Ccctma Salem County Bike Report

JUNE 2007

Cross County Connection Transportation Management Association

BICYCLE FACILITIES INVENTORY and ANALYSIS

2002 D Lincoln Drive West Marlton, NJ 08053 Phone: (856) 596-8228 www.transportationchoices.com

SALEM COUNTY

BICYCLE FACILITIES INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS SALEM COUNTY June 2007

2002D Lincoln Drive West Marlton, NJ 08053

(856) 596-8228 www.transportationchoices.com

Cross County Connection TMA was formally incorporated in 1989 through the efforts of a group of southern New Jersey business leaders, local government officials, and 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 on state and local roadways. Today, Cross County Connection is a non-profit organization, which partners with NJDOT, NJ TRANSIT, Federal Highway Administration and its members to provide solutions to complex transportation problems for counties, municipalities, employers and commuters in our seven-county region. This Cross County Connection Transportation Management Association publication is funded by the New Jersey Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. The Federal Government and the State of New Jersey assume no liability for the contents.

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

List of Tables

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION Perspective The Salem County Work Methodology

Page 1 1 3 3

Table 1 Table 2 Table 3

2. INVENTORY Inventory Findings Linkages to Public Transit Linkages with Adjacent Counties Summary 3. BICYCLE FACILITIES RANKING ANALYSIS Ranking Criteria Findings Summary 4.

PROPOSED BICYCLE FACILITIES RECOMMENEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION Bicycle Corridors: Northern and Southern Summary

5. CONCLUSION Bicycle Task Force Planning Tools Funding Opportunities Summary

Cross County Connection

4 4 5 5 9

Table 4 Table 5 Table 6

10 10 12 15

Table 8

16

Table 9

Table 7

Page 5

Bicycle Facilities by Segments & Miles Criteria 1: Proximity to Commuter Roadways Criteria 2: Number of Bus Routes Within Two Miles Criteria 3: Proximity to Business Parks Criteria 4: Number of Schools Within Two Miles Highest Ranking Facilities Averaged by Municipality Highest Ranking Facilities Overall by Municipality Workplace County Flows, Salem County Residents, 2000 Proposed Bicycle Facilities Recommended for Construction

16 20 21 21 21 22 22

i

June 2007

10 11 11 12 12 13 14 19

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

List of Figures

Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6

Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14

Bicycle Facilities Inventory: Salem County Bicycle Facilities and Bus Routes: Salem County Bicycle Facilities Inventory: Salem, Gloucester and Cumberland Counties Proposed Bicycle Facilities Recommended for Construction by Corridor Pennsville, Salem City, Quinton City-Route 49 Carneys Point, Woodstown, Pilesgrove, Upper Pittsgrove, Elmer, Pittsgrove--Route 48/40 Oldmans, Carneys Point, Pennsville, Penns Grove--Route 130 Carneys Point, Harding Highway—Route 48 Salem City, Mannington, Pilesgrove-Salem Woodstown Road (Route 45) Pennsville—Hook Road Pennsville—Fort Mott Road Carneys Point, Mannington—Hawks Bridge Road Pilesgrove—Kings Highway Upper Pilesgrove—Bridgeton Pike/Route 77

Cross County Connection

List of Appendices Page 6

Page Appendix A

7

Appendix B

8

Appendix C

17

Bicycle Facilities Inventory: Salem County Table of Attributes Proposed Bicycle Facilities Recommended for Construction Funding and Technical Assistance Sources for Bicycle Facilities

26 27 28 28 29 29 30 30 31 31

ii

June 2007

23 26 32

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pedestrian Master Plan presents a vision and action plan for improving the bicycling and walking environment throughout the state. It provides organizations, agencies and local governments with analytical tools and methods to plan for future facilities. This Plan serves as a blueprint for improving conditions for bicycling and walking and focuses on state highways and county roads.

1. INTRODUCTION In recent years, much attention has been given to improving bicycle facilities throughout New Jersey. Former Governors Christine Todd Whitman, James E. McGreevy and Richard Codey pledged their support and commitment to improving bicycle facilities in the State by awarding over $16 million in grant funding for local bicycle facilities. Governor Jon Corzine is continuing this support and commitment. An increasing number of municipalities in southern New Jersey are adding bicycle facilities to their road network. NJ TRANSIT permits and can accommodate bicycles on-board almost all of its public transit services. In southern New Jersey, bicycles are permitted on NJ TRANSIT buses, the River LINE, the Atlantic City rail line, the BurLink shuttle system and the Port Authority Transit Corporation (PATCO) Speedline. As traffic congestion continues to worsen throughout New Jersey, government leaders and the private sector are realizing the worth of bicycling as a commute alternative. The cost to stripe a bicycle lane or install a bike rack at a worksite is small when compared to improving roadways and building more parking.

Cross County Connection’s Bicycle Facilities Project In contrast, the Cross County Connection bicycle facilities project examines the county and municipal bicycle facilities network specifically for commuting purposes. Therefore, while the Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan focuses on the larger state and county road network, Cross County Connection examines how commuters can use local and regional bicycle facilities to get to and from their places of employment and other commuting destinations. Given the increased awareness of, and interest in, bicycling as a commute alternative, Cross County Connection decided to inventory bicycle facilities throughout southern New Jersey. Given the size of Cross County Connection’s seven county service area, this work is being conducted over several years and through two phases and is being funded by the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT). Phase I includes the inventory of existing and proposed bicycle facilities by county. During 2004, an inventory of facilities in Burlington and Camden counties was completed. During 2005, the inventories in Gloucester and Atlantic counties were completed, and inventories in Salem and Cumberland counties are being completed during 2006. This document reports the findings of the inventory and analysis (Phases I and II) for

PERSPECTIVE New Jersey Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan In 1995, the New Jersey Department of Transportation published the Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan which was updated in 2004. The primary goal of the Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is to provide clear guidance to NJDOT, MPOs, counties and other implementers on the most efficient and effective use of federal, state and local resources to implement bicycle and pedestrian initiatives. The 2004 update of the Statewide Bicycle and

Cross County Connection

1

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Salem County, which was undertaken during the late fall of 2005 and the winter of 2006.

identifying and prioritizing these facilities, they will be looked upon more favorably when funding is sought.

Cross County Connection began its bicycle facilities project work approximately two years ago by conducting an inventory of existing and proposed bicycle facilities in Camden and Burlington counties. That inventory was used to identify gaps in the two county’s regional bicycle network. The gaps were prioritized to identify those facilities that should be built in the near future and bicycle improvement areas were also identified. These areas are those that have the most potential to link bicycle commuters to regional employment opportunities via the public transit system. The same analysis was undertaken and completed for Atlantic and Gloucester Counties during 2005 and 2006. 1

The need for studies like Cross County Connection’s bicycle facilities project is demonstrated in the lack of strategic placement of existing bicycle facilities. There is a limited number of existing bicycle facilities that have inter-municipal connections. For example, there are no existing links between Burlington and Camden counties. While there is a need for a coherent set of plans that the counties and municipalities can use to design and build commuter bicycle facilities, there is also a need to locate the gaps in the local bicycle facility network and determine how best to complete them. The ultimate goal of Cross County Connection’s bicycle facility work is to create a region-wide network of bicycle facilities that, in conjunction with public transit, can be used by commuters to reach employment and other destinations throughout the region.

The Salem County bicycle facilities inventory underwent the same analysis as the Burlington, Camden, Gloucester and Atlantic counties inventories. Additionally, Phase II of the Salem County work includes the identification of gaps between Salem, Gloucester and Cumberland counties’ bicycle networks. Phase II also identifies gaps in each county’s bicycle network and prioritizes proposed facilities for implementation. The prioritization process is designed to show local governments which facilities should be built immediately to fill in the gaps in the county’s bicycle network. It is hoped that by 1

For the complete analysis and findings of Cross County Connection’s bicycle projects, see Bicycle Facilities Report: Burlington and Camden Counties, June 2004 and Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Atlantic County, December 2005 and Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Gloucester County, June 2006. These publications can be obtained, free of charge, through Cross County Connection.

Cross County Connection

2

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Transportation Planning Organization (SJTPO) responded to the survey. Cross County Connection input the data into its Geographical Information System (GIS) software. Municipal data was cross-referenced with the New Jersey Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Since the scope of this project is municipal, if a facility was reported by a municipality, it superseded either SJTPO or NJDOT data. The facilities were grouped into four categories, as follows:

THE SALEM COUNTY WORK The purpose of Phase I of Cross County Connection’s bicycle facility work in Salem County is to identify existing and proposed bicycle facilities at the municipal level and to assist local governments as well as Salem County to identify commuter bicycle facilities. This inventory will assist local governments to prioritize their existing bicycle facilities and plan for building future facilities.

• Existing facilities o On-road o Off-road • Proposed facilities o On-road o Off-road

The primary goal of this project is to inventory and prioritize the existing and proposed bicycle facilities in Salem County’s 15 municipalities. The emphasis of this inventory is on bicycle facilities that can be used for commuting purposes. Therefore, closed systems that are used primarily for recreation (parks, school facilities) are not included in this analysis, unless they could be opened and connected to a regional facility.

Cross County Connection created attribute tables as well as county and municipal maps of the facilities. Once the inventory was finalized, Cross County Connection undertook Phase II of this project; the gap and prioritization analysis. The completed inventory will be placed on Cross County Connection’s website as part of an interactive map of bicycle facilities in southern New Jersey. Please visit www.transportationchoices.com to view the interactive bicycle facilities maps.

To further facilitate commuting, the bicycle facilities inventory is compared to NJ TRANSIT’s existing bus route system. NJ TRANSIT’s buses are equipped with bicycle racks; therefore, a commuter can bicycle to a bus stop, attach the bicycle to the bus, and use it to reach the final destination. By combining bicycle trips with public transit trips, Salem County commuters have better access to employment opportunities throughout southern New Jersey, Delaware and the Philadelphia area. This transit analysis will appear in Phase II of this project. METHODOLOGY To inventory commuter oriented bicycle facilities in Salem County, Cross County Connection surveyed the county’s 15 municipalities as well as the County during the fall of 2005 and the winter of 2006. All 15 municipalities and the South Jersey

Cross County Connection

3

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

significance. The information from these sources was compared to the municipal information. When conflicting or incomplete information was found, Cross County Connection contacted municipal and county representatives to correct the data; thus all parties received up-to-date information. In most cases, the municipality has approval authority for the construction of new bicycle facilities. If the municipal information conflicted with NJDOT, SJTPO or County information, priority was given to the information provided by the municipality.

2. INVENTORY Cross County Connection began its analysis by identifying existing and proposed bicycle facilities at the municipal level. During the fall of 2005 and the winter of 2006, the 15 municipalities in Salem County were asked to provide the following information: • •

Location of existing bicycle facilities o On-road o Off-road Location of proposed bicycle facilities o On-road o Off-road

The emphasis of this study is on the identification of bicycle facilities for commuting purposes. Cross County Connection’s inventory does not include closed loop systems, such as bike facilities in a local park. These recreational facilities were not included in the analysis, unless they could be opened and connected to a regional facility.

Existing facilities are those that have already been built and are officially designated as a bike route through signage and/or pavement striping. Proposed facilities are those that are proposed or pending construction. No distinction was made between facilities that have funding for construction versus those that do not.

INVENTORY FINDINGS After analyzing the data collected, Cross County Connection used its Geographic Information System (GIS) to create the bicycle facilities inventory. Cross County Connection found 14 municipalities had existing or proposed bicycle facilities suitable for commuting. Only Elsinboro did not have any facilities. It should be noted that seven towns stated that they have no existing or proposed facilities; however the State Plan has proposed facilities within these municipalities. The existing and proposed facilities represent approximately 122 miles, broken into 35 segments, as shown on Table 1. Approximately, 94% of the 122 miles of facilities are proposed. Currently, there are 13 existing bike facilities in Salem County; all but two are on-road facilities. The existing facilities encompass only seven miles and are located primarily in

The bicycle facilities were further defined into two classifications: on-road and off-road. An on-road facility is defined as one that shares the road with motorized traffic. This bicycle facility is signed as a bicycle route and/or the travel lane is striped for bicycles. An off-road facility has its own right of way which is separated from motorized traffic. Off-road facilities can be paved or dirt trails. Cross County Connection also surveyed the County of Salem, the South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization (SJTPO) and NJDOT’s statewide inventory. The SJTPO and NJDOT provided information on bicycle facilities of statewide

Cross County Connection

4

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pilesgrove Township, with a small segment extending into Woodstown.

For this reason, the proximity of each of the existing and proposed bicycle facilities to public transit will be considered as an important element of the Phase II analysis.

All of the proposed facilities are on-road. Most are located in the northern section of the County; north of Route 45 (refer to Figure 1).

Under Phase II of this project, transit access via bicycle facilities will be one of the primary factors used to prioritize those bicycle facilities that should receive priority in funding and construction. Linkages to public transit and to facilities along Salem County’s borders with its neighbors will strengthen the bicycle networks’ outreach throughout southern New Jersey.

TABLE 1 BICYCLE FACILITIES BY SEGMENTS & MILES SALEM COUNTY

Segments Miles

Existing Proposed On- Off- Total OnOff- Total Grand road road road road total 11 2 13 22 0 22 35 5.7 1.1 6.8 114.7 0.0 114.7 121.5

LINKAGES WITH ADJACENT COUNTIES Since Salem County shares a border with Gloucester and Cumberland counties, the connections between the three counties were analyzed.

LINKAGES TO PUBLIC TRANSIT

Gloucester County Linkages

NJ TRANSIT operates five bus routes throughout Salem County (refer to Figure 2). These routes provide service to employment locations within the County, as well as to destinations in Gloucester and Cumberland counties and the cities of Philadelphia and Wilmington. Most NJ TRANSIT buses are equipped with bicycle racks on the front of the bus.

As Figure 3 shows, three proposed bicycle facilities in Salem County have direct connections with proposed facilities in Gloucester County. One proposed facility travels north to south through Salem County into Gloucester County along Route 45. The second proposed facility travels through Upper Pittsgrove Township into Gloucester County along Route 77 and the third travels along Route 48 and connects with a proposed facility along Route 40 in Gloucester County. These connections will be investigated further during Phase II of this study. Phase II will more thoroughly identify missing links within Salem County, as well as between Salem, Gloucester and Cumberland counties.

In Salem County, the proposed bicycle facilities provide direct access to all five of the NJ TRANSIT bus routes serving the County. The ability to link a bicycle trip with public transit provides commuters with access to the region-wide public transit system, thus increasing the bicyclists’ pool of potential destinations.

Cross County Connection

5

June 2007

School

Bicycle Facilities

Existing, Off-Road

130

Existing, On-Road

Penns Grove

Proposed, Off-Road

Proposed, On-Road

0

1

2

Figure 1: Bicycle Facilities Inventory Salem County

Oldmans 295

Gloucester County

Carneys Point

4 Miles

Tp NJ

140

www.transportationchoices.com 856-596-8228 June 2007

40

48

45

Pilesgrove Woodstown

Mannington Pennsville

77

Upper Pittsgrove

45

Elmer

40

Deleware River

Salem City Elsinboro

Alloway

55

Pittsgrove

49

Quinton

56

Lower Alloways Creek

Cumberland County

6

School 130

Bicycle Facilities

Existing, Off-Road

Penns Grove

Existing, On-Road

Oldmans 295

Proposed, Off-Road

2

p NJT

4 Miles

140

40

3 42

48

401

1

Gloucester County

Carneys Point

Proposed, On-Road

0

Figure 2: Bicycle Facilities and Bus Routes Salem County

2 40

NJ TRANSIT Bus

412

45

Pilesgrove

www.transportationchoices.com 856-596-8228 June 2007

8 46

Mannington Pennsville

Woodstown

77

Upper Pittsgrove

45

Deleware River

410

1 40

Salem City Elsinboro

Alloway

Elmer

40

55

Pittsgrove

49

Quinton

56

Lower Alloways Creek

Cumberland County

7

30

563

Bicycle Facilities

Figure 3: Bicycle Facilities Inventory Salem, Gloucester and Cumberland Counties

Existing, Off-Road

Existing, On-Road

Proposed, Off-Road

Proposed, On-Road

0

1.5

3

Deptford

44

Parks

6 Miles

West Deptford

Greenwich

www.transportationchoices.com 856-596-8228 June 2007

130

41

47

Washington

45

295

Mantua

East Greenwich

.

Pittman

Oldsman

Carneys Point

Newfield

Pillsgrove

Upper Pittsgrove Elmer

48

40

130

Pittsgrove

Mannington

SALEM

45 49

40

Woodstown

295

Penns Grove

Franklin

Elk

South Harrison

NJ

Tp

Swedesboro

GLOUCESTER

Clayton

55

Harrison

Woolwich

Monroe

Glassboro

322

Logan

42

77

Alloway

Salem 49

Pennsville

Upper Deerfield

49

Deerfield

55

Shiloh

Quinton Elsinboro

56

Vineland

47

Millville

CUMBERLAND

49

Commercial

Bridgeton

Lower Alloways Creek Stow Creek

Hopewell

Greenwich

8

Maurice River

Fairfield

47

47

Lawrence

Downe

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

of these proposed facilities must be obtained if they are to be constructed.

Cumberland County Linkages Figure 3 shows five proposed bicycle facilities in Salem County linking to proposed facilities in Cumberland County. These proposed facilities are located on Route 77 and Route 49. Other proposed facilities in Upper Deerfield, Shiloh and Stow Creek end at the Salem/Cumberland border.

Given the limited financial resources that may be available to construct this bicycle facility network, a prioritization system should be put into place to ensure that those facilities with the most benefit will be built first. Phase II of Cross County connections’ bicycle facility project does this.

There are no existing or proposed links between Cumberland County and Gloucester County. However, a proposed route in Pittsgrove Township could link with a proposed route in Newfield Borough and Franklin Township, Gloucester County, if a missing segment in Vineland was proposed. One route links to a proposed route in Upper Deerfield along Route 77. Others link with three proposed routes in Shiloh; one of which travels along Route 49. The fourth and fifth proposed routes link with existing routes in Deerfield, crossing Route 56, and Stow Creek. SUMMARY As Figure 1 demonstrates, Salem County has a proposed network of bicycle facilities that forms a good network for most County residents. With the exceptions of Elsinboro Township and Lower Alloways Creek Township, each municipality has one or more proposed facilities traversing it. These proposed bicycle facilities link to one another and to the NJ Transit bus routes serving the County. Once these facilities are built, county residents, employees and visitors will be able to bicycle to most areas of the County. Many of the proposed facilities appear on the State’s Bicycle Plan but are not part of any municipal plan. Municipal support

Cross County Connection

9

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

3. BICYCLE FACILITY RANKING ANALYSIS

Criterion One: Proximity to Commuter Roadways

To identify those bicycle facilities that should be built in the near future, Cross County Connection developed a set of ranking criteria and applied each criterion to the bicycle facility inventory. The purpose of ranking criteria is to determine which facilities are most suitable for commuter usage. The criteria are as follows:

Routes 130, 49, 45, 77, 48 and 40 were chosen as the attractors in this criterion. They serve as the major transportation arteries through Salem County, thus allowing access to most areas throughout the study area. Therefore, the closer a bicycle facility is to one of these roads, the more attractive the facility will be as a commuter corridor for bicyclists.

1. Proximity to commuter roadways 2. Number of New Jersey TRANSIT bus routes within two miles 3. Proximity to business parks 4. Number of schools within two miles

Cross County Connection identified the bicycle facilities within a two mile buffer of the identified commuter roadways. As shown in Table 2, those facilities that fell within the two mile buffer were then scored based on their distance from the roadway.

RANKING CRITERIA Table 2 Criteria 1: Proximity to Commuter Roadways Distance of Bicycle Facility from Commuter Score Roadway 0 >2 miles 1 1.5 – 2.0 miles 2 1.0 - 1.5 miles 3 0.5 – 1.0 miles 4 0 - 0.5 miles

For each criterion, a set of values or points was established. Criteria one and four are assigned from zero to four points while criteria two and three have been weighted and are assigned from two to six points, equaling a possible 20 points for each bicycle facility. A score of zero shows that a particular criterion is least conducive to bicycle usage. For example, a zero in Criterion One would indicate that a facility is more than two miles from the commuter roadways. A score of four or six in a particular criterion shows that the facility is most conducive to bicycle usage. For example, in Criterion Two a score of six would indicate that a facility is within two miles of more than five New Jersey TRANSIT bus routes.

Cross County Connection

10

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

Criterion Two: Proximity to New Jersey TRANSIT Bus Routes

Criterion Three: Proximity to Business Parks Bicycle facilities benefit from being within two miles of a business park because of increased proximity to employment opportunities. If a business park is along or in proximity to a bicycle facility, then the usage of the bicycle facility as a commuter route would most likely increase. When combined with other modes of transport, such as buses that have bicycle racks, commuters could arrive at their employment sites by combining different modes of transportation and incorporate the bicycle facility into the overall transportation network.

The number of New Jersey TRANSIT routes within a two mile buffer of the bicycle facility was selected as a criterion because a bicyclist linking with a bus route has access to a much larger geographic area for employment. All New Jersey TRANSIT buses have bicycle racks. In addition, the number of routes is important because a bicyclist can ride along a bicycle facility to an intersect point with a New Jersey TRANSIT bus, put the bicycle on the bike rack and ride to their stop. Upon reaching their stop, the bicyclist can then take the bicycle off of the bus and ride to their destination. Therefore, the number of bus routes would help to determine the usage of a particular bicycle facility as a commuter route. Table 3 shows how the bicycle facilities were scored based on the distance to bus routes.

The business parks in Salem County were identified using county maps, the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development employers’ database, the Salem County Department of Economic Development and local knowledge and experience; refer to Figure 4. The bicycle facilities were scored as shown in Table 4.

Table 3 Criteria 2: Number of Bus Routes Within Two Miles Score Number of Bus Routes Within Two Miles 0 0 2 1 3 2 4 3 5 4 6 5 or more

Cross County Connection

Table 4 Criteria 3: Proximity to Business Parks Score Proximity to Business Parks 0 >2 miles 2 1.5 - 2 miles 3 1.0 - 1.5 miles 4 0.5 – 1.0 miles 5 0.25- 0.5 miles 6 0 to 0.25 miles

11

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

most conducive to commuting. The lowest possible score is a 0 which shows that the bicycle facility is least conducive to commuting. The average score amongst the 34 facilities is 9.0. The facilities that scored at or above the average score are located in 12 municipalities, as shown on Table 6. Table 6 shows the average score of all bicycle facilities that received a score of nine or higher.

Criterion Four: Number of Schools within Two Miles The number of schools within a two mile buffer was selected as a criterion to encourage students to use bicycles to commute to school. When considered along with government spending on programs such as the Safe Routes to School Initiative, schools are becoming a significant attractor for alternative modes of commuting. Including this criterion allows Cross County Connection to account for a growing number of commuters. At the present time, approximately 25% of morning traffic is school related. The bicycle facilities were scored as shown in Table 5.

As Table 6 shows, the range of scores at or above the average varies from a low of 10.0 to a high of 19.0. Table 6 Highest Ranking Facilities Averaged by Municipality Rank Municipality Score 1 Quinton Township 19.0 2 Salem City 17.5 3 Upper Pittsgrove Township 17.0 4 Pittsgrove Township 17.0 5 Elmer 17.0 6 Pennsville Township 16.8 7 Penns Grove 16.0 8 Oldsman Township 16.0 9 Carneys Point Township 15.3 10 Mannington Township 13.5 11 Pilesgrove Township 11.9 12 Woodstown 10.0

Table 5 Criteria 4: Number of Schools Within Two Miles Score Number of Schools Within Two Miles 0 0 1 1 to 3 2 4 to 7 3 8 to10 4 11+ FINDINGS Each facility was scored and ranked based on the above criteria. Fourteen of Salem County’s 15 municipalities have at least one existing or proposed bicycle facility. The facilities ranged in score from a low of 1 to a high of 19. The highest possible score is 20, which shows that the bicycle facility is

Cross County Connection

12

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

This analysis also examined the overall scores of each bicycle facility in each municipality. The overall score is comprised of the individual scores of all of the existing and proposed facilities within the municipality thus indicating the volume of facilities in the municipality; the higher the overall score, the greater the number of facilities in the municipality. As Table 7 shows, Pilesgrove Township surpasses all other municipalities with an overall score of 96 while the next twelve municipalities range from a score of 80 to 14. Sixty-two percent of the reported bicycle facilities in Salem County are proposed.

County Resident Commuting Patterns The U.S. Census of 2000 documented the commuting patterns of employees from their county of residence to their county of employment. Approximately, 50% of Salem County’s employed residents travel outside the County for employment. Given this high percentage and this study’s emphasis on bicycle facilities for commuting purposes, Cross County Connection thought it important to analyze existing and proposed bicycle facilities linking to employment destinations not only within the County, but outside the County, as well.

Table 7 Highest Ranking Facilities Overall by Municipality Rank Municipality Score 1 Pilesgrove Township 96 2 Woodstown 80 4 Pennsville Township 67 3 Carneys Point Township 61 5 Upper Pittsgrove Township 38 6 Mannington Township 35 7 Salem City 35 8 Quinton Township 26 9 Pittsgrove Township 25 10 Elmer 24 11 Oldsman Township 16 12 Penns Grove 16 13 Alloway Township 14

According to the 2000 Census, New Castle County (Wilmington area), Delaware and the New Jersey counties of Cumberland and Gloucester account for the largest percentage of employment locations outside Salem County; refer to Table 8. Given the importance of the three county employment destinations to Salem County residents, it is important that the bicycle facilities network be compatible with this commuting pattern. Although it may not be realistic to expect many commuters to bicycle outside the County given the distance they would have to travel, those bicycle facilities that connect to a bus route serving these employment destinations should be given priority for implementation. NJ TRANSIT bus routes 401, 402 and 410 serve Gloucester County; the 410 also serves Cumberland County and bus route 423 serves Wilmington. The proposed facilities connecting with bus routes 410, 402 and 423 scored above average in the ranking process.

Cross County Connection

13

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

However, the proposed facility along Route 77 which parallels the 410 bus into Gloucester and Cumberland counties scored below average, with a score of 7.0. This proposed facility scored below average due to a lack of schools in close proximity to the proposed facility and because it is only served by one bus route.

Table 8 Workplace County Flows Salem County Residents, 2000 Workplace County

Salem Percent of Commuters Commuters New Castle Co. DE 3,258 11.3% Cumberland Co. NJ 2,859 9.9% Gloucester Co. NJ 4,343 15.1% Salem Co. NJ 14,248 49.6% Subtotal 24,708 85.9% All Other Counties 4,040 14.1% Total 28,748 100.0% Source: U.S. Census 2000, County-To-County Worker Flow, 2000.

The proposed Route 77 bicycle facility is of regional importance since it connects with proposed bicycle facilities in Gloucester and Cumberland counties, providing access to key employments destinations. A bicyclist could use this proposed route to connect with bus route 410 to reach Bridgeton City and numerous locations in central Gloucester County. The Route 77 bicycle facility is also the only bicycle facility linking the eastern section of Salem County to Gloucester and Cumberland counties. Given the importance of commuter flows into Gloucester and Cumberland counties and the fact that this proposed facility connects with proposed bicycle facilities in Gloucester and Cumberland counties, Cross County Connection believes it should be included in the list of proposed facilities for construction despite its below average score.

Cross County Connection

14

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

counties. Given bus connections into these counties, it is reasonable to assume that a strong bicycle network in Salem County will be attractive to many Salem County residents seeking employment outside the County.

SUMMARY Nineteen existing and proposed bicycle facilities, out of a total of 34 facilities, scored at or above the average of 9.0. As stated above, these bicycle facilities are located in proximity to existing commuter attractors. Nine of these facilities are proposed and are located in the northern section of the county, with two traveling into the southern section as well. These proposed facilities travel along the road network, and connect with NJ TRANSIT bus routes that transport commuters into Gloucester, Cumberland and New Castle counties. These proposed facilities plus the proposed Route 77 facility are those that will have the greatest local and regional impact if constructed. Cross County Connection believes that funding the construction of these 10 proposed facilities is the next step to improving the bicycle network in Salem County for commuting purposes. Therefore the need to assist the municipalities to obtain funding and complete their proposed facilities is the priority. Cross County Connection believes that this is the next step in making Salem County attractive as an alternative commuting location. The Salem County bicycle network will play an important role in connecting the neighboring counties of Gloucester and Cumberland in New Jersey and New Castle County in Delaware. These neighboring counties support a significant number of employment opportunities for Salem County residents and Salem County provides an important source of potential employees to employers in these neighboring

Cross County Connection

15

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

9 lists the name and location of the proposed facilities and is keyed to the maps in Appendix B.

4. PROPOSED BICYCLE FACILITIES RECOMMENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION

BICYCLE CORRIDORS: NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN

Of the original 19 existing and proposed facilities that scored at or above the average, nine are proposed and are located in 13 municipalities. These facilities are located close to several of the attractors, thereby deeming them above average in importance for commuting purposes. These proposed bicycle facilities plus the Route 77 proposed facility have the greatest potential to improve the regional bicycle facility network, if constructed. Although other proposed facilities have the potential to improve the regional bicycle commuting network, their lower ranking and limited overall funding dictates that they not be recommended for construction at this time. The proposed facilities recommended for construction are shown on Figure 4 and Table 9.

For purposes of this analysis, Salem County has been divided into two bicycle corridors, northern and southern; refer to Figure 4. The northern corridor includes the municipalities of Pennsville, Penns Grove, Oldsman, Carneys Point, Mannington, Salem City, Pilesgrove and Woodstown. The southern corridor includes the municipalities of Lower Alloways Creek, Quinton, Alloway, Pittsgrove and Elsinboro. Pittsgrove, Upper Pittsgrove and Elmer overlap both corridors. These corridors were derived based on commuter flows. As Table 9 shows, only one proposed route recommended for construction is located in the southern corridor. However, two proposed routes traverse both corridors. The proposed northern routes provide access in to/from population and employment centers in Pennsville, Carneys Point, Salem City and Mannington. They also provide access to bus routes serving Gloucester and New Castle Counties.

Cross County Connection recommends that the proposed facilities shown on Table 9 be considered immediately for implementation. The construction of these facilities will provide improved access to employment destinations for commuters who want to bicycle to work or to a bus route. Appendix B provides detailed maps for the 10 proposed bicycle facilities recommended for construction. In addition to the location of the proposed facility, information is also provided on the bicycle facility’s ranked score and attractors which make the facility a good candidate for construction. Each facility can be found on Figure 2, which also provides a county-wide view of all existing and proposed facilities. Table

Cross County Connection

As mentioned earlier, approximately 50% of Salem County

residents who are employed commute outside the

16

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities

130

Proposed, On-Road Business Complex

Penns Grove

NJ TRANSIT Bus

Southern Corridor

2

Carneys Point

4 Miles

140

40

Gloucester County

Tp NJ

48

42 3

1

Gateway Business Center

295

Northern Corridor

0

Oldmans

45

Pilesgrove

www.transportationchoices.com 856-596-8228 June 2007

Broadway Shopping Center

Deleware River

Pennsville Market Place

Woodstown

77

Lake View Complex

48

45

40 1

Pennsville

8 46

Mannington

Salem City Elsinboro

Upper Pittsgrove

410

412

Figure 4: Salem County Bicycle Facilities Recommended for Construction

2 40

School

Alloway

Elmer

40

55

Pittsgrove

49

Quinton

56

Lower Alloways Creek

Cumberland County

17

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

County. Approximately, 36% of Salem County residents commute to New Castle County, Cumberland County or Gloucester County; refer to Table 8. It is therefore important to ensure that bicycle facilities accommodate this commuting pattern. The northern corridor’s road network and bus routes facilitate commuting to Gloucester County and New Castle County. The southern corridor’s road network and location is more conducive to commuting into Cumberland County, particularly Bridgeton and Vineland.

employment estimates for this project are not reflected in SJTPO’s forecasts. Additionally, SJTPO is revising and updating its population and employment forecasts to 2030.

Salem County’s population is not forecast to increase significantly by 2025. According to the SJTPO, the County’s population is forecast to increase by 5%. Additionally, SJTPO’s employment forecasts show the County to gain approximately 2,260 new jobs between 2000 and 2025; a 9% increase. 2 However, it should be noted that the Gateway Business Park is under construction in Oldsman in the northern section of the County. This business park is expected to attract a significant number of jobs. The first employer is expected to move into the business park spring 2007 with 200 employees. This employment center will significantly increase employment opportunities in the northern section of the County. The 2

Source: SJTPO, Endorsed by Technical Advisory Committee, December 16, 2003. SJTPO is currently revising and updating these preliminary population and employment forecasts to 2030. Once completed, the revised and updated figures will be presented to the SJTPO Board for adoption.

Cross County Connection

18

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

Figure (See Appendix B) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

TABLE 9 PROPOSED BICYCLE FACILITIES RECOMMENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION Corridor Facility Municipality Name/Location Northern & Route 49 Pennsville, Salem City, Quinton Southern Northern & Route 48/40 Carneys Point, Woodstown, Pilesgrove, Southern Upper Pittsgrove, Elmer, Pittsgrove Northern Route 130 Oldsman, Carneys Point, Pennsville, Penns Grove Northern Harding Hwy Carneys Point Northern Salem Woodstown Salem City, Mannington, Pilesgrove Rd (Route 45) Northern Hook Road Pennsville Northern Fort Mott Rd Pennsville Northern Hawks Bridge Rd Carneys Point , Mannington Northern Kings Highway 1 Pilesgrove Southern Bridgeton Pike Upper Pittsgrove (Route 77)

Cross County Connection

19

Score

Type

19

On Road

17

On Road

16

On Road

17 16

On Road On Road

16 16 11 10 7

On Road On Road On Road On Road On-Road

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

Cross County Connection recommends funding the proposed facilities because they will provide modes of alternative transportation for commuters in Salem County. When linked to bicycle facilities and bus routes serving the neighboring counties, these facilities can provide a regional bicycle transportation network established through a coordinated planning effort between county and municipal governments.

SUMMARY Ten proposed bicycle facilities are recommended for construction. Nine of the 10 were chosen because they scored high in the ranking process due to their close proximity to major attractors. Although the tenth facility did not receive an above average score, it is recommended for construction due to its connections with proposed bicycle facilities in Gloucester and Cumberland counties, as well as the fact that it parallels a bus route serving the three counties. Although updated employment forecasts are not available for Salem County, it is assumed that the Gateway Industrial Park in Oldsman will have a significant impact on job growth in the County. Therefore, Cross County Connection also recommends the County of Salem and the Township of Oldsman consider adding the business park to the county’s proposed bicycle network. At the present time, the business park is approximately three miles from the nearest bicycle route, proposed along Route 130. The proposed Route 130 and Route 40/48 bicycle routes have the potential to provide access to the Gateway Business Park for many Salem County residents living in the northeastern section of the County. Additionally, the Route 423 and Route 402 buses travel along Route 130. The bus and bicycle routes could provide access to the business park for many Salem County residents, as well as residents from the surrounding area.

Cross County Connection

20

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

5. CONCLUSION

PLANNING TOOLS

This analysis has identified 10 proposed bicycle facilities that could be considered for construction. To be considered for state funding, the municipalities must initiate certain steps before applying for funding. The completion of these steps may better position the municipalities for state-funded technical assistance and funding to build the facilities.

To ensure implementation of the Task Force Bicycle Plan, local planning tools should be in place and compatible with the Plan. It is recommended that municipalities and counties review their planning documents to ensure that they not only permit bicycle and pedestrian facilities, but encourage or even require their construction. At a minimum, the municipal Master Plan should include a Bicycle/Pedestrian Element that outlines a bicycle network within the municipality. Consideration should be given to providing linkages to existing and proposed bicycle facilities in neighboring municipalities as well as to employment destinations and public transit stops.

BICYCLE TASK FORCE First, a bicycle task force or committee should be established to oversee the planning effort. The task force should consist of community leaders, citizens, local, county, regional and state representatives and officials and planning and engineering officials, and other identified stakeholders. The goal of this task force should be to develop and design a bicycle Plan for at the municipal and county levels. The Plan should identify priority areas for implementing bicycle facilities. These areas should be based on a Plan that accommodates bicyclists throughout the community as well as enables them to connect to bicycle and public transit facilities outside the community. Recommendations should be both site specific (an intersection) and non site specific, such as installing bicycle friendly drainage grates. The NJDOT can provide technical assistance to those municipalities and counties that want to create a bicycle Plan (refer to Appendix B).

Additionally, the municipal land development ordinance should be amended to include requirements for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Standards for bicycle facilities and sidewalks should be specified in the ordinance. These standards should be in accordance with the New Jersey Site Improvements Standards and the planning and design guidelines found in NJDOT’s Bicycle Compatible Roadways and Bikeways report. 3 Ensuring that local planning documents permit and encourage bicycle facilities demonstrates the local government’s support of and commitment to developing a viable bicycle network within the community. This support and commitment is necessary to ensure success.

3

Visit www.state.nj.us/transportation/commuter/bike/resources.shtm for report.

Cross County Connection

21

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

to Appendix B for an expanded list of programs that provide funding and planning assistance for bicycle projects.

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Funding for bicycle facilities in New Jersey is provided primarily through NJDOT under its Local Aid program and at the federal level through the Transportation Enhancements (TE) program. Funding through both programs is awarded annually through a highly competitive process. Demand for these funds far exceeds the funding available. The State’s bikeways program provides funds to municipalities and counties for the construction of bicycle projects. According to the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, from 2000 to 2005, New Jersey municipalities submitted applications through this program totaling $157 million; however less than $39 million has been awarded because of the funding shortfall.

SUMMARY This project has documented the existing and proposed bicycle facilities in Salem County. This inventory will be updated periodically to reflect changes made at the local and county level. The County and the municipalities have made good progress towards creating a bicycle network that links to public transit. This project has documented the existing and proposed bicycle facilities in Salem County and provided a ranking process to prioritize those facilities that should be constructed initially. The inventory will be updated periodically to reflect changes made at the local and county level. Salem County and its municipalities have made good progress towards proposing a bicycle network that links to public transit and provides inter-county connections. The ground work has been laid, and a solid foundation established, however there is considerable opportunity in Salem County to improve the County’s bicycle network, through implementation of these proposed bicycle facilities.

The same is true under the federal TE program. In 2003 and 2004, New Jersey municipalities submitted 367 applications totaling almost $200 million for bicycle and pedestrian projects. However, New Jersey’s federal funding allocation only enabled the State to approve 46 projects totaling $18.4 million. 4 Given the highly competitive funding picture, municipalities and counties must have extremely strong grant applications. It is Cross County Connection’s hope that those municipalities and counties that seek funding to fill in the gaps that are identified and prioritized in southern New Jersey’s bicycle network will have a greater chance of receiving funding. Refer

A region-wide bicycle network will improve the quality of life for southern New Jersey’s residents and provide greater economic development opportunities. By working together as a region, southern New Jersey will be better positioned to attract federal and state funds for the implementation of bicycle facilities.

4

Tri-State Transportation Campaign. Skimping on Sidewalks: New Jersey’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Deficit, April 2005. Visit www.tstc.org for a copy of the report.

Cross County Connection

22

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

Appendix A Bicycle Facilities Inventory: Salem County Table of Attributes Municipality

Path Name

Status

Type

Length (miles)

NJ Transit Bus Routes Within 2 Miles

Source

410

Alloway Twp

Alloway Twp

Alloway Aldine Rd

Proposed

On-Road

4.4

Alloway Twp

Circuit Route 640

Proposed

On-Road

3.0

Alloway Twp

Main Street Alloway

Proposed

On-Road

1.1

Alloway, Upper Pittsgrove, Elmer

Shirley Rd

Proposed

On-Road

6.2

410

NJ State Plan

Carney's Point

Harding Highway

Proposed

On-Road

4.5

402, 423, 468

NJ State Plan

Carney's Point Twp, Mannington Carney's Point, Woodstown, Pilesgrove, Upper Pittsgrove, Elmer, Pittsgrove

Hawks Bridge Rd

Proposed

On-Road

3.3

402, 423, 468

NJ State Plan

Route 40

Proposed

On-Road

22.9

401, 402, 410, 423, 468

NJ State Plan

Lower Alloways Creek

Route 623

Proposed

On-Road

1.3

Mannington Twp Oldsman, Carney's Point, Pennsville

Pointers Auburn Rd

Proposed

On-Road

3.2

401, 468

NJ State Plan

Route 130

Proposed

On-Road

8.8

402, 423, 468

NJ State Plan

Pennsville

Fort Mott Rd

Proposed

On-Road

1.6

402, 423, 468

NJ State Plan

Pennsville

Hook Rd

Proposed

On-Road

4.6

402, 423, 468

NJ State Plan

Pennsville, Pittsgrove

Willow Grove Rd

Proposed

On-Road

5.7

Pennsville, Salem City, Quinton

Route 49

Proposed

On-Road

20.5

Cross County Connection

23

Alloway Twp

NJ State Plan

NJ State Plan 401, 402, 423, 468

NJ State Plan

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

Municipality

Path Name

Status

Type

Length (miles)

Proposed

On-Road

1.4

Existing

On-Road

1.1

NJ Transit Bus Routes Within 2 Miles

Source

Pittsgrove

Centerton Rd

Pilesgrove

Azalea Rd

Pilesgrove

Commissioners Pike

Proposed

On-Road

1.2

Pilesgrove

Existing

On-Road

2.3

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Proposed

On-Road

0.6

401, 468

NJ State Plan

Pilesgrove

Kings Highway Kings Highway Proposed Segment 1 Kings Highway Proposed Segment 2

Proposed

On-Road

0.4

401

NJ State Plan

Pilesgrove Twp

Grandview Drive

Existing

On-Road

0.2

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Pilesgrove Twp

Marlton Rd Pilesgrove Twp Off Road Bike Path

Existing

On-Road

1.0

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Existing

Off-Road

0.4

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Grant Street Pittsgrove Off-Road Bike Path (ID 892)

Existing

On-Road

0.2

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Existing

Off-Road

0.7

Proposed

On-Road

2.2

468

Alloway Twp

Salem City, Mannington, Pilesgrove

Quinton Alloway Rd Salem Woodstown Rd/Route 45

Proposed

On-Road

8.8

401, 468

NJ State Plan

Upper Pittsgrove Twp

Bridgeton Pike

Proposed

On-Road

3.4

410

NJ State Plan

Upper Pittsgrove Twp

Pole Tavern Rd

Proposed

On-Road

4.2

410

NJ State Plan

Woodstown Boro

Borton Rd

Existing

On-Road

0.1

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Pilesgrove

Pilesgrove Twp Pilesgrove, Woodstown Boro Pittsgrove Quinton Twp

Cross County Connection

24

NJ State Plan 401

NJ State Plan NJ State Plan

NJ State Plan

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

Municipality

Path Name

Status

Type

Length (miles)

NJ Transit Bus Routes Within 2 Miles

Source

Woodstown Boro

Elms Street

Existing

On-Road

0.4

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Woodstown Boro

Howard Ave

Existing

On-Road

0.1

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Woodstown Boro

Main Street Woodstown

Existing

On-Road

0.1

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Woodstown Boro

School Lane

Existing

On-Road

0.1

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Woodstown Boro

Harris Lane

Existing

On-Road

0.1

401, 468

Pilesgrove Twp

Existing Facilities:

6.8 Miles

Proposed Facilities:

113.3Miles

On-Road: Off-Road:

5.7 Miles 1.1 Miles

On-Road: Off-Road:

113.3 Miles 0.0 Miles

Total Facilities:

Cross County Connection

35 Paths 120.1 Miles

25

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County 130

46

8

Pennsville Center

295

NJTP

40

551

Pointers Au burn Rd

se

Chestnut

adw Bro

wn Ki

hvi lle

653

on

t uin

Elsinboro Twp

Q

Ha

nc

g

rid

sB

k oc

nR

r

le

ck

Si

owa n All

to Quin

d

y Rd 581

Burden Hill Rd

468

540

Acton Station Rd

into

Alloway Twp

Rd

d

Qu

49

y

1

40

ich R

Pk

Lake View Complex

Rd

enw

es

t

Rd

Gre

8

an

iev

wn

to

ds

oo W

We lc

46

Gr

Gr

ck

w H

S

45

Ne

y

m ale

ay

Figure 5: Pennsville, Salem City, Quinton Route 49

s ng

llto

Hoo k Rd ou

d

5

R ck

Rd

hth

Pennsville Market Place

540

620

Haines

lltown

Marsha

Pilesgrove Twp

Mannington Twp

Ne

St

Pennsville Twp Broadway Market Places Place

s

e idg Br

field

Rd

ine

s wk Ha

le ap

40 2

M

Ha

Pitts

Lig

Wiley

49

Cemete ry Rd

Delaware River

Ha

Appendix B: Proposed Bicycle Facilities

nt

ui

Q on o or lb ar

M Rd

School

Rd

1

o

<0.5 4 <0.25 12 19

h ric Je

Route 49 Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

Quinton Twp

Proposed On Road

d Jericho R

Business Park 400

NJ TRANSIT Bus

26

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County Appendix B: Proposed Bicycle Facilities

77

410

Allowa

Rd t

Wil

Pittsgrove Twp

low

Gro

ve

n

w hto

Rd

NJ TRANSIT Bus

Route 48/40 Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

27

Fork Bridge Rd

mS Sale

rc Po Upper Deck Rd

Business Park 400

611

Rd

Proposed On Road

Shir

d ley R

ve

1

Elmer Boro gton

School

w

wn

Gro

Upper Pittsgrove Twp

to

Rd

Ro

re

eville

llow

Da

Monro

tch

wn

40

Du

ry

to

Wi

Rd

ds

n

dstown

6

W oo

Burlin

y Woo

581

er

Cemete

M a M in ai n

e

v Ta

Lake View Complex

m

ale

Lan

ne

45

Whig

Pi

burn Rd

y

1

40

S Old

Woodstown Boro

605

town

Pointers Au

Hw

lton

e York

Ki

s ng

n

Richwood Rd

Rd sA

ub

ur

Rd

Po

ge

int er

Rd

rid

620

631

County Home

ck

sB Marsh

alltown

dL

Mar

n

es

Ne

le

wk

ap

Ha

M

Ha in

rbe

Pike

the

Brid geto n

Fea

Carneys Point Twp

Pennsville Center

Pilesgrove Twp

ers

646

ion

P

iss

NJT

mm

40

Auburn Rd

Co

8 46

2 40

e

48

Rd

42 3

sville

n Pen

rov

rn bu Au

130

sG

Pole Tarven Rd

nn

Ste wa rt

295

Pe

Sharptown Auburn Rd

Figure 6: Carneys Point, Woodstown, Pilesgrove, Upper Pittsgrove, Elmer, Pittsgrove Route 48/40

<0.5 5 <1.5 11 17

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County Appendix B: Proposed Bicycle Facilities Figure 8: Carneys Point Harding Highway

Figure 7: Oldmans, Carneys Point, Pennsville, Penns Grove Route 130

ille

ll i Straughen M

2

Rd

G

Rd ek Cre

e

8 46

illy

48 NJTP

m

ickto wn

Pedr

3

ol

40

n ai M

Av e d oo fw ol

G

sv nn Pe

Qu

y mp

Stu

Ga

n Cr ow 2 40

ia

423

Virg in

8 46

ad l Bro

Mil

402

ell Sh y wa

Proposed On Road

d

d

R Pennsville Auburn

d

Carneys Point Twp

nR

nR

ad

DRBA Business Centers

ur

tow

Bro

ub

Wiley Rd

40

Business Park

Business Park 400

Gr ov eA Sc ho olh ou l se ra s

d

1

Proposed On Road

Oldmans Twp

nn

eld

Rd

Wiley R

nt Ce

n

School

School 1

8

to w

y

b

y

w

H

Carneys Point Twp

Route 130 Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

Au

NJTP

ge

gfi

urn

ng

di 40

or

Hw

s 551

ar

A

e

H

urn ub

ov

Oldmans Twp

Ge

ing

nn

Gr

Sp rin

295

nd

rd

295

la

Ha

n Pe

D

Hollywood

n

ow

v

ns

DRBA Business Text Centers

Gateway Business Center

Pe

Delaware River

Pennsville Twp

ille

gh

Pe

601

Hi

t on

up

Shell Rd

130

nt

48

130

Mi

ki

6th

7

Rd

ll St

r Pe

Penns Grove Boro

re

d

ua

Gateway Business Center

42

Penns Grove

oo

Sq

Po

in t

Rd

nt er

fw

Ce

400

NJ TRANSIT Bus

NJ TRANSIT Bus

Harding Highway Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

<0.5 3 <1 13 16

28

<0.5 3 <0.25 9 17

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County Appendix B: Proposed Bicycle Facilities Figure 9: Salem City, Mannington, Pilesgrove Salem Woodstown Road (Route 45)

468

Rd

Q

d

ay R

ow n All uinto

oa dw a

Hi gh An lan na d po Ka lis ns as

Mo

tt

lem

rt School

School

Proposed On Road

1

Business Park 400

10

ch

tow

d

669

n

Br

Woodstown Boro

Pennsville Twp 1

ur

y

n

Broadway Shopping Centers Center

551

40

Hook R

ai

Rd

Pitts

field

Mannington Twp

Mahoney

Fo

Acton Station Rd

49

M

NJTP

Wiley

2

Ch

Carneys Point

49

468

es

P Salem ky City

Lake View Complex

ich

iev

Rd

lem

Sa

enw

Gr

Old

295

130

40

Delaware River

Sa

ville

t

4

Pennsville Center

Gre

Salem City

an

1,

40

68

Mannington Twp

We lch

9

w

d oo W

Rd

d nR

sto

lem Sa

45

Gr

s

g in

H

ck

wy

dstown

n Ha llto w

K

Pointers Aub

urn Rd

lltown

Ne

423

45

40

ry

Rd

ge

Haines

County Home

Pilesgrove Twp

n Gra nt

y Woo

s

ck Ne

Marsha

Mar lto

40

Cemete

ine

rid sB wk

Ha

Ha

Allowa

Center

Figure 10: Pennsville Hook Road

Proposed On Road Business Park

NJ TRANSIT Bus

400

Salem Woodston Road (Route 45) <0.5 Miles to Commuter Roadway 2 Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles <0.25 Miles from Business Park 10 Number of Schools within 2 Miles 16 Overall Score

NJ TRANSIT Bus

Hook Road Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

29

Pennsville Market Place

<0.5 3 <0.25 7 16

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County Appendix B: Proposed Bicycle Facilities

Figure 12: Carneys Point, Mannington Gr ov Hawks Bridge Road e Rd

40 2

ell

d

d kR NJ TRANSIT Bus

d nR ur ub sA

Rd

Business Park

ck

Mars

Proposed On Road

s

Ne

Hoo

ine

Rd

30

Ha

ge

Mannington Twp

Hawks Bridge Road Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

<0.5 3 >0.25 6 16

631

rid

ay

400

Wiley R

er

le

School

NJ TRANSIT Bus

40

int

tt R Mo rt

NJTP

551

551

Pennsville Twp 1

48

sB wk

Pennsville Market Place

Auburn Rd

Carneys Point Twp

Ha

Fo

ville

540

Pennsvile Center

ap

adw

Proposed On Road

Fort Mott Road Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

wa

y

M

Bro

Pennsville Twp

Business Park 400

140

49

551

468

1

3

295

49

630

School

P

Sh

d

field

42

Bro ad

4

Br

oa

295

Pitts Mahoney

s enn

130

d

11

Broadway Shopping Center

Hook R

n

dw 02 ay

Sa lem

Delaware River

Hi gh An lan na d po Ka lis ns as

Delaware River

Po

Ch 669 ur ch tow

Pennsville Center

46 8

Figure 11: Pennsville Fort Mott Road

12

646

wn

hallto

wn

to

ll Ha

<0.5 3 <2 1 11

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County Appendix B: Proposed Bicycle Facilities

Figure 14: Upper Pittsgrove Bridgeton Pike/Rt 77

Figure 13: Pilesgrove Kings Highway

on

Sa

Pik

e

wM

ill get Brid

roev

Mon

n

77

40

ille

n

ai n

14

to w

er

M

ds

v Ta

County Home

660

Wo o

n

Kings Highway Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

y

ern

1 400

x

NJ TRANSIT Bus

Ba ile

Ta v

erso

Proposed On Road

1

Glassboro

40

Millb rooke 40

Upper Pittsgrove

Fo

400

le

605

Woodstown Boro

Rd 468

1

1

40

Po

Jeff

lton

School

45

636

Mar

Rd

Burlington

wy sH ng Ki 13

d

ln

ne

ks

ne

on

ry R

co

Dil

77

410

602

Ai

Lin

Whi g La

wn

n

sM ill R

d

Po int

620

Pilesgrove Twp

he

to

dL

el

GLOUCESTER COUNTY

Pi

ins

Po rc

Rd

Ro b

h

Auburn

40

GLOUCESTER

rc

ur

rbe

Pilesgrove Twp

hu

re

the

La

C

Da

Fea

Rd

an

rt

bu rn

vi

wa

Au

or a

Ste

Po

int

er

sA

ub

ur

n

NJTP

Sharptown Auburn Rd

Oldsman Twp

Swedes boro Rd

M

Bridgeton Pike/Rt 77 Miles to Commuter Roadway Number of Bus Routes Within 2 Miles Miles from Business Park Number of Schools within 2 Miles Overall Score

<0.5 2 <2 1 10

31

School Proposed On Road NJ TRANSIT Bus

<0.5 1 >2 2 7

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

APPENDIX C: Funding and Technical Assistance Resources for Bicycle Facilities

jurisdiction. Public transportation and other transportation projects are also included.

The following are possible sources of funding for the design and construction of the proposed bicycle facilities. If a municipality is interested in a particular program, it is recommended that they contact that program’s administrative agency directly or visit their website for more information. Please refer to the New Jersey Smart Growth Planning and Program Resources Guide for a complete list of all of the programs that the State offers in various areas of smart growth. The Resources Guide is located on the internet at: www.state.nj.us/dca/osg/docs/techassist110102.pdf.

Local Aid for Centers of Place Agency: NJDOT Local Aid and Economic Development Contact: District 4, Cherry Hill Office 856-486-6618 www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/ This program is available to communities that qualify as approved Centers of Place through the State Development and Redevelopment Plan (SDRP) and also certain Pinelands Communities as determined by the Pinelands Commission. Funds are available for non-traditional transportation, such as bikeways, that advance municipal growth management objectives.

Municipal Aid Program Agency: NJDOT Local Aid and Economic Development Contact: District 4, Cherry Hill Office 856-486-6618 www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/

Local Planning Assistance-Bicycle and Pedestrian Agency: NJDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs Contact: Sheree Davis 609-530-6551 www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/

Funds are appropriated by the NJ Legislature for municipalities in each county based on a formula contained in legislation. Additionally, $5 million was allotted for those municipalities that qualify for Urban Aid. Urban Aid is distributed by a formula that is computed by the Department of Community Affairs. Road improvement projects such as resurfacing, rehabilitation or reconstruction and signalization are funded from the $78.75 million (FY 2007) in municipal aid distributed by formula.

This program provides technical assistance to counties and municipalities that desire to undertake various planning activities for non-motorized modes. Studies undertaken are to be locally-driven planning studies and require a partnership agreement to commit staff and financial resources. This is an extremely competitive program.

County Aid Program Agency: NJDOT Local Aid and Economic Development Contact: District 4, Cherry Hill Office 856-486-6618 www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/ Funds are appropriated by the NJ Legislature annually for the improvement of public roads and bridges under county

Cross County Connection

32

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

This program provides assistance to governments and nonprofit land owners for developing and maintaining trail facilities. Trails can be for non-motorized, multi-use and motorized purposes.

Transit Village Initiative Agency: NJDOT Contact: Monica Etz 609-530-5957 Email: [email protected] http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/community/village/

Safe Routes to Schools Program Agency: NJDOT Local Aid and Economic Development Contact: District 4, Cherry Hill Office 856-486-6618 www.state.nj.us/transportation/community/srts/

The Transit Village Initiative helps to redevelop and revitalize communities around transit facilities to make them an appealing choice for people to live, work and play, thereby reducing reliance on the automobile. Transit Villages stress mixed-use developments that incorporate residential and commercial uses. Bicycle facility planning and connections to the Transit Village may be one of the aspects taken into consideration when the State examines a municipality’s application.

This program funds projects that improve safety for school children walking or bicycling to school. It will focus on projects that create safer walkways, bikeways and street crossings near schools. It also increases pedestrian safety awareness and education among motorists and school children.

Local Bikeway Program Agency: NJDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs Contact: District 4, Cherry Hill Office 856-486-6618 www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/

Smart Future Planning Grants Agency: NJ DCA Office of Smart Growth Contact: 609-633-9769 http://www.state.nj.us/dca/osg

This program promotes alternate modes of transportation. All municipalities are eligible to apply for funds through this program. As New Jersey continues to work towards 1,000 miles of dedicated bikeways, consideration will be given to bikeways that are physically separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open space or barrier.

This program provides funds for planning initiatives that meet Smart Growth objectives, including more livable and sustainable communities. Encouraged proposals include: those consistent with established statewide and regional planning precepts; multiple municipality or county partnerships, so as to effectively address issues that transcend local municipal boundaries. Matching funds are not required, but applicants are encouraged to seek multiple sources of funding, including offerings of in-house staff time. The Smart Future Grants support bicycle facility planning.

National Recreational Trails Program Agency: NJDEP Office of Natural Lands Management Contact: Larry Miller 609-984-1014 Email: [email protected] www.state.nj.us/dep/parksandforests/natural/njtrails.html

Cross County Connection

33

June 2007

Bicycle Facilities Inventory and Analysis: Salem County

Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program (RTCA) Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS) Contact: Dave Lange 215-597-6477 www.nps.gov/rtca

NJ Mini-Grants for Healthy Community Development Agency: NJ Department of Health and Senior Services Contact: 609-292-7837 www.state.nj.us/health/fhs/njcpfs/academy.shtml Mini-Grants for Healthy Community Development – The goal of this program is to motivate, activate and energize communities to become healthy and physically active. Ten to twenty grant awards will be made available to municipalities through a competitive application process. Community teams are eligible to apply for grants ranging from $2,500 up to $10,000. A total of $100,000 will be awarded. Community teams need not attend the Leaders’ Academy to apply for a grant; however, those that have attended the Academy will receive first consideration.

The NPS provides assistance to communities to conserve their local natural recourses and develop new close-to-home outdoor recreation opportunities. The RTCA program does not provide direct grants. RTCA staff helps on a variety of natural resource conservation and outdoor recreation projects including multi-use trails, single-purpose trails, greenways, water trails/blueways, river corridor conservation, land protection and park planning. Transportation Enhancements Program Agency: NJDOT Local Aid and Economic Development Contact: District 4, Cherry Hill Office 856-486-6618 www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/

Local Aid for Designated Transit Villages Agency: NJDOT Local Aid and Economic Development Contact: District 4, Cherry Hill Office 856-486-6618 www.state.nj.us/transportation/business/localaid/

This program is available through SAFETEA-LU 5 in order to support non-traditional transportation projects whose objectives support: more livable communities, enhance the travel experience, and promote new transportation investment partnerships. The program focus is on transportation projects designed to preserve and protect environmental and cultural resources, and to promote alternative modes of transportation. Bicycle and Pedestrian improvements are included among the projects that are fundable under this program.

This program is available to communities that have been designated as Transit Villages by the State of New Jersey. Its focus is on projects in a community that plans and encourages mixed-use redevelopment near passenger transportation facilities. Transportation initiatives may include bike paths, sidewalks, streetscaping and signage.

5

A federal law that authorizes funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, transit programs, and for other purposes including funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects.

Cross County Connection

34

June 2007