Investigating Bike Safety: What 5 metrics reveal about a proposed shared-use path in greater Philadelphia

To evaluate three routing options for a shared-use path in greater Philadelphia, StreetLight analyzes five key bike and pedestrian safety indicators that agencies can use to identify effective interventions and make the most of funding.

Road safety is in crisis. Although pedestrian deaths dropped in the first half of 2025, pedestrian fatalities rates remain higher than before the 2019 pandemic, when a surge in high-speed driving led to a spike in crashes.¹ 

As agencies work to save lives by making streets safer for walking and biking, they must first understand what factors are creating danger for vulnerable road users (VRUs).

Because road safety is impacted by many factors that can vary significantly by neighborhood, corridor, or even individual intersection, a data-driven approach to safety planning—coupled with local context—is crucial.

Our U.S. Safe Streets Index offers a high-level analysis of how metros can identify promising levers for road safety improvements, ranking the top 100 U.S. metro areas across five safety factors: VMT, speed-related pedestrian risk, speed differentials, truck activity, and residential speeds.

But when agencies need to drill down to answer questions like “what’s the best place for a new bike lane?” or “how can I maximize the impact of available safety funding?” they need even more detailed data on what’s happening on each road or intersection in the area they’re considering. 

In this article, we dive deep on how agencies can use granular road safety metrics to ensure interventions will have the greatest possible impact by analyzing a community in the Philadelphia metro that is exploring a new shared-use path.

Key Takeaways

• Measuring bike and pedestrian activity, vehicle volumes, vehicle speeds, hard braking, and truck activity can help planners determine the most impactful infrastructure improvements for VRU safety.

• Segment-level bike and pedestrian activity data is key to identifying where VRUs are exposed to dangerous conditions and prioritizing interventions that support demand and ensure safety.

• To ensure a proposed shared-use path in Maple Shade, a Philadelphia suburb, supports safer connectivity for walkers and bikers, StreetLight finds planners may want to consider additional improvements at key segments with high vehicle volumes, speeds, and hard braking events.

• For a fuller picture on active transportation safety, planners can combine the 5 metrics studied here with additional context from crash data, turning movements, speeds by time of day, and more.

Improving Active Transportation in Maple Shade, NJ

Burlington County, New Jersey is one of many communities working toward Vision Zero goals to eliminate traffic fatalities entirely — and big investments in improved biking and walking infrastructure are core to their strategy.

At the heart of the county’s efforts is the Southern Regional Trails initiative. This project aims to connect biking and walking paths across the county to the greater Philadelphia region’s Circuit Trails network.²

Maple Shade, NJ is one of several townships included in this initiative. Located less than 10 miles east of Philadelphia, PA, the township is part of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRCP), the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) that serves the Philadelphia metro area.

With the help of Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) funding, DVRCP and Burlington County officials are hoping to connect Maple Shade to the larger Circuit Trails system by establishing continuous walking and biking paths between Maple Shade and its immediate neighbors.

Identifying the Best Path for Walkers and Bikers: Three Alternatives

To ensure the new walking and biking paths will be safe, convenient, and accessible, planners must understand not only the feasibility of installing new infrastructure but also the risks posed by nearby vehicle traffic and how cyclists and pedestrians are using existing routes today.

This helps ensure that available funding translates into improved connectivity and safety for VRUs.

Area planners are exploring three potential routes for the new shared-use paths in Maple Shade. Each of these options has unique profiles for safety, cost, and usability.

The planners preferred route combines safety and feasibility advantages, getting vulnerable road users off the busy Main Street for a portion of the route, while also being the easiest and most cost-effective to construct.

The first alternate route (Alternate 1) would place the new walking and biking path entirely along Maple Shade’s Main Street, presenting drawbacks for ease of construction as well as safety.

Because Alternate 1 requires the use of on-road bike lanes along Maple Shade’s main thoroughfare, planners note it “may not be suitable for all users,” such as casual cyclists and children who are not comfortable biking alongside areas of high traffic.²

Lastly, Alternate 2 would establish a Rail-with-Trail along an existing active railway corridor. While this route presents significant safety advantages by keeping walkers and bikers off the road, it would also be the most difficult and costly to construct.

ANALYSIS: What five safety factors reveal about the three potential routes

There are many factors that contribute to road safety for cyclists and pedestrians. To evaluate the safety of each proposed walking and biking path through Maple Shade, we used StreetLight’s detailed metrics to understand some of the most important factors impacting safety:

1. Bike & Pedestrian Activity 

2. Vehicle Volumes 

3. Vehicle Speeds 

4. Hard Braking & Acceleration Events 

5. Truck Activity 

When combined with local context such a crash data, High Injury Network maps, roadway design, and land use, these safety indicators can help planners at agencies everywhere better understand VRU safety and prioritize infrastructure to improve protections for walkers and bikers.

Bike and Pedestrian Activity 

When considering changes to walking and biking infrastructure, it’s helpful to first understand existing bike and pedestrian (bike/ped) demand. Bike/ped trends will likely shift after the new shared-use path is constructed, but understanding where people are (and aren’t) walking and biking today helps highlight a few things:

• Places where cyclists and pedestrians are currently exposed to dangerous road conditions like high vehicle volumes, speeds, or hard braking

• Areas cyclists and pedestrians may be avoiding due to perceived safety risks

• Road segments beyond Main Street or Front Street that walkers and bikers may take on their way to the new shared-use path

To measure bike and pedestrian volumes in the area, we used our Active Transportation Snapshot, which provides segment-level Annual Average Daily Pedestrian Traffic (AADPT) and Annual Average Daily Bike Traffic (AADBT) for all roads and trails across the U.S. You can learn more about the Active Transportation Snapshot from our Measure Every Mode webinar, or see the data science behind the metrics in this white paper.

Areas with high pedestrian volumes today include sections of Main Street between Coles Ave and Fellowship Rd, North Forklanding Rd, and South Lippincott Ave. This has a few potential ramifications for the new path:

• Pedestrians are active on downtown segments of Main Street, despite areas of high vehicle volumes, speeds, and hard braking events (see sections below).

• However, pedestrians are less active on segments of Main Street to the west of Coles Ave. This could indicate perceived safety risks on these segments, and/or fewer destinations that drive foot traffic.

• N ;Forklanding Rd and S Lippincott Ave may be key connectors for pedestrians traveling to or from the new mixed-use path. Thought should be paid to how pedestrians can travel safely between these roadways and the chosen route.

From the map above, a few areas of high bike activity stand out along S Maple Ave, Center Ave, N Forklanding Rd, and sections of Broadway. Compared to pedestrians, cyclists are less likely to take Main Street, though the road does see some bike traffic, especially between Forklanding Rd and Fellowship Rd. This could signal a few takeaways for planners:

• Cyclists do use Main Street despite a lack of dedicated bike infrastructure, which could be exposing them to dangerous conditions.

• S Maple Ave and N Forklanding Rd could act as key connectors for cyclists traveling to or from the new shared-use path. Planners may want to consider how cyclists can safely travel between these roadways and the three potential routes.

Vehicle Volumes

More vehicles create higher crash risk, especially in cases where vulnerable road users are sharing the road with drivers, like in the case of on-road bike lanes or intersection crossings. Likewise, higher vehicle volumes reduce comfort for VRUs, leading less confident cyclists, kids, and disabled folks, among others, to avoid these roadways.

To evaluate how vehicle volumes impact safety on each of the three proposed routes, we first zoomed in on segments with over 10k annual average daily traffic (AADT). This is a benchmark that often indicates a need for additional safety measures for pedestrians depending on roadway design factors like number of lanes and crossing distance. For example, the FHWA advises that marked crosswalks alone aren’t sufficient to protect pedestrians when they cross multi-lane roadways with AADT at or above 10k.³

Five segments in the analysis area meet this threshold, all of them clustered around the intersection between Main Street and Highway 73, at the eastern edge of the Maple Shade jurisdiction. These segments are part of both the preferred route and Alternate 1.

While all other road segments fall below the 10k threshold, the bulk of E Main Street still sees relatively high vehicle volumes for planners to be aware of. Below, segments highlighted in yellow indicate segments with volumes above 8k AADT. Several segments east of Pine Ave are included in the preferred route and Alternate 1, while the segments west of Pine are only included in Alternate 1.

Vehicle Speeds 

Vehicle speed is one of the biggest factors in road safety. When a vehicle is traveling at 30 mph, a pedestrian struck by that vehicle has an 8% chance of dying and a 50% chance of suffering serious injury, according to research by IIHS.⁴ At 50 mph, those risks skyrocket to 82% for fatalities and 95% for serious injury.

Average vehicle speeds along sections of Main Street could present concerns for bike and pedestrian safety. The highest average vehicle speeds are concentrated on segments west of Coles Avenue and east of Stiles Avenue.

Within the Maple Shade jurisdiction, the highest average vehicle speed on any potential route segment is 35 mph. This average speed is observed on a few segments between Cole Ave and the Merchantville border.

Meanwhile, several other segments along Main Street also see average speeds of 30 mph or above (shown in yellow above). While some of these segments are avoided by the preferred route, others are included in both the preferred route and Alternate 1.

In addition to average speeds, 85^th percentile speeds can be helpful in evaluating road safety. The 85^th percentile speed metric is commonly used to identify speeding trends along a corridor. Speeding vehicles are especially dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists as well as other road users.

Both the preferred route and Alternate 1 include these segments with the highest observed 85^th percentile speeds. If one of these routes is selected, traffic calming measures may be needed to help reduce vehicle speeds in key locations.

Additionally, vehicle speeds can vary significantly by time of day. Peak congestion hours may see reduced speeds, while nighttime speeding can be more severe, and may compound safety risks due to reduced visibility for both drivers and VRUs. Planners may want to look further at how speeds vary by time of day to understand the severity of the risk vehicles pose and evaluate other potential improvements such as street lighting or speed cameras. Vehicle speeds by time of day are available through StreetLight.

Hard Braking Events 

When vehicles slam on the brakes, that can be a warning sign for planners. A concentration of hard braking events at a particular location could signal issues with visibility, signal timing, or other road design and operations concerns that may be resulting in near-miss scenarios. This metric is particularly important for getting proactive about safety planning because it acts as a leading, not lagging indicator of safety risk.

The highest concentration of hard braking events (marked with a 1 in the image above) overlaps with segments of West Main Street that see high vehicle speeds, west of the Coles Avenue intersection. This intersection must be navigated by VRUs if either the preferred route or Alternate 1 is selected. It marks the spot where the preferred route diverts walkers and bikers north along Coles Ave to connect with Front Street.

Other intersections with hard braking events (2, 3, and 4 on the map above) would be avoided by the preferred route and Alternate 2, but not Alternate 1.

Truck Activity 

Because trucks are heavier vehicles that also restrict visibility for drivers, they pose additional risks to vulnerable road users.

Truck activity is mostly observed at the Main Street/Highway 73 intersection at the eastern edge of both the preferred route and Alternate 1.

The heavier weights, larger frames, and lower visibility of heavy-duty trucks make them particularly dangerous for VRUs, but medium-duty trucks also present heightened risks compared to the average passenger vehicle.

Truck activity (both heavy- and medium-duty) is relatively low along the bulk of the proposed routes. However, higher volumes observed at the Main Street/Highway 73 intersection could warrant additional consideration if either the preferred route or Alternate 1 is selected. Planners would need to ensure the intersection geometry accounts for potential truck and VRU conflict zones.

Choosing a Winner: Which route is best for walking and biking?

Overall, each of the three potential routes for Maple Shade’s new walking and biking path has advantages and drawbacks. Analyzing safety indicators like vehicle volumes, speeds, hard braking, and current active transportation activity can not only help planners choose the best path, but also reveal potential locations where additional safety measures might be needed to support active transportation.

Based on our analysis above, the preferred path emerges as a strong option that helps balance safety concerns with convenience for walkers and bikers and cost feasibility considerations. It helps reduce overall exposure to vehicle volumes and high-speed segments and avoid certain hard braking hotspots.

However, some of the most dangerous sections of Main Street—based on hard braking, vehicle speeds, volumes, and truck activity—are still included in the preferred route. If this route is selected, consideration should be taken to mitigating these safety risks at these key locations. For example, traffic calming measures may be considered near the Main St./Coles Ave and Main St/Pine Ave intersections.

Since walkers and bikers are already using Main Street today, Alternate 1 could provide a convenient route for these road users if special care is taken to address key segments and intersections where vehicle speeds, volumes, and hard braking events are concentrated. This might include measures like daylighting, accessible pedestrian signals, widened sidewalks, signal timing adjustments, and separated or buffered bike lanes.

Finally, despite some concerns with financial feasibility, Alternative 2 is the clear frontrunner from a safety standpoint, as it completely avoids the higher traffic volumes, speeds, and hard braking events along Main St and only requires walkers and bikers to contend with vehicles at certain lower volume and lower speed intersections. However, if feasibility makes this option challenging, the analyses above can help planners identify which other route is most advantageous AND prioritize the right interventions to maximize safety.

Other ways to use data to advance safety in your community

Agencies often rely on data from permanent sensors, crash reports, manual counts, or traveler surveys to inform road safety projects like this one. But these sources can have drawbacks, including limited roadway coverage, narrow temporal granularity, or bias.

Crash data is often delayed, incomplete, or inconsistent, so relying on this data alone can make it difficult to act quickly of safety risks. Meanwhile, traditional sensors may also fail to capture walking or biking activity, and specialized sensors for these modes can be expensive, making it difficult for planners to get counts for every roadway.

On-demand transportation data platforms like StreetLight can help supplement these traditional methods with expanded coverage and granularity and speed up data collection, helping agencies address road risks faster.

Streamlining the data collection process also makes it easier for agencies to consider multiple road safety factors when evaluating potential projects, prioritizing where to implement improvements, or making the case for grant funding.

We examined five key road safety metrics for this analysis: bike and pedestrian volumes, vehicle volumes, speeds, hard braking, and truck activity. But since many factors contribute to road safety, there are also many other lenses planners can use to inform impactful decisions.

StreetLight offers other helpful metrics such as:

• Vehicle Miles Traveled – To understand where exposure to vehicle activity is high and inform potential mode shift or VMT reduction efforts

• Turning Movement Counts – To support intersection safety improvements

• Origin-Destination and Top Routes – Informing how traffic can be rerouted around areas of high pedestrian or bike activity

For teams with limited time who need ready-to-use insights, StreetLight’s Street Scanner product is also a powerful resource. Street Scanner is a network-wide dashboard helping DOTs, MPOs, and cities quickly visualize trends in speed, volume, and speed limits across their region to prioritize funding, evaluate safety programs, and share defensible insights.

To explore how jurisdictions can use these and other metrics to advance safety, check out our U.S. Safe Streets Index, which ranks the top 100 U.S. metros across five core road safety metrics, including VMT, speeds, and truck activity.

And to learn more about data-driven safety planning, check out our Safety Solutions page.