required
Description
Have the bicycle and pedestrian

conditions within the study area,
including pedestrian and/or
bicyclist treatments, volumes,
important connections and
lighting been identified?
Do bicyclists/pedestrians
regularly use the transportation
facility for commuting or
recreation?
Are there physical or perceived
impediments to bicyclist or
pedestrian use of the
transportation facility?
Is there a higher than normal
incidence of bicyclist/pedestrian
crashes within the study area?
Have the existing volumes of
pedestrian and/or bicyclist
crossing activity at intersections
including midblock and nighttime
crossing been collected/provided?

G-5
June 2014

Item to be
Addressed
Existing Transit
Operations
YES NO
N/A
Required
Description
Are there existing transit facilities

within the study area, including
bus and train stops/stations?
Is the transportation facility on a
transit route?
Is the transportation facility
within two miles of park and
ride or kiss and go lots?
Are there existing or proposed
bicycle racks, shelters, or parking
available at these lots or transit
stations? Are there bike racks on
buses that travel along the
facility?
Existing Motor
Vehicle Operations
Are there existing concerns within

the study area, regarding motor
vehicle safety, traffic
volumes/congestion or access?
Existing
Truck/Freight
Operations
Are there existing concerns within

the study area, regarding
truck/freight safety, volumes, or
access?
Existing Access and

Mobility
Are there any existing access or

mobility considerations, including
ADA compliance?
Are there any schools, hospitals,
senior care facilities, educational
buildings, community centers,
residences or businesses of
persons with disabilities within or
proximate to the study area?
Land Usage
Have you identified the

predominant land uses and
densities within the study area,
including any historic districts or
special zoning districts?
Is the transportation facility in a
high-density land use area that
has pedestrian/bicycle/motor
vehicle and transit traffic?

G-6
June 2014

Item to be
Addressed
Major Sites
Have you identified the major

sites, destinations, and trip
generators within or proximate to
the study area, including
prominent landmarks,
employment centers, recreation,
commercial, cultural and civic
institutions, and public spaces?
Existing Streetscape
Are there existing street trees,

planters, buffer strips, or other
environmental enhancements
such as drainage swales within
the study area?
Existing Plans
Are there any comprehensive

planning documents that address
bicyclist, pedestrian or transit user
conditions within or proximate to
the study area?
limited to):
x SRTS Travel Plans
x Municipal or County Master or
Redevelopment Plan
x Local, County and Statewide
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans
x Sidewalk Inventories
x MPO Transportation Plan
x NJDOT Designated Transit
Village
YES NO
N/A
Required
Description

PROJECTMANAGERSIGNOFF
Statement of Compliance
YES
NO
If NO, Please
Describe Why (refer
to Exemptions
Clause)
The Preliminary Preferred Alternative (PPA)

accommodates bicyclists and pedestrians as set forth in
the New Jersey Department of Transportations
Complete Streets Policy.

G-7
June 2014

PRELIMINARYENGINEERINGCHECKLIST
Instructions:
For each box checked, please provide a brief description for how the item is addressed, not
addressed or not applicable and include documentation to support your answer.
Item to be
Addressed
Bicyclist,
Pedestrian, and
Transit
Accommodations
YES NO N/A
Required
Description
Does the proposed project design

include accommodations for
bicyclists?
limited to):
Bicycle facilities: bicycle path;
bicycle lane; bicycle route; bicycle
boulevard; wide outside lanes or
improved shoulders; bicycle
actuation at signals (loop detectors
and stencil or other means); signs,
signals and pavement markings
specifically related to bicycle
operation on roadways or shareduse facilities; bicycle safe inlet
grates
Bicycle amenities: Call boxes (for
trail or bridge projects); drinking
fountains (also for trail projects);
secure long term bicycle parking
(e.g., for commuters and
residents); and secure short term
bicycle parking.
Does the proposed project design
address accommodations for
pedestrians?
limited to):
Pedestrian facilities: Sidewalks
(preferably on both sides of the
street); mid-block crosswalks;
striped crosswalks; geometric
modifications to reduce crossing
distances such as curb extensions
(bulb-outs); pedestrian-actuated
traffic signals such as High
Intensity Activated Crosswalk
Beacons, Rapid Rectangular
Flashing Beacons; dedicated
pedestrian phase; pedestrian

G-8
June 2014

Item to be
Addressed
Motor Vehicle
Operations
Does the proposed design address

the desired future motor vehicle
conditions within the project area,
including volumes, access,
important motor vehicle
connections, appropriateness of
motor vehicle traffic to the
particular street (e.g., local versus
through traffic) and the reduction
of the negative impacts of motor
vehicle traffic?
Truck/Freight
Operations

the desired future truck conditions
within the project area, including
truck routes, volumes, access,
mobility and the reduction of the
negative impacts of truck traffic?
Access and Mobility

accommodations for those with
access or mobility challenges such
as the disabled, elderly, and
children, including ADA
compliance?
limited to):
Curb ramps, including detectable
warning surface; accessible signal
actuation; adequate sidewalk or
paved path (length & width or
linear feet); acceptable slope and
cross-slope (particularly for
driveway ramps over sidewalks,
over crossings and trails); and
adequate green signal crossing
time
Land Usage
Is the proposed design compatible

with the predominant land uses
and densities within the project
area, including any historic
districts or special zoning districts?
Major Sites
Can the proposed design support

the major sites, destinations, and
trip generators within or
proximate to the project area,
including prominent landmarks,
commercial, cultural and civic
institutions, and public spaces?

YES NO N/A
Required
Description

G-9
June 2014

Item to be
Addressed
Streetscape
Does the proposed design include

landscaping, street trees, planters,
buffer strips, or other
environmental enhancements such
as drainage swales?
Design Standards or
Guidelines
Does the proposed design follow

all applicable design standards or
guidelines appropriate for bicycle
and/or pedestrian facilities?
YES NO N/A
Required
Description

limited to):
American Association of State
Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) - A Policy on
Geometric Design of Highway and
Streets, Guide for the Development of
Bicycle Facilities, Guide for the
Planning, Design, and Operation of
Pedestrian Facilities; Public Right-ofWay Accessibility Guide
(PROWAG); Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD);
Americans with Disabilities Act
Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG);
National Association of City
Transportation Officials (NACTO)
- Urban Bikeway Design Guide; New
Jersey Department of
Transportation (NJDOT) - Bicycle
Compatible Roadways & Bikeways
Planning and Design Guidelines,
Pedestrian Planning and Design
Guidelines.

PROJECTMANAGERSIGNOFF
Statement of Compliance
YES NO
If NO, Please
Describe Why (refer
to Exemptions Clause)
The Approved Project Plan (APP) accommodates

bicyclists and pedestrians as set forth in the New Jersey
Department of Transportations Complete Streets
Policy.

G-10
June 2014

Item to be
Addressed
YES NO N/A
Required
Description
signal heads and pushbuttons;

pedestrian signs for crossing and
wayfinding, lead pedestrian
intervals; high visibility
crosswalks (e.g., ladder or zebra);
pedestrian-level lighting; in-road
warning lights; pedestrian safety
fencing; pedestrian detection
system; pedestrian
overpass/underpass; and median
safety islands for roadways with
(two or more traffic lanes in each
direction).
Pedestrian amenities: Shade trees;
public seating; drinking fountains
Have you coordinated with the
corresponding transit authority to
accommodate transit users in the
project design?
Transit facilities: Transit shelters,
bus turnouts
Transit amenities: public seating,
signage, maps, schedules, trash
and recycling receptacles
Bicyclist and
Pedestrian
Operations
Does the proposed design consider

the desired future bicyclist and
walking conditions within the
project area including safety,
volumes, comfort and convenience
of movement, important walking
and/or bicycling connections, and
the quality of the walking
environment and/or availability of
bicycle parking?
Transit Operations

the desired/anticipated future
transit conditions within the
project area, including bus routes
and operations and transit station
access support transit usage and
users?

G-11
June 2014
Township of Medford Complete Streets Policy

October 16, 2012
TOWNSHIP OF MEDFORD
RESOLUTION 132-2012
Establishing a Complete Streets Policy
WHEREAS, the Township of Medford is committed to creating street and roadway corridors that
safely accommodate all street and road users of all abilities; and
WHEREAS, the Township Council supports this complete streets initiative and desires to
reinforce its commitment to creating a comprehensive, integrated, connected street and road network that
safely accommodates all street and road users of all abilities for all trips; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of
Medford that the Township hereby supports the complete streets initiative by making it Township
policy that all public street and road projects, both new construction and reconstruction (excluding
maintenance) undertaken by the Township of Medford shall be designed whenever feasible and subject to
Council approval to do so in order to safely accommodate travel by pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit,
and motorized vehicles and their passengers, with special priority given to pedestrian safety, subject to the
following conditions:
A. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities shall not be required where they are prohibited by law.
B. Public transit facilities shall not be required on streets or roads not serving transit routes and
the desirability of transit facilities will be determined on a project specific basis.
C. In any project, should the cost of pedestrian, bicycle, and/or public transit facilities cause an
increase in project cost exceeding 5% as determined by engineering estimates, that would have to be
funded with local tax dollars, then, and in that event, approval by Council shall be obtained for the same
prior to bidding the project.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the Township Council of the
Township of Medford, at a meeting held on the 16th day of October, 2012.
__________________________
Kathy Burger, Township Clerk
G-12
June 2014
Appendix H: Bicycles on Sidewalks Ordinance

Burlington Citys Ordinance
H-1
June 2014
H-2
June 2014
Appendix I: Provision of Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities

Gibbsboros Subdivision Ordinance
I-1
June 2014
I-2
June 2014
I-3
June 2014
I-4
June 2014
Appendix J: Bicycle Parking Ordinance

Pennington Borough, Mercer County
Borough of Pennington
Ordinance No. 2014- 5
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 215, ZONING, OF THE CODE
OF THE BOROUGH OF PENNINGTON BY ADDING A NEW SECTION ENTITLED
ROUTE 31 CORRIDOR BUSINESS OVERLAY ZONE AND REVISING THE ZONING
MAP.
WHEREAS, based on the land use recommendations of Maser Consulting in its June,
2013 Route 31 Redevelopment Study, the Borough seeks to create a Route 31 Business Overlay
Zone;
WHEREAS, the proposed Route 31 Business Overlay Zone will be located on lands
known as Block 206, Lots 3, 4 and 12 in the B-H Zone District and lands known as Block 206,
Lots 5, 6 and 7 in the R-80 Zone District;
WHEREAS, the proposed Route 31 Business Overlay Zone will replace the existing
Affordable Housing Overlay Zone located on the lands known as Lot 5 in Block 206 in the R-80
Zone District;
WHEREAS, the proposed ordinance is consistent with the Borough Master Plan and
Development Regulations Periodic Reexamination Report adopted by the Borough Planning
Board on October 19, 2013;
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2013, the Planning Board reviewed a version of the
proposed ordinance and proposed it for consideration by Borough Council;
WHEREAS, Borough Council has amended the ordinance as initially proposed to clarify
the relationship between the Overlay Zone and underlying zoning;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Borough Council of the Borough of
Pennington, that Chapter 215, Zoning, of the Code of the Borough of Pennington, is hereby
amended as follows:
1. Section 215-78.2, providing for an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, is repealed.
2. The following new Section 215-78.2 providing for a Route 31 Corridor Business Overlay
Zone is adopted as follows:
SECTION 215-78.2.
ZONING MAP).
ROUTE 31 CORRIDOR BUSINESS OVERLAY ZONE (AS SHOWN ON REVISED
A. Purpose. To create a mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly development that is aesthetically

pleasing. The permitted uses are intended to be compatible with and complement each
other to create a pedestrian-oriented shopping environment consistent with the character
of the surrounding community.
All new development and redevelopment on lands within the Route 31 Corridor Business
Overlay Zone shall comply with the provisions of the Overlay Zone.
B. Permitted primary uses.
(1) Retail businesses as listed in Section 215-72 (B-H zone).
(2) Personal service establishments as listed in Section 215-72 (B-H zone).
(3) Office uses as listed in Sec. 215-73 (O-B zone).
(4) Restaurants.
(5) Banks and financial institutions.
(6) Child care centers.
(7) Studios, including art, dance, music, etc.
(8) Health clubs/exercise facilities.
(9) [ (10)] Passive and/or active recreation areas.
[(11)] (10) Municipal services, including emergency response services.
[(12)] (11) A mixture of one or more of the aforementioned uses within a structure or
on a parcel.
C. Permitted secondary uses.
(1) Off-street parking facilities for the use of clients, customers, employees and
residents.
J-1
June 2014
(2) Sidewalk sales by adjacent retail merchandise stores when authorized by a permit
issued by the Borough Clerk.
(3) Outdoor dining contiguous to restaurants.
(4) Signs.
(5) Fences, walls and retaining walls in accordance with the provisions of 215-24.
(6) Roof-mounted solar panels.
D. Conditional uses.
(1) Retail businesses with drive-through facilities.
(a) Drive-through facility shall be located to the rear of the building.
(b) For queuing purposes, room for at least 2 automobiles per drive-through
window shall be provided.
(2) Banks and financial institutions with drive-through facilities.
(a) Drive-through facility shall be located to the rear of the building.
(b) For queuing purposes, room for at least 3 automobiles per drive-through
window shall be provided.
E. Prohibited uses.
(1) Retail uses where an individual store/tenant is greater than 10,000 square feet.
(2) Auto repair, service, and/or gas stations.
(3) Automobile sales.
(4) Drive-through facilities related to a restaurant.
F.
Bulk standards.
(1) Minimum lot size shall be 10,000 square feet.
(2) Minimum lot width shall be 100 feet.
(3) Setbacks for structures shall be as follows:
(a) Minimum front yard along Broemel Place shall be 10 feet; the minimum
setback along Route 31 shall be 20 feet, except where sight triangles are needed
at intersections.
(b) Maximum front yard shall be 50 feet.
(c) Minimum side yard shall be 20 feet.
(d) Minimum rear yard shall be 50 feet.
(4) Minimum distance between buildings on the same property shall be 20 feet.
(5) Maximum lot coverage shall be 65%.
(6) Maximum building height shall be 3 stories and 40 feet.
G. Off-street parking, automobiles.

(1) General design standards.
(a) All parking spaces within any parking area shall be clearly marked and
maintained to show the parking arrangement within said parking area.
(b) All parking spaces shall measure no less than 9 feet in width by 18 feet
in length.
(c) The number, location, size and marking of spaces shall conform to the
design requirements required for such spaces by the State of New Jersey
[barrier-free design (N.J.S.A. 52:32-12)] and the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990.
(d) Parking lots shall be interconnected with adjacent parking lots to
facilitate vehicular and pedestrian circulation.
(e) Parking lots shall be located to the side or rear of a building. A single
row of parking shall be permitted within the front yard.
(2) Schedule of off-street parking requirements.
(a) The following non-residential off-street parking requirements shall be
followed:
1. Retail businesses one space for each 300 square feet of
building floor area
2. Personal service establishments one space for every 300 square
feet of building floor area
3. Business, professional offices, banks and financial institutions
one space for each 250 square feet of building floor area
4. Child care centers one space for each 300 square feet of
building floor area
5. Studios and health club/exercise facility one space for every
400 square feet of building floor area
6. Restaurants one space for each three seats, plus one space for
each two employees employed therein
J-2
June 2014
(b)
Shared parking. Nothing in the above requirements shall be construed to

prevent the employment of shared parking, which may be implemented
in one of two manners:
1. On-site shared parking. For parcels containing a multiple
occupant building or two or more buildings with different
permitted uses, on-site shared parking may be implemented.
a. A 50% shared parking allowance shall be permitted for
combining weekday uses with evening/weekend uses in
the same building or in separate buildings on the same
parcel. Office and retail uses are considered to be
weekday uses, while residential and restaurant uses are
considered to be evening/weekend uses.
b. 50% of the parking requirement of the evening/weekend
use of the building may be met through parking already
provided for the weekday use. For example, a building
contains office space that requires 20 parking spaces and
residential units that require 8 parking spaces. The
residential parking is permitted to be reduced by 50% or
4 parking spaces. Therefore, the development would
only be required to construct 24 parking spaces instead
of 28.
2. Off-site shared parking. For parcels that cannot accommodate
all or a portion of their required parking spaces, the differential
parking requirement may be shifted to an adjacent property
determined by the Zoning Officer to have parking in excess of
zoning requirements or parking that is demonstrated to be
unused during normal hours of operation. This would require
the submission of a memorandum of agreement between the two
property owners, which demonstrates the shifting of parking
spaces from one site to an adjacent site.
H. Off-street parking, bicycle.

(a) For retail uses, one bicycle space shall be provided for every 10 retail
employees and at least one bicycle space shall be provided for every
5,000 square feet of retail space for customers.
(b) For non-residential uses other than retail, one bicycle space shall be
provided for every 10 workers and at least one bicycle space shall be
provided for every 10,000 square feet of space.
(c) All bicycle racks shall be within 200 feet of the building entrance.
I.
Off-street loading requirements.

(1) General requirements.
(a) No off-street loading area or berth shall be located in any front or side
yard except side yards for buildings on a corner lot. All loading
areas/berths shall have unobstructed access that is at least 10 feet wide to
and from a street. Such access may be combined with access to a
parking lot.
(b) All required loading areas/berths shall be on the same lot as the uses(s) to
which they are accessory.
(2) Schedule of off-street loading requirements.
(a) For restaurants, the number of berths shall be:
1. One loading area/berth shall be provided for restaurants with less
than 5,000 square feet of gross floor area.
2. Two loading areas/berths shall be provided for restaurants with
more than 5,000 square feet of gross floor area.
J. General Requirements .
(1) Landscaping.
Any front or side yard with a parking area visible from the street shall be
screened with a row of shrubs at least 2 ft. high when mature. Street trees shall
be planted along any street frontage 30-40 ft. on center and foundation plantings
shall be included along the building faade. A landscaped or grass strip at least
5 feet wide shall be provided along the front and side yard property lines.
J-3
June 2014
(2) On-site Circulation.

Driveways with appropriate cross easements providing access between adjacent
lots shall be permitted and provided where feasible. On-site circulation systems
and parking areas shall be designed to accommodate the interconnection between
adjacent lots.
(3) Pedestrian Access.
Adequate and safe pedestrian access between uses or separate buildings in the
development or on adjacent lots shall be provided, and the design of the
development shall promote non-vehicular, pedestrian-friendly access, inclusive
of bicycle racks, benches or other such amenities. Sidewalks shall be provided
along street frontages and throughout the development.
(4) Building Design.
(a)
All buildings shall have a dual pitched, single ridge roof (such as a true and
complete gable, hip or gambrel roof or a mansard roof where the lower slope is
steeper and deeper than the upper slope) with a minimum pitch of one foot
vertical to eight feet horizontal. No flat roof shall be permitted; provided,
however, that where roof-mounted equipment is necessary and/or preferable for
the operation of the building, a facade roof treatment exhibiting the appearance
of such a dual pitched, single ridge roof on all sides of the building may be
permitted if specifically approved by the Planning Board as part of a submitted
site plan application for the development.
(b)
All portions of all buildings on one lot shall be compatibly designed with a
common architectural motif, whether constructed all at one time or in stages over
a period of time. The architectural design and material surface and color of all
building walls on all sides of all buildings shall be suitably finished for aesthetic
purposes and shall be compatible in design and scale with the surface materials
existing within the area.
K. The revised Zoning Map prepared by Coppola & Coppola Associates, Princeton
Junction, New Jersey, May, 2014, is hereby adopted.
L. This Ordinance shall take effect upon passage and publication as provided by law.

Introduced:
June 6, 2014
Advertised:
June 12, 2014
Public Hearing:
July 7, 2014
Adopted:
July 7, 2014
Published:
July 17, 2014
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Elizabeth Sterling, Borough Clerk

Anthony Persichilli, Mayor

J-4
Burlington County
Bicycle Master Plan
June 2014

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Final Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Final Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

June 2014

Funding Provided By:

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Physical Barriers ..................................................................................................................................41

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Bicycle Safe Sewer Grates ..............................................................................................................81

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

DVRPCs Priority Corridors for Bicycle Facilities (2011) ..........................................................14

Burlington County Parks Trail Types ........................................................................................16

Regional Bicycle Commuting Rates (2011)...............................................................................19

Burlington County Bicycle Crashes by Corridor (2008-2012) ..................................................20

Burlington County Existing Bikeway Network .........................................................................25

Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network by Corridor ....................................................46

Table 10: Burlington County Proposed Bikeway Network by Bikeway Type.............................................46

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan Project Timeline ......................................................... 5

Burlington County Bicycle Crashes per Year (2008-2012)........................................................20

Severity of Bicyclists Injuries by Posted Speed Limit (2008-2012)...........................................22

Bicycle Crashes by Time of Day (2008-2012) ..........................................................................23

River LINE Bike Racks............................................................................................................24

Moorestown Side-path Ending Abruptly .................................................................................28

Marlton Parkway Bike Lane Ending Abruptly at Route 73 ......................................................29

Bike Route Designated by Sharrow ..........................................................................................29

Substandard Bike Route on Taunton Lake Boulevard in Marlton ............................................29

Figure 10: Well-Designed Bike Route in Cambridge Park ........................................................................29

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Burlington County, New Jersey ...................................................................................................7

Burlington County Land Uses......................................................................................................8

Burlington County Crashes Involving a Bicycle (2008-2012).....................................................21

Burlington County Public Transportation ..................................................................................23

Burlington Countys Existing Bikeway Network.........................................................................26

Smithville Park Multi-Use Trails .................................................................................................27

Moorestown Side-path Network ................................................................................................27

Marlton Parkway Bikeway Facilities ...........................................................................................28

Burlington County Population Per Square Mile .........................................................................36

Map 10: Burlington County Percentage of Zero Car Households.............................................................37

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Vision & Goals

The Planning Process

were completed in June 2014. Phase II focused

phasing; design standards; policy and program

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Better access to, and between, town centers is needed.

Employment destinations such as business parks are important cycling destinations

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

cooperation of state and municipal partners. The Burlington

The Implementation Plan

The Bicycle Facilities Design Toolkit

Programs & Policies

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

VISION, GOALS &

Phase II of the Plan was completed in June 2014

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Burlington County Bicycle Master Plan

Map 1: Burlington County, New Jersey

MAPLE SHADE TWP

NORTH HANOVER TWP

MOUNT LAUREL TWP

NEW HANOVER TWP

BASS RIVER TWP

4A Eves Drive, Suite 114