Piedmont Greenway Master Plan - Town of Kernersville

The Piedmont Greenway 

Master Plan 

Linking the Past with the Future

The Piedmont Greenway 

Master Plan 

Linking the Past with the Future 

Prepared for: 

The Piedmont Land Conservancy 

Prepared by: 

Greenways Incorporated 

January 2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Executive Summary...............................................................................................................................................1 

Overview and Introduction...................................................................................................................................3 

Regional Context....................................................................................................................................................4 

Vision Goals and Objectives..................................................................................................................................5 

Benefits of Greenways............................................................................................................................................7 

Inventory of Existing Conditions........................................................................................................................10 

Master Plan Recommendations ..........................................................................................................................22 

Segment 1: Salem Lake to East Forsyth High School....................................................................................................................................28 

Segment 2: East Forsyth High School to Cash Elementary School...............................................................................................................30 

Segment 3: Kernersville Lake Spur Trail .......................................................................................................................................................32 

Segment 4: Cash Elementary to YMCA..........................................................................................................................................................34 

Segment 5: YMCA Spur Trail .........................................................................................................................................................................36 

Segment 6: Kerners Mill Creek Spur Trail.....................................................................................................................................................38 

Segment 7: YMCA to Civitan Park.................................................................................................................................................................40 

Segment 8: Civitan Park to Triad Park..........................................................................................................................................................42 

Segment 9: Triad Park to Reedy Fork Creek..................................................................................................................................................44 

Segment 10: Reedy Fork Creek to Highway 68 Underpass ...........................................................................................................................46 

Segment 11: Highway 68 to Northwest School Road.....................................................................................................................................48 

Segment 12: Moore's Creek Corridor ............................................................................................................................................................50 

Segment 13: Pleasant Ridge Road Trail Head to Lake Higgins Trail Head..................................................................................................52 

Segment 14: Summerfield Spur Trail..............................................................................................................................................................54 

Design Guidelines.................................................................................................................................................56 

Estimates of Probable Costs................................................................................................................................60 

Sources of Funding ..............................................................................................................................................71 

Methods of Gaining Public Access .....................................................................................................................75 

PIEDMONT GREENWAY 

Final Master Plan Report 

TOC-1

Greenway Facility Safety and Security..............................................................................................................77 

Watersheds of Guilford and Forsyth Counties .................................................................................................83 

Appendix A: Trail Alignment........................................................................................................................... A-1 

Appendix B: Public Information Flyer........................................................................................................... A-2 

Appendix C: Public Survey.............................................................................................................................. A-3 

Appendix D: Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ A-4 

Appendix E: Newspaper Articles..................................................................................................................... A-6 



TOC-2

LIST OF MAPS & FIGURES 

Figure 1: Regional View of the Piedmont Greenway Corridor ........................................................................................................... 4 

Figure 2: Primary Spur Trail Piedmont Greenway Segments ............................................................................................................. 27 

Figure 3: Location of Segment 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 28 

Figure 4: Map of Segment 1 ................................................................................................................................................................ 29 

















Figure 21: Location of Segment 10 ....................................................................................................................................................... 46 

Figure 22: Map of Segment 10 .............................................................................................................................................................. 47 










TOC-3


Figure 31: Phase 1 Cost Estimates ......................................................................................................................................................... 61 









Figure 40: Phase 10 Cost Estimates ....................................................................................................................................................... 65 




Figure 44: Total Phase Cost Estimates .................................................................................................................................................. 67 

Figure 45: Total Parcel Acres ................................................................................................................................................................ 69 

Figure 46: Total Easement Acres .......................................................................................................................................................... 69 



TOC-4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The Piedmont Greenway System Concept 

The vision for our Piedmont Greenway is of families walking with their children, bicyclists enjoying a 

sunny afternoon ride to Winston-Salem and back to Greensboro, the local high school's cross country team 

practicing, retired couples strolling, joggers running, birdwatchers catching a glimpse of a migrating warbler, 

kids spying their first glimpse of a deer on their way to school - all enjoying the outdoors on a maintained trail 

without worrying about traffic. 

To achieve this vision a technical Master Plan has to be created to include the interests of the local 

citizens and municipalities. These interests address community needs, which are incorporated into a guiding 

document. 

The proposed Piedmont Greenway should be viewed as a recreational, physical fitness, and alternative 

transportation resource incorporating multiple uses including environmental education, better floodplain management, 

enhancing wildlife habitat, and improving water quality. 

Recommendations for this multi-objective greenway are based largely on input from the general public, 

local businesses, civic and community organizations and public agencies. At the beginning of the planning 

process, a number of potential greenway corridors were identified through a meeting with staff members from 

the cities and counties. The greenway corridor alternative map was evaluated and presented at meetings with 

interested individuals and at two public workshops. Comments received from these meetings and workshops 

were incorporated into the Master Plan recommendations for the greenway system. 

Proposed greenway corridors are located along natural and man-made linear corridors and generally follow 

roadways, ridge tops and waterways within the study limits. This means greenways will fulfill objectives 

related to alternative transportation, natural resource conservation and water quality and floodplain management 

in addition to their function as recreational resources. Corridors were also selected to ensure development 

of a continuous greenway, centrally located and spanning the area from Salem Lake in Forsyth County 

to Lake Higgins in Guilford County. The greenway is designed with the potential to extend into neighboring 

jurisdictions when desired and funding becomes available. 

The Master Planning Process 

The Piedmont Land Conservancy (PLC) commissioned Greenways Incorporated, of Durham, NC, to 

assist the communities of Forsyth and Guilford counties in preparing this Master Plan. The planning process 

consisted of several primary tasks. First, viable site evaluations were undertaken in Forsyth and Guilford 

Counties for potential Piedmont Greenway corridors. Representatives of city departments, local 

agencies, nonprofit organizations and interested citizens provided focused feedback and input 

throughout the planning process. The formation of goals and objectives came next, crafted from 

comments received from staff meetings and citizen participation in two community workshops. 

Preliminary recommendations were then developed and presented to participants for review. Recommendations 

were implemented into the document by PLC and city and county staff and submitted 

by Greenways, Inc. for final review. The last step of the planning process was the presentation 

of the final plan to PLC. 

Recommendations 

The Piedmont Greenway in Forsyth and 

Guilford counties is envisioned as a project with 

several objectives. The greenway corridor is 

designed to include improved floodplain management, 

protect wildlife habitat, enhance water 

quality, provide for passive recreation, encourage 

environmental and cultural education, promote 

personal fitness, accommodate alternative 

transportation and offer recreational resources. 

The proposed Piedmont Greenway corridor 

is approximately eighteen miles in length, and 

is located along natural and man-made linear 

corridors which generally follow roadways, ridge tops and waterways within the study limits. The 

corridors have been selected to ensure development of a continuous system of on- and off-road 

greenway system flowing through North, South, East, West and Central Forsyth and Guilford 

Counties, with the potential to extend into neighboring jurisdictions. 

Five regions are proposed as sites of the primary Piedmont Greenway System: (please refer to 

Figure 2, page 27): 

• Salem Lake 

• Residential Kernersville 

• Downtown Kernersville 

• Residential Greensboro 

• Lakes Segment 


Final Master Plan Report 1

Spur trails are considered alternative options for neighborhoods served by the Piedmont Greenway. Such 

spurs can serve as enhancements of and additions to the primary system. 

Greenway per year as the plan recommends. Additional funding for Piedmont Greenway acquisition 

and capital improvements could come from a bond referendum. 

The Master Plan is intended to serve as a “living document” to be used as a reference guide for greenway 

development in the area for years to come. To this end, the plan includes design guidelines and associated 

amenities for all levels of Piedmont Greenway use. These guidelines should be consulted as the Piedmont 

Greenway is developed to ensure a consistent, high quality system. 

Plan of Action 

The Piedmont Greenway Master Plan is comprehensive and visionary. The plan identifies a continuous 

greenway corridor through Forsyth and Guilford counties and proposes specific action steps to establish the 

greenway in two-year, five-year, and 10-year time frames. To realize the vision laid forth in this plan, the following 

will need to be incorporated into each Piedmont Greenway phase: master planning, land protection, 

design development and plans for greenway construction and maintenance. 

Implementation Strategy 

The Piedmont Greenway Master Plan can best be implemented through a public-private partnership. 

Successful implementation will require a concerted effort by private citizens as well as the counties and cities 

of Forsyth and Guilford. Implementation can not be achieved by any one city or county. To be truly successful, 

the greenway system must become the a partnership project. 

It is recommended that the Piedmont Land Conservancy facilitate the formation of a private, nonprofit 

501 (c) (3) corporation, that would be formed to raise money from the private sector for use in parks, recreation 

and Piedmont Greenway projects. The counties of Forsyth and Guilford should create a new Piedmont 

Greenway Advisory Commission, comprised of private citizens, to help prioritize projects in the Piedmont 

Greenway Master Plan. The commission should also be prepared to recommend projects and their funding 

to city councils and aldermen, to assist in right-of-way acquisition and to act as strong advocates for the 

Piedmont Greenway. City and county staff will perform planning, design and management functions for the 

Piedmont Greenway System. Staff should work closely with both the nonprofit corporation and the Piedmont 

Greenway Advisory Commission described above. 

The Forsyth and Guilford counties Piedmont Greenway System is an initiative that will require a fresh 

look at how local dollars are spent to fulfill community-wide objectives. The greenway will serve as a functional 

land-use system providing financial return on money the communities invest in infrastructure, transportation, 

recreation and education. Based on the expenditures of similar communities, it is recommended that 

the set-aside amount should be at least $500,000 per year to be used as seed money for greenway planning, 

land acquisition and development. When matched with $500,000 in public and private funds (as identified in 

the Master Plan), this $1 million will contribute to the development of a minimum of two miles of Piedmont 



OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION 

Since the first city was founded in the heart of the Piedmont, the region has been recognized as one of 

the best places to live in the South. The region’s popularity stems from the natural amenities of the Piedmont, 

combining the friendly atmosphere of small towns such as Kernersville and the cultural activities of the larger 

cities of Winston-Salem and Greensboro. Tourists and other visitors come to see a wide range of attractions, 

such as Old Salem Village and Wake Forest University, and many choose to make Forsyth and Guilford counties 

their permanent homes, creating a growing urban area. 

The development of a comprehensive greenway system will enhance the region’s natural amenities. 

Greenways are linear corridors of natural land that serve a variety of purposes, especially when trails are 

developed within these corridors. As an alternative transportation route, tourist attraction and natural 

resource corridor, a central continuous greenway in Forsyth and Guilford counties affords important 

connections between workplaces and homes, shopping areas and neighborhoods, parks and schools, 

historic sites and hotels, rivers and ridge tops and lakes and valleys. A central greenway developed as a 

continuous link between the cities of Winston-Salem and Greensboro will bring further recognition to 

the region for its quality of life. Greenways have also been proven to attract new business. 

Today, many of the features that drew new families to the region are threatened by growth and development. 

With few exceptions, the region is not a friendly place for bicyclists or pedestrians, especially in 

recently developed areas. Once it was easier and safer to travel on foot or by bicycle between neighborhoods 

and such destinations as local schools, parks, shops, restaurants and businesses. Today, these connections 

have been severed by the development of highways, unsafe intersections, sprawling land uses (increasing distances 

between destinations) and other automobile-oriented hazards that serve as physical and psychological 

barriers to bicycle and pedestrian travelers. To reach the city from either Greensboro to the northeast or Winston-Salem 

to the southwest tourists must negotiate strip commercial development and four-lane roadways, an 

unattractive prospect even for motorists. Tourists are often forced to remain in their cars instead of bicycling 

or walking around the area. Encouraging tourists to use bicycles or to walk will generate more tourist revenue 

for local businesses. 

Not only have connections between popular origins and destinations in the region been severed, but the 

community’s physical connections to its rivers and ridges have been limited. Many residents are unaware 

of the existence of the region’s lakes and creeks, even though they may drive across them on a regular basis. 

Encroachment by residences and businesses on these waterways has led to water quality degradation and 

increased the potential for flooding. The parks serving the region offer residents and visitors excellent outdoor 

recreation opportunities, including trails along the major sites of Salem Lake, Lake Brandt and Lake Higgins. 

However, continuous public open space within the central core of the counties is minimal. 

Additionally, as is common in many other urban areas throughout the country, Forsyth and 

Guilford counties are beginning to experience the problems that accompany rapid growth, including 

increased traffic congestion, diminishing air and water quality, a loss of wildlife habitat and 

natural lands, and fewer close-to-home recreational opportunities. 

Responding to these growth problems, the Piedmont Land Conservancy (PLC) asked 

Greenways Incorporated to assist the communities of Forsyth and Guilford counties in developing 

a Piedmont Greenway Master Plan. Prior to the initiation of the Master Plan, PLC is already at 

work in both counties and the region, negotiating with landowners to acquire land for greenways 

and other purposes. 

Greenways Incorporated is a nationally recognized multi-disciplinary environmental planning 

and design firm that specializes in providing consulting services to government agencies, for-profit 

corporations and nonprofit organizations. Their chosen professional focus is greenway planning, 

design, development and management and they have provided services to more than 120 communities 

in 28 states. Chuck Flink, the president of the firm, participated in the development of the 

Bethabara Greenway in Forsyth County and the Bicentennial Greenway in Guilford County prior to 

the firm’s producing the Piedmont Greenway Master Plan. 

In association with local residents, the cities of Winston Salem, Greensboro and Kernersville 

planning offices, parks and recreation departments and other municipal government staff, 

Greenways Incorporated has prepared this Master Plan report. The report and associated graphic 

elements represent initial investigations and evaluation of the Piedmont Greenway as a future multipurpose 

transportation corridor bridging the counties of Forsyth and Guilford and connecting the 

cities of Winston Salem, Kernersville and Greensboro. 

This report is divided into several sections describing the existing conditions of the project 

corridor, incorporating the comments of local residents who participated in the master planning 

process, making design development recommendations and estimating probable costs. The report 

also includes a recommended phasing strategy for the project and an action plan for involving local 

residents in the development and management of the Piedmont Greenway. 

The Piedmont Greenway Master Plan offers new opportunities for broadening community 

interaction and enhancing the environment in one of the state’s most attractive growth areas. 



REGIONAL CONTEXT 

The Piedmont Greenway Corridor is centrally located within the counties of Forsyth and Guilford. The 

corridor will span the Salem Lake area in Forsyth County to Lake Higgins in Guilford County. Because of its 

key location, the potential exists for this corridor to be the major recreational spine for parks and open spaces 

in the central region, connecting the cities of Winston Salem, Kernersville, and Greensboro. The primary 

function of the greenway will be to serve as an alternative transportation corridor for walking, bicycling and 

other forms of transportation. A greenway along portions of Kerners Mill Creek, Reedy Fork Creek and 

Moore’s Creek also provides an opportunity to manage the creeks’ significant natural resources, providing a 

continuous “green corridor” protecting riparian wildlife habitat and wetlands and improving water quality. 

Development of the Piedmont Greenway addresses a clearly identified need for walking paths and safe bicycling 

facilities within the cities and counties of the region. 

Regionally, the Piedmont Greenway is an 

important segment of a larger corridor which can 

link to existing trails such as the Winston-Salem 

Strollway, Salem Creek Greenway, Salem Lake 

Trail system, Triad Park trail system, Bicentennial 

Greenway (Greensboro and High Point systems), 

Lake Higgins trail system. Other important links 

are the natural resource areas of Reedy Fork Creek, 

Beaver Creek, Moore’s Creek, and the Lake Higgins 

and Lake Brandt natural areas (See Regional Map, 

Figure 1.). This regional network of open space 

and greenway corridors could serve as a recreation/ 

alternative-transportation linkage into neighboring 

communities, and other parks and community 

facilities including schools, libraries, and neighborhoods. 

Additionally, spur trails would provide future 

connections along creek streambeds, equestrian 

trails and utility corridors to ultimately tie into 

Kernersville lake, and existing trails such as Bowen 

Branch Trail, Silas Creek Greenway, Bethabara 

Trail, Lake Brandt trail system, the proposed 

Haw River Regional Greenway, and the proposed 

Mountians-to-Sea North Carolina trail system. 

The creeks that form the continuous Piedmont 

Greenway corridor are an important water resource and their recreational and educational 

opportunities are significant. Pedestrian access into the more southern portions of the greenway 

would create a new north-south route for greenway users, who could then access Salem Lake 

Natural Area with its several piers for fishing and viewing, picnic areas, walking trails and a fishing 

center. The Piedmont Greenway will link important existing educational and recreational areas 

such as Salem Lake, Kernersville Lake, Lake Higgins and Lake Brandt at Bur-Mil-Park to communities 

such as Old Salem, Kernersville, and Summerfield, while providing a link to urban and 

heavily commercialized areas within Winston-Salem and Greensboro. 

The cities of Winston-Salem, Kernersville and Greensboro offer scenic surroundings and 

important historical sites. In recent years, residents and tourists have enjoyed the enhanced atmosphere 

of the revitalized downtowns. The Piedmont Greenway will further empower the region 

to provide opportunities that will connect communities, parks, wildlife corridors and historic and 

cultural sites. 

Figure 1. Regional view of the Piedmont Greenway Corridor. 



VISION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 

The following is the vision statement crafted for the Piedmont Greenway System. Goals that support 

this vision and a series of objectives to achieve each goal follow the vision statement. The vision, goals and 

objectives reflect the needs and desires of residents living in the study corridors, as indicated in the public 

involvement process of the Master Planning effort (see Summary of Public Input). 

Vision 

Historically, land forms have provided the reason for the location of development in the Piedmont 

Triad area. Settlers first came to the Piedmont Triad to build cities where people could live, work and play 

and where wildlife thrived. Through time, Native American trading routes became wagon trails which then 

became roadways across the land, connecting the cities to other towns and bringing the people of the region 

together. The future of land corridors in the region should build upon these connections through greenways 

which serve to protect and promote the qualities of these corridors, places where: 

• Land connects to water; 

• People connect to nature; 

• Past connects to the present; 

• Residents connect with each other; 

• Community connects to economy; 

• People connect to parks; 

• Home connects to work, school, and shops; 

• And city connects to countryside. 

Goals and Objectives 

The following goals and numbered objectives support the vision statement. These goal categories are 

representative of the benefits outlined in the previous chapter and reflect the “connections” theme which has 

been voiced by many citizens. Although the goals are not listed in priority order, the objectives rated as most 

important by residents during community workshops are listed first. 

Where Land Connects To Water 

Goal: Greenway corridors along waterways will improve water quality and reduce the impacts of flooding on 

lives and property by providing a more appropriate use for floodplain lands. 

3. Promote the use of native vegetation in greenway development; 

4. Protect drinking water sources by conserving lands adjacent to surface water bodies; 

5. Establish monitoring stations along greenways to measure water quality; 

6. Promote and support a comprehensive management plan for floodplains that reduces 

exposure to future flooding and financial losses; 

7. Help restore the quality of creeks and streams to levels suitable for recreational contact; 

8. Promote the use of soil bioengineering techniques in stream bank stabilization; 

9. Improve water quality by discouraging impervious surfaces in greenway lands; 

10.Encourage the development of greenways within sewer corridors. 

Where People Connect To Nature 

Goal: Greenway corridors will conserve plant and wildlife habitat and serve as sites to educate 

visitors on environmental issues. 

1. Protect, restore, and maintain environmentally sensitive lands to support plant and animal 

habitat; 

2. Provide public access to natural streams and reconnect the downtown with the creeks; 

3. Connect fragmented ecosystems and habitat areas to maintain native habitat and viable 

plant and wildlife communities; 

4. Establish “outdoor classrooms” along greenways to teach students about riparian and terrestrial 

trail ecology; 

5. Provide interpretive signage along greenways to highlight the natural resources of the area; 

6 .Improve air quality in the region through promoting non-motorized forms of transportation; 

7. Protect the native ecosystems of ridge lines and their view sheds; 

8. Connect ridge lines to nearby neighborhoods. 

Where The Past Connects To The Present 

Goal: Greenway corridors will highlight and enhance significant historical structures, places and 

people as part of the local landscape. 

1. Provide interpretive signage along greenways to highlight the historic resources of the area 

(this could be accomplished by working with nonprofit organizations and local universities); 

2. Encourage the preservation and restoration of historic buildings, sites, and archeological 

resources in the greenway corridors; 

3. Connect historic and archeological sites to neighborhoods, parks, schools and other areas; 

4. Revitalize historic transportation corridors (railroads and roads) as greenway facilities. 

1. Restore degraded watershed, provide river and stream bank stabilization, and promote enhancement 

of natural waterways to improve water quality; 

2. Provide reasonable, adequate streamside vegetated buffers to filter pollutants and runoff; 



Where Residents Connect With Each Other 

Goal: Greenway corridors will improve the quality of life for residents. 

1. Provide opportunities for physical fitness and activities to improve health and physical wellbeing; 

2. Promote greenways as “self-policing” facilities, where the potential for any criminal activity is 

reduced due to the numbers of trail users and neighbors; 

3. Connect neighborhoods within the study corridor to other neighborhoods; 

4. Present the Piedmont’s greenways as community “main streets”, where residents and visitors can 

enjoy one another amid pleasant surroundings; 

5. Soften the negative impacts of heavily used roadways through the development of greenways as 

natural buffers; 

6. Provide greenways as places for community events; 

7. Educate the general public about the benefits of greenways. 

Where Community Connects With The Economy 

Goal: Greenway corridors will improve the continued economic health of the region. 

1. Increase the value of nearby residential, commercial and industrial properties through greenway 

development; 

2. Provide greenways as magnets for businesses seeking to relocate; 

3. Encourage appropriate land use of high-hazard landscapes, reducing exposure to future financial losses 

and providing a more cost effective method for managing these resource lands; 

4. Establish greenways as tourist destinations; 

5. Provide opportunities for economic growth through the creation of trail-related businesses (such as 

bike shops, restaurants, bed and breakfasts and plant nurseries); 

6. Promote the efficient use of existing resources through developing greenways within utility rights-ofway. 

Where Home Connects To Work, School and Shops 

Goal: Greenway corridors will provide alternative transportation facilities for residents and 

visitors. 

1. Provide greenways as safe linkages between neighborhoods, businesses, schools and 

shopping areas; 

2. Promote bicycle and pedestrian friendly land uses; 

3. Establish on- and off-road greenway corridors to maximize alternative transportation 

opportunities; 

4. Provide connections between greenways and transit facilities to promote alternative 

transportation modes; 

5. Coordinate greenway development with state and local transportation agencies and projects; 

6. Work with NCDOT, Winston-Salem DOT, and Greensboro DOT to incorporate bicycle and 

pedestrian facilities into future roadway maintenance and improvement projects. 

Where City Connects To Countryside 

Goal: Greenway corridors will provide a regional network of recreation and transportation routes. 

1. Protect and enhance the community’s scenic beauty, including views and vistas of 

ridge lines, creeks, streams and lakes; 

2. Establish greenways as connections between the downtown areas and regional destinations 

including the Beaver Creek drainage, and Oak Ridge area including the Old Mill of 

Guilford; 

3. Provide “urban green” in the downtown areas through on- and off-road greenway 

development. 

Where People Connect To Parks 

Goal: Greenway corridors will improve opportunities for close-to-home recreation. 

1. Provide greenway access to multiple users, including hikers, joggers, bicyclists, horseback riders and 

rollerblades and wheelchair users; 

2. Establish greenways as connections among schools, parks and other recreation facilities; 

3. Construct greenways where people live, work, and play. 



BENEFITS OF GREENWAYS 

A multi-objective greenway system for Forsyth and Guilford counties will address and resolve community 

issues that affect the future environmental and economic health of the region. Greenways have been implemented 

by communities throughout the United States to provide recreation and alternative transportation, 

control flooding, improve water quality, protect wetlands, conserve habitat for wildlife and buffer adjacent 

land uses. Greenways typically incorporate varying types and intensity of public use, among them trails for 

recreation and transportation and passive and active park facilities, including playing fields. Greenways have 

also been shown to increase the value of adjacent private properties as an amenity to residential and commercial 

developments. These and other benefits of a central Piedmont Greenway network are described in the 

following pages. 

Transportation Benefits 

In past years, American communities have grown in a sprawling form because of dependence upon 

the automobile as the sole means of transportation. Americans have abandoned some traditional forms of 

transportation (such as passenger train service) and have been slow to improve other forms of transportation 

(bicycle and pedestrian networks, bus systems, local 

train service). In order to provide relief from congested 

streets and highways, future transportation planning and 

development should be concentrated on providing local 

residents with a choice in modes of travel. These choices 

should offer the same benefits and appeal currently offered 

by the automobile: efficiency, safety, comfort, reliability 

and flexibility. 

A central continuous greenway corridor through 

Forsyth and Guilford counties can serve as an extension of 

the road network, offering realistic and viable connections 

between origins and destinations such as work, schools, 

libraries, parks, shopping areas and tourist attractions. 

Greenway-based bikeways and walkways are most effective 

for certain travel distances. Surveys by the Federal 

Highway Administration show that Americans are willing 

to walk as far as two miles to a destination and bicycle as 

far as five miles. The development of a central greenway 

system allows destinations to be linked to multiple origins 

throughout the region with a combination of off-road 

trails and on-road bicycle and pedestrian facilities. 

Economic Benefits 

The greenway will bring economic benefits to the region, including raising real property values 

and increasing tourism and recreation-related revenues, and can offer savings in the costs for 

public services. Greenways have been shown to raise the value of immediately adjacent properties 

by as much as five to 20 percent. In a new development in Raleigh, North Carolina, new lots situated 

on greenways were priced $5,000 higher than comparable lots off the greenway. Many home 

buyers and corporations are looking for real estate that 

provides direct access to public and private greenway systems. 

According to a survey by the National Association 

of Realtors (NAR) and the National Association of Home 

Builders (NAHB), trails help sell houses. The survey 

report, Consumers’ Survey on Smart Choices for Home 

Buyers, released in April 2002, shows that 36 percent of 

2,000 recent home buyers designated walking, jogging or 

biking trails as either an “important” or “very important” 

community amenity. Trail availability outranked 16 other 

options including security, ball fields, golf courses, parks 

and access to shopping or business centers. Only highway 

access, at 44 percent, was specified as a top amenity by 

more of the home buyers surveyed. For more information 

on the survey, (see www.realtor.org, or www.nahb.org). 

Greenways are viewed as amenities by residential, 

commercial and office park developers who, in turn, are 

realizing higher rental values and profits. Additionally, 

greenways can save local tax dollars by utilizing resourcebased 

strategies for managing community storm water and 

hazard mitigation, thus placing into productive use landscapes 

that possibly could not be developed in a conventional manner. 

Tourism plays a vital role in the economies of Forsyth and Guilford counties, and the development 

of a central greenway will work to enhance the industry. Tourism is currently ranked as the 

number one economic force in the world. In several localities throughout the nation, greenways 

have been specifically created to capture the tourism potential of a landscape or cultural destination. 

The state of Missouri, for example, spent $6 million to create the 200-mile KATY Trail, which, in 

its first full year of operation, generated travel and tourism expenditures of more than $6 million. 



Health and Recreation Benefits 

Greenways encourage people to walk or bike to short-distance destinations. Studies have shown that 

as little as 30 minutes a day of moderate-intensity exercise (such as bicycling, walking, in-line skating or 

cross-country skiing) can significantly improve mental and physical health and help prevent certain diseases. 

Providing opportunities for participation in outdoor activities 

close to where people live and work is an important component 

of promoting healthy lifestyles for Piedmont residents. 

In 1987, the President’s Commission on Americans Outdoors 

released a report that profiled the modern pursuit of leisure 

and defined the current quality of life for Americans. Limited 

access to outdoor resources was cited as a growing problem 

throughout the nation. The commission recommended that a 

national system of greenways could provide all Americans with 

access to linear open-space resources. 

This proposed central Piedmont Greenway is designed to complement the community’s existing parks 

and open space system. Trail systems are developed not only for alternative transportation, but also to serve 

as primary recreation and fitness resources. Additionally, the greenway can help meet the passive recreation 

needs of Piedmont’s growing population of older residents, enhancing the region’s reputation as a popular 

place to retire. 

Cultural Benefits 

Greenways are a tool to enhance cultural assets and protect 

historic resources in the Piedmont area. Successful greenway 

projects across the United States have served as new “main 

streets”, where neighbors meet, children play and community 

groups gather to celebrate. For cities and towns large and small, 

greenways have become a focal point for community activities. 

Some communities sponsor “greenway days” to celebrate the 

outdoors and local traditions. Walking and running events are 

held on greenways to support charity or extend traditional sporting 

events. Many civic groups adopt segments of greenways for 

clean up, litter removal and environmental awareness programs. 

Some greenways, like San Antonio’s River Walk, are focal points not only for community activities, but also 

for economic development. 

Numerous National Register of Historic Places, 

locally significant sites and historic districts represent 

the richness and diversity of the Piedmont area’s 

historic resources. The interpretation of historic and 

archeological sites along greenways can serve to increase 

the awareness and appreciation of Piedmont’s 

rich history. As example, the historic Old Guilford 

Mill is an active restored grist-mill still in operation 

that could provide a future educational feature for the 

greenway system. Greenways can also be vehicles to 

provide controlled public access to important cultural 

sites in ways that promote preservation and enhance 

interpretive opportunities. 

Safety Benefits 

Many Americans are concerned about crime. According to a report by the Rails-to-Trails 

Conservancy (RTC) and the National Park Service Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance 

Program, crime and safety concerns are very low for trails. The report, Rail-Trails and Safe communities, 

released in January, 1998, shows that out of 372 trails that cover approximately 7,000 

miles of trail with more 45 million annual users, RTC found only 3% of responding trails which 

had experienced any type of major crime. The study found that common sense and preventative 

measures should be used on trails to ensure the lowest possible levels of crime, trails remain much 

safer than many other environments. Simply stated the study said "crime occurs on roads, parking 

lots, in shop-ping malls, office buildings, airports, and at zoos. However, no one would rationally 

argue that we shouldn’t build any of the above because crime will occur there." The same should be 

said for all trail types. 

Additionally, RTC also found that letters from law enforcement agencies support these findings. 

Crime statistics and reports from law enforcement officials have shown that parks and 

greenways are typically land uses with the lowest incidence of reported criminal activity. They 

consistently report that rail-trails do not encourage crime. Some of the most successful deterrents 

to criminal activity have involved increased neighborhood awareness by citizens and participation 

in community watch programs. Greenways have proven to be an effective tool to encourage local 

residents to participate in neighborhood watch programs. 

As a recreation resource, alternative transportation corridor or site where fitness activities 

can take place, most greenways provide a safer and more user-friendly resource than other linear 

corridors, such as local roads. Greenways typically attract local residents who use the facility 

frequently, thus creating an environment that is virtually self-policing. Additionally, greenways— 



whether publicly or privately owned—are dedicated for multiple uses and are normally designed to meet 

federal, state, and local standards for public safety. 

Water Quality and Water 

Quantity Benefits 

Greenways often preserve wooded open spaces along 

creeks and streams, which absorb floodwaters and filter 

pollutants from storm water. Flooding can be a significant 

problem, especially when building and other land uses encroach 

into flood-prone areas. As an example, by designating the 

floodplains of Reedy Fork Creek, and Moore’s Creek, and other 

tributary creeks of the system as greenways, the encroachments can be better managed and in some cases 

replaced with linear open space. This open space serves as an amenity to local residents and businesses whose 

property lies adjacent to the greenway. 

Greenways can also provide needed floodwater storage capacity. As a flood control measure, greenway 

corridors serve as a primary storage zone during periods of heavy rainfall. The protected floodplain can be 

used during non-flood periods for other activities, including recreation and alternative transportation. In conjunction 

with existing storm water management policies and programs, greenway lands can be established as 

development occurs. 

The savings realized in reduced flood-damage claims can 

offset the expense associated with the establishment of the 

greenway system. Additionally, for those residents who are 

required to purchase flood insurance, implementation of a community-wide 

central greenway system in the region is likely to 

result in reduced flood insurance rates. 

Greenway corridors can improve the surface water quality 

of local rivers and creeks. The floodplain forests and wetlands 

contained within the Reedy Creek, Moore’s Creek and small 

tributary creeks floodway act as filters for pollutants from storm 

water. These pollutants are not removed if storm water is collected 

in pipes and discharged directly into local streams and rivers. Improving surface water quality in streams 

not only benefits local residents, and the continued protection of the critical watershed boundary associated 

with Reedy Fork Creek in Guilford County, but also numerous forms of wildlife that depend on streams for 

their habitat. In the Piedmont Greenway Master Plan, one of the critical issues is regional protection of the 

natural environment. 

Air Quality Benefits 

Greenways as alternative transportation corridors are designed to reduce traffic congestion, 

helping to improve local air quality. Automobile emissions in the Piedmont area are a major source 

of such air pollutants as nitrates and carbon monoxide. One of the important recommendations of 

the assessment was the “study and implementation of appropriate transportation control measures/ 

programs to reduce mobile emissions.” Offering viable, alternative transportation choices through 

greenways would encourage people to bicycle and walk more often, especially on short trips, 

thereby reducing traffic congestion and automobile emissions. 

The Triad is able to meet air quality standards at present and has not been designated as a 

federal “non-attainment” area (see www.epa.gov/airs/nonattn.html, for more information). However, 

air quality monitoring shows that levels of such air pollutants as ozone are increasing. Due to 

the area’s topography, weather inversions can confine and concentrate pollutants, causing sporadic 

increased air pollution. 

Plant and Animal Habitat Benefits 

Greenway corridors serve as viable habitat for many species of plants and wildlife. 

Greenways provide essential food sources and, most importantly, access to water that is required 

by all wildlife. Additionally, a central greenway corridor could become a primary migratory corridor 

for terrestrial wildlife, serving to help maintain the integrity of many plant and animal gene 

pools. Some wildlife biologists have extolled greenways as future “gene-ways” and determined 

that migration routes are essential to maintaining healthy wildlife populations. Greenways can also 

serve as “gene-ways” for plant species, 

which migrate with changes 

in climate and habitat. These 

“gene-ways” often follow river 

and stream corridors that have long 

served as transportation routes for 

animals and humans. The Piedmont 

Greenway can be targeted as 

a primary habitat for many species 

of plants and animals. Programs 

can be established to protect the 

valuable existing forest and wetland 

areas of the region, and to 

reclaim and restore streams to support 

higher quality habitat. 



INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 

Summary of Greenway Efforts 

Planning for greenways and other bicycle and pedestrian facilities is not a new concept in the Piedmont 

region. Comprehensive plans such as the 1995 Guilford County “Forecast 2015” plan and the Winston-Salem 

Forsyth County Greenway Plan "Legacy Development Guide", have involved numerous individuals and organizations 

working on promoting greenways to meet the region’s conservation, recreation and transportation 

needs. Past planning efforts and others that continue to the present day will be complemented by related 

recreation, bicycle and pedestrian planning efforts. 

In the 1995 Forecast 2015 Plan, Guilford County officials from two cities, four towns and county government 

formed various committees to inform and educate citizens about spatial relationships and physical 

features of the county which helped identify possible greenways and open space objectives. The Greenway 

Plan for Winston-Salem/Forsyth County has formulated a greenway master plan that seeks to address missing 

links in its present system. 

In addition, parks and recreation departments from the cities of Winston-Salem, Kernersville and Greensboro 

are in the process of updating their parks and recreation master plans. The plans will address recreation 

needs and park development to the year 2015. Greenways as linear parks are considered in the findings of 

the master plans; however, the vision for parks and greenways has yet to be realized. The counties realize 

that their individual plans do not address the need for a common linked greenway that serves citizens of both 

Forsyth and Guilford counties. 

Topography and Drainage 

The major topographic features of the region encompassed by both counties are the rivers, ridge lines, 

and valleys. Elevations range from 720 to 1,050 feet above sea level. The region’s topographic character 

is mainly composed of wide and often abrupt variations in elevation due to ravines created by drainage 

courses, which lead from the higher elevations to the rivers. Of the major cities and towns in the study area, 

Kernersville in Forsyth County is the highest point in the study corridor. 

The study area includes Forsyth and Guilford Counties which cross five watersheds: the Haw River, 

Upper Yadkin River, Lower Yadkin River, Deep River and Upper Dan River. Reedy Fork Creek is the largest 

creek in length and volume in the study corridor and is part of the Haw River watershed located in Guilford 

County. The Haw River watershed spans 638 square miles or 96.9 percent of Guilford County, and 10 square 

miles or 0.1 percent of Forsyth County. The Haw River basin includes 25 rivers and streams for 2,233 total 

river miles with 1,680 listed as perennial for the entire watershed. The streams are made up of 75 

percent forested riparian habitat and 25 percent agricultural/urban riparian habitat. Reedy Fork 

creek is a protected water sensitive stream. The north-flowing creek terminates near its confluence 

with Lake Brandt in Guilford County. Near Lewiston Road in Guilford County, Moore’s Creek 

joins Reedy Fork Creek. Beaver Creek joins Reedy Fork south of Bunch Road in Guilford County. 

Guilford County is located on a plateau that ranges in elevation from 600 feet to nearly 1,000 feet 

within the watershed area. Reedy Fork Creek watershed covers an area of 464 square miles and 

meanders through low valleys that are separated by broken ridge lines. 

The Piedmont Greenway will follow the floodplains of Reedy Fork Creek and part of Moore’s 

Creek while avoiding some of the more sensitive land (wetlands and steep or erodible slopes). This 

topography could present constraints to trail development due to steep slopes. In some areas, it 

may be difficult or impossible to develop trails to ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) standards 

and in other areas, changes in elevation may completely prohibit trail development. In these cases, 

an unimproved nature trail is recommended similar to the type of trails existing at Lake Higgins in 

Guilford County. 

Soils 

The composition of soil along the creek floodplains found within the greenway corridor directly 

affects the feasibility of Piedmont Greenway development in certain areas. The land associations 

found along the corridor is characterized by nearly level, well drained to poorly drained soils 

that have a sandy loam, loam, silt loam, clay loam, and silty clay loam subsoil, found mostly on 

floodplains. Relief, or topography, affects soil formation by causing differences in free drainage, 

surface runoff, soil temperature and the extent of geologic erosion. In Guilford County, the relief 

is largely determined by the kind of bedrock underlying the soils, by the geology of the area and 

the amount of landscape dissection by streams, and by slope retreat. For soils that have slopes of 

15 percent, geologic erosion removes soil material almost as fast as the soil develops. As a result, 

steep slopes are characterized by thin soils and level slopes are characterized by deeper soils. 

The majority of the soils found along the Reedy Creek portion located in Guilford County are 

wetland soils of the Chewacla-Wehadkee-Congaree association. Wehadkee soils found within the 

Reedy Fork Creek drainage were formed on floodplains, are poorly drained and have similar parent 

material but different characteristics according to their topographic position and internal drainage. 

Two broad classes of parent material exist in the makeup of Guilford County soils: bedrock or 

those formed in place, and weathered material derived from the bedrock. Reedy Fork Creek and its 

tributaries were formed from alluvium soils that weathered upstream and were deposited along the 

floodplains. 

Soil associations along Moore's Creek in Guilford County show a number of areas that are 



sensitive to erosion and need to be protected. Moore’s Creek has soils that are derived from the Madison-Cecil 

association and can be characterized as strongly sloping to steep, well-drained soils that have a sandy clay 

loam, clay loam and clay subsoil. These soils are formed mainly on uplands of the creek’s watershed. Beaver 

Creek in Guilford County has soils composed of the Cecil-Madison association, and they differ from Moore’s 

Creek soils due to the difference in slope and clay content. These soils are gently sloping and sloping, welldrained 

soils that have a sandy clay loam, clay loam, and clay subsoil. The parent material is derived from 

igneous and metamorphic rocks, reflected in the low pH of these soils. 

In Forsyth County, the relief is largely determined by knobs or ridges and valleys. A broad plateau near 

Kernersville borders this area on the east. The inter streams areas are remnants of an erosional landscape 

dissection by streams. The average elevation in the county is 870 feet above sea level. Forsyth County lies at 

the junction of four drainage basins. The Kerners Mill Creek watershed falls within the Deep River drainage 

basin. Chewacla-Wehadkee-Congaree soils predominate in the creek corridor. These poorly drained areas 

consist of loamy soils subject to frequent inundation by floodwaters. They are generally very nutrient-rich 

and can yield botanically interesting habitats. One of these areas exists at the terminus of Kerners Mill Creek 

at the headwaters of Salem Lake. Significant to the study corridor is an area east of the proposed Piedmont 

Greenway along Kerners Mill Creek. This area is known as a Piedmont/Mountain Semipermanent Impoundment 

and is characterized by its location in the low-gradient floodplain of Kerners Mill Creek. 

The soils within the urban areas of the greenway corridor are well drained for the most part, with loamy 

subsoils on area ridges and side slopes of mountain areas. Hydric soils (waterlogged soils) can generally be 

found only in the floodplain areas of rivers and creeks. According to a soil map prepared by the Soil Conservation 

Service prior to 1985, soils which are the most unfavorable for development purposes are typically 

those located on the steep slopes of ridges within the city limits. 

(Source: Soil Survey of Guilford and Forsyth Counties, North Carolina, United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation 

Service. 1980., and North Carolina Natural Heritage Inventory of Forsyth County, North Carolina. North Carolina 

Natural Heritage Program. 1998) 

Water Quality 

Land use in the study corridor is characterized by continuous urban development on the valley floors. 

The primary effects on watersheds of the creeks are increased imperviousness, increased frequency of flooding, 

destabilized stream configurations, disconnection of streams from floodplains and loss of riparian corridors. 

Pollutants and toxicity are a secondary concern. Improving the streams in the urbanized parts of the 

watersheds will require reconnecting the streams with their floodplains where feasible, and restoring riparian 

cover. To do so will require changing land-use patterns in the watersheds. In new and redeveloped areas, 

low-impact site design, where appropriate, will be most effective when aimed at a specific location within a 

sub-watershed. Similarly, municipal urban runoff pollution prevention programs will be most effective when 

they are targeted to subwatershed-scale objectives. Riparian buffers are some of the most effective tools to 

meet goals of improving and protecting water quality. 

Stream corridors in Guilford County identified for the greenway trail all flow into the City of 

Greensboro's drinking water supply lakes, thus making water quality protection an important issue. 

Reedy Fork Creek water quality issues include pathogens due to point-source pollutants and 

nutrients from storm water. Agricultural lands adjacent to the creek can be sources of suspended 

solids and low dissolved oxygen levels due to the lack of buffers and (BMP’s). The ecological 

condition of the Reedy Fork Creek headwaters and Moore’s Creek and tributaries are rated as WS- 

III in the watershed. A critical area has been established around Lake Brandt, Lake Higgins and 

parts of Reedy Fork and the Moore’s Creek drainage area. This area is defined as “land adjacent to 

a water supply intake where risk associated with pollution is greater than from remaining portions 

of the watershed. A critical area is land bounded within one-half mile upstream and draining to a 

river intake or within one-half mile and draining to the normal pool elevation of water supply reservoirs.” 

The critical area restricts certain uses such as development density and the requirements of 

agricultural (BMP’s). The rest of the watershed also has restrictions on development (more density 

than critical areas), and BMP’s are not required for agriculture. However, as you approach the 

more urban/suburban areas near Kernersville, water quality often degrades as the waters enter these 

more densely populated areas. 

The Piedmont Greenway corridor can serve to improve the surface water quality of Reedy 

Fork Creek, Beaver Creek, Moore’s Creek, Kerners Mill Creek and their tributaries. If left unprotected, 

some areas in those water bodies can fall below acceptable standards for recreational 

water contact. Currently, storm water is collected in pipes and is eventually discharged into the 

watershed of Reedy Fork and Moore’s Creeks. If more storm water were allowed to flow overland 

through floodplain forests and wetlands (hence the need for establishing buffers) more pollutants 

would be removed. Cleaner surface water in both creeks would benefit not only local residents, 

but also the numerous forms of wildlife which depend on streams and creeks for their habitat. Due 

to increasing land development along the creeks and within the watershed, water quality must 

be protected and monitored to evaluate and improve/preserve present conditions. Inappropriate 

agricultural, industrial, residential and commercial development adversely affects water quality and 

creates stress on aquatic life and the stability of the watersheds. 

By designating stream buffers through easements within floodplains will allow the development 

of the Piedmont Greenway. Implementing best-management practices will help maintain the 

water quality of Reedy Fork and Moore’s creeks. 

(Source: NCDENR, Dept. of Water Quality (DWQ) and The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Surf your 

Watershed Program, www.epa.gov). 



Wetland Communities 

The Piedmont Greenway corridor is abundant in wetlands, especially in Guilford County. Wetlands are 

typically defined by the presence of three unique interrelated natural features: hydrology, certain soils and 

species of vegetation. Wetlands are important to many ecological systems and serve as habitat for a diverse 

variety of plant and animal life. Wetlands also serve to filter pollutants from surface waters, recharge underground 

aquifers and absorb floodwaters. Most wetlands are protected by Section 404 of the federal Clean 

Water Act, which authorizes the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill 

materials into waters of the United States, including wetlands (called “Jurisdictional Wetlands”) that meet 

certain criteria. 

Reedy Fork Creek corridor’s floodplains have saturated soils at least part of the year, forming wetlands 

along the creek channel. These wetlands are valuable for maintenance of quality water resources and abatement 

of flooding. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetlands Inventory defines the different 

types of wetlands that may occur on a site according to characteristic vegetation and hydrological properties. 

Typically, wetlands occur in floodplain landscapes and the following is a listing of classified types of wetlands 

known to exist along Reedy Fork Creek, Beaver Creek, Moore’s Creek and Kerners Mill Creek: riverine, 

palustrine, palustrine scrub-shrub, palustrine forested (low water table), and palustrine open water. 

Fresh Water Marsh Ecosystem 

Fresh water marshes are characterized by herbaceous rather than hardwood plants emerging from water 

habitat. Cattails and reeds are two commonly recognized herbaceous wetland species. Marshes are often 

located along streams or immediately adjacent to other permanent water bodies such as the Reedy Fork Creek. 

Seasonal changes in water levels are common and complete drying of these marshes will occur during periods 

of drought. 

Wet meadows are another type of marsh. Water loving grasses, unlike freshwater marshes, characterize 

wet meadows. Like the marshes, they frequently do not have standing water. 

Field analysis revealed a range of marshes and wet meadows scattered throughout the corridor both in 

size and range. Several large marshes were found near Lake Brandt, Lake Higgins and the Audubon Acres 

and near Lakewood Memory Gardens. These areas are likely to be considered jurisdictional wetlands and are 

probably subject to protection under federal, state, and local laws. Some of the vegetation identified within 

these marshes includes soft rush, wool grass, red maples and black tupelo (gum). Swamp saw grass, spikerush, 

dotted smartweed, pickerelweed, bulrush, tickseed and sedge dominate the vegetation. 

Riparian Forest Ecosystem 

The Reedy Fork Creek drains most of the corridor before emptying into Lake Brandt. The plant community 

that the stream and its tributaries support is classified as riparian forest. Plant species common to riparian 

forests require moist soils to survive, but can also tolerate flooding. The National Wetland Inventory 

generally classifies riparian areas as jurisdictional wetlands. Some of the species identified 

during the field analysis include the red maple, sweetgum, american sycamore, eastern cottonwood, 

virginia pine, yellow poplar, black walnut, white oak, water locust, southern catalpa, river birch, 

willow oaks, live oaks and swamp chestnut oaks. The understory ranges from dense shrubs to a mix 

of herbs and grasses with little ground cover. The herbaceous understory consists of sedges, rushes, 

various ferns, royal fern, ragwort, cardinal flower, marsh mallow, eastern marsh fern, virginia 

spiderwort, aster and spleenwort. 

Floodplain Forest 

The Reedy Fork Creek corridor floodplain forest includes all of the land that runs parallel on 

either side of the creek and lies below the riparian forest community. This community is similar 

in species composition to the riparian community. This community has a closed to almost-closed 

canopy of trees, which include but are not limited to the red maple, honey locust, american elm, 

loblolly pine, sycamore, and oaks. The dominant woody understory consists of trumpet vine, 

american hornbeam, virginia creeper, eastern poison ivy, deerberry, smooth blackhaw, muscadine 

and summer grape. There is a combination of bottomland trees and pines in the terraces beyond the 

bank. 

Upland Communities 

Early Successional Fields Ecosystem 

The majority of the Reedy Fork Creek, Moore’s Creek, Beaver Creek and Kerners Mill Creek 

corridors are composed of abandoned farm fields in various stages of ecological succession. When 

these fields were originally abandoned, grasses and wildflowers first dominated. The area then 

began to support small shrubs and eventually saplings. These old fields are characterized by subtle 

differences in plant composition depending on the soil type, the amount of water available, the 

dominant types of trees nearby and the length of time the field has been abandoned. The dominant 

invasive tree species in these fields are generally eastern red cedar, red maple, sycamore and a variety 

of oaks and pines. 

Within these fields, many small pockets of wet meadows and fresh water marshes exist. Prior 

to extensive farming of the sites located adjacent to the creeks, the entire landscape most likely possessed 

factors which today define the presence of jurisdictional wetlands. As wetland vegetation 

becomes established in these areas and spreads, the wetlands will grow in size. The dominant trees 

are sweetgum, yellow poplar, willow oak, water oak, ash and loblolly pine. Some of the understory 

tree species identified in this community are cottonwood, sourwood and alders 



Mixed Hardwood Forest Ecosystem 

Several small upland areas within the Piedmont Greenway corridor contain mature forest, with a variety 

of hardwood species scattered within a few areas of the corridor. They are characterized by species such as 

the white oak, scarlet oak and eastern red oak. 

Each of the ecosystems offers opportunities and constraints to future land use development. Marshes 

and riparian areas protect water quality, filter sediment and dissolved nutrients, stabilize the stream structure, 

provide irreplaceable habitat and prevent flooding. Some are also protected by federal, state, and local laws, 

which protect them from significant alteration for the accommodation of many forms of development. These 

areas also serve to mitigate and absorb negative impacts of adjacent land development. Prior to actual construction 

of a Piedmont Greenway within the creek corridors, an in-depth evaluation of the wetland communities 

will be necessary to determine the areas appropriate and inappropriate for greenway development. 

(Partial Source: Ecology of Piedmont Greenway, Smith and Hellmund, 1993.) 

(Source: Landscape Restoration Handbook, Harker, Evans, Harker, Evans, Lewis Publishers, 1993.) 

Wildlife 

There are two broad categories of wildlife that are of concern to this planning effort. “Interior forest” 

species wildlife and “edge” species wildlife. Most species of wildlife that were observed to inhabit the Piedmont 

Greenway corridor are known as “edge” species. These mammals, birds, amphibians and insects have 

adapted to urbanized landscapes and have developed harmonious relationships with urban residents. However, 

“interior” species require undisturbed forest environments to survive and because of human population 

growth and resulting land development have experienced significant habitat loss and population declines. 

According to the North Carolina Natural Heritage program, there are 22 endangered species and/or threatened 

species listed for Guilford County. Animals and plants include eastern fox squirrel, bald eagle loggerhead 

shrike, mole salamander, carolina darter, greensboro burrowing crayfish, american barberry, dissected toothwort, 

piedmont horsebalm, hellar's rabbit tobacco, glade wild quinine, purple fringeless orchid, dwarf chinquapin 

oak, carrion flower, and appalachian golden-banner. Natural communities include the basic mesic forest, 

basic oak-hickory forest, low elevation seep, piedmont/low mountain alluvial forest, piedmont/mountian 

swamp forest, upland depression swamp forest, and wading bird rookey. 

Forsyth County lists 30 endangered species and/or threatened species. The animals and plants include 

loggerhead shrike, red-cockaded woodpecker, bog turtle, bigeye jumprock, bog rose, blunt-lobed grape-fern, 

small-anthered bittercress, brown bog sedge, hop-like sedge, long-bracted frog orchid, granite flatsedge, 

heller's rabbit tobacco, creeping sunrose, northern green orchid, yellow fringeless orchid, purple fringeless 

orchid, small's portulaca, pursh's wild-petunia, northern cup-plant, appalachian golden-banner. Natural communities 

include the basic mesic forest, dry oak-hickory forest, dry-mesic oak-hickory forest, granitic flatrock, 

low elevation seep, mesic mixed hardwood forest, piedmont monadnock forest, piedmont acidic cliff, alluvial 

forest, and piedmont semipermanent impoundment. 

The lands that are part of and/or adjacent to the greenway corridor have not been formally 

studied or recorded as part of the North Carolina Natural Heritage program. However, habitats for 

rare and common “interior” and “edge” species may exist in various forms throughout the Piedmont 

Greenway Study area. Edge environments exist in many locations throughout the Piedmont 

Greenway corridor, such as Reedy Fork Creek and Moore's Creek. The Greenway Master Plan is 

primarily concerned with those edge environments that exist within the floodplains of the corridor. 

These resource areas are arguably the most valuable for wildlife in that they provide a food source, 

water and shelter, and connectivity. Approximately 80 percent of all wildlife depends on riparian 

corridors for survival. Therefore, the protection of floodplains is crucial to sustaining a diversity of 

wildlife in Piedmont. 

The abundance of natural vegetation that covers the Piedmont Greenway corridor provides an 

excellent habitat for wildlife, which is diverse and abundant. However, in some of the more industrialized 

areas, the water quality of streams has affected aquatic habitat and stream banks, reducing 

their value for people and wildlife habitat. 

The corridor offers several features that are beneficial to wildlife: 

• diverse types of ecosystems containing a variety of habitats for wildlife; 

• small tracts of interior forest habitat; 

• numerous corridors available along streams and fence lines for wildlife 

movement; 

• plentiful water; and 

• natural adjacent land uses, creating a greater range for wildlife 

The following is a list of wildlife species that commonly occur in these habitats. It may be 

desirable to employ a qualified wildlife biologist to document habitat recovery along the creek corridor 

as the Piedmont Greenway becomes more developed. 

Aquatic Species 

Sunfish 

Largemouth Bass 

Reptile 

Eastern Box Turtle 

Snapping Turtle 

Birds 

Red-winged Blackbird 

Common Crow 

Eastern Bluebird 

American Robin 

Northern Cardinal 



Mourning Dove 

Great Blue Heron 

Sparrow 

Woodpecker 

Belted Kingfisher 

Red-Shoulder Hawk 

Mammals 

Muskrat 

Raccoon 

Beaver 

Gray Squirrel 

White-Tailed Deer 

The banks of the streams also offer a wide variety of non-game wildlife, such as songbirds, kingfishers, 

blue heron, woodpeckers, cardinals, blue jays, mourning doves and field sparrows. Common aquatic species 

are bottom-dwelling fish. Deer, squirrels, gray fox, raccoon, mink, muskrat, beaver and ruffed grouse are 

common woodland wildlife. 

The overall good water quality in the Reedy Fork and Moore’s Creek watersheds promotes abundant 

aquatic life resulting in greater biological diversity, allowing many different species to live within the creek 

corridors. 

(Source: Inventory of Natural Heritage of Forsyth County, North Carolina, North Carolina Natural 

Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, Department of Environmental and Natural Re 

sources, Piedmont Land Conservancy. 1998.) 

(Source: Soil Survey of Forsyth County, North Carolina, United States Department of Agriculture, Soil 

Conservation Service.) 

(Source: Soil Survey of Guilford County, North Carolina, United States Department of Agriculture, 

Soil Conservation Service. 1975.) 

(Source: Landscape Restoration Handbook, Harker, Evans, Lewis Publishers, 1993.) 

Significant Species 

In addition to the aforementioned species, the 1998 Inventory of Natural Heritage of Forsyth County 

study has listed the following rare, and endangered or threatened plants and animals within the Salem Lake 

and Kerners Mill Creek corridor. The plant species include cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), southern 

lady fern, Virginia day flower (Commelina virginica), orange touch-me-not, arrowleaf tearthumb (Polygonum 

sagittatum), halberd leaf tearthumb (Polygonum arifolium) and greenhead coneflower. 

Reedy Fork Creek, Beaver Creek, and Moore’s Creek contain diverse habitat as you near Lake Brandt. 

Reedy Fork Creek contains some excellent stands of 50-plus year old loblolly pine mixed with beech and 

short leaf pine. The areas located (see segment 12 and 13 maps, pages 50 and 52) in the critical watershed of 

Lake Higgins and Lake Brandt have become wetter with the damming of these two Lakes. As a 

result, Reedy Fork Creek has become intertwined with wetlands and branded tributaries. In these 

areas you can find many large stands of reed grasses along the edges of the creek. Herbs such as 

spring beauty, foam flower, and wild ginger can be found here. Moore’s Creek is distinctive from 

Reedy Fork for its steep topography and various rock outcrops near the bases of these slopes. The 

slopes contain excellent remnants of a beech-hickory-oak forest, with running cedar at the base of 

the slopes and skunk cabbage in the wetter flood plain. Beaver Creek has a rather narrow flood 

plain that features ash, maple and second-growth pine stands. Farms and pastures along its banks 

blanket this area. 

(Source: Inventory of Natural Heritage of Forsyth County, North Carolina, North Carolina Natural Heritage 

Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, Piedmont 

Land Conservancy. 1998.) 

Prominent Views 

Scenic views are common along the Piedmont Greenway corridor. The majority of the stream 

corridor viewshed is dominated by agricultural lands and forested areas. Reedy Fork Creek is typically 

20-50 feet wide, with the exception of a braided stream area where the creek widens to 100 

feet in some places. The stream corridor’s width changes constantly depending on the flow patterns 

of the creek, but the corridor is typically 100 - 350 feet in width for most areas. The majority 

of the corridor is buffered by vegetation with the exception of a few open areas of fields, bridges, 

pipelines and power line crossings. At these crossings, debris jams are common where pipelines 

and bridge footings obstruct flow and eventually views. 

Moore’s Creek is a smaller stream than Reedy Fork Creek with average widths between 10 

and 30 feet. The surrounding topography limits the width which varies from 75 -150 feet along the 

study corridor. Vegetation and steep slopes buffer the majority of the corridor, excepted by a few 

open areas of currently farmed fields, bridges and pipelines. At these crossings, debris jams are 

common where pipelines and bridge footings serve as obstructions. 

Land Use 

The majority of the area surrounding creeks prior to 1900 was used for agricultural practices 

or was forested. As the Triad region of the Piedmont began to rapidly expand after 1900, land use 

in the flood plain changed from predominately agricultural to a mix of residential, commercial, 

industrial and agricultural use. 

The Piedmont Greenway corridor, near the Forsyth and Guilford County border, is dominated 

by residential and agricultural land with a few open space areas. The predominate land use is com- 



mercial in some parts and open farmland in others. As the corridor heads north into Guilford County, several 

road bridges and utilities cross over the creeks. 

After passing under Interstate business 40, increasing residential land use lies on both banks of Kerners 

Mill Creek and the neighborhoods of Kernersville surround the corridor on both sides. Many open space areas 

including recreation sites such as small pocket parks are interspersed along the corridor in this section. 

As you approach Triad Park to the east, the land use is urban and commercial/industrial and becomes 

suburban neighborhoods near Main Street in Kernersville. 

At the time of this writing, the Reedy Fork and Moore’s Creek property ownership and land use has 

not been studied intensively. In Guilford County, Reedy Forks Creek’s floodplain is still primarily used for 

agricultural purposes in the southern area that includes land to the south of Highway 68 and north of Beeson 

Road. The land north of Highway 68 is largely low density residential and is characterized by large tracts of 

wetlands and or poorly drained areas north to the confluence of Moore’s Creek. Along the banks of Reedy 

Fork Creek there are estates and farmsteads that include agricultural land adjacent to the creek until reaching 

Triad Park to the south and land in Forsyth County. 

Moore’s Creek’s floodplain is primarily used for agricultural purposes south of its confluence with Reedy 

Fork Creek. There are areas that have a sparse amount of residential low-density developments and areas that 

support an active equestrian trail system along the eastern banks of the creek. Below Stanley Huff Road, the 

few roads that access the creek corridor are mostly private. 

Higher density suburban development begins as you approach Northwest School Road. Land use will be 

restricted in the Moore’s Creek corridor because of the unique topography and soils associated with the creek 

corridor. The land use for the Haw River watershed in Guilford County is 20.5 percent agricultural, 75 percent 

or greater forest and 4.5 percent suburban, according to the EPA’s land use data. 

Information on land use in the study area was obtained from current zoning information and consultant 

field visits. Those lands most conducive to encouraging bicycling and walking contain a mix of residential, 

commercial and institutional lands. In general, mixed land use occurs primarily in the downtown area 

of Kernersville with commercial use concentrated along main roadway thoroughfares and residential lands 

located outside of these commercial strips. Institutional uses, such as parks, schools and community centers 

are scattered throughout the study area, usually along main thoroughfares. Land uses within specific areas of 

study are described in further detail in subsequent sections of this report. 

(Source: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) EnviroMapper for Watersheds-Surf your Watershed Program - 

www.epa.gov). 

Population 

The population of the Piedmont region known as the Triad has been steadily increasing over 

the last two decades. In Forsyth County, the population grew from 265,878 in 1990 to 306,067 in 

2000, a 15.1 percent increase. The land is 410 square miles with 746 people per square mile. In 

Guilford County, the population grew from 331,785 in 1990 to 421,048 in 2000, a 21.2 percent 

increase. The county has 649 square miles in land area with 648 persons per square mile. The 

twelve counties that make up the Piedmont Triad region are ranked as the third most populated 

in North Carolina. Population projections for the study area indicate a steady increase of people 

every five years to the year 2015. As the population continues to grow, the need for conservation 

of undeveloped lands, such as greenway corridors, will also increase. 

Public Transportation 

Transportation plans are different from thoroughfare plans. The Winston-Salem/Forsyth 

County Urban Area thoroughfare plan is the street and highway system component of the Winston-Salem/Forsyth 

County Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The plan makes area-wide 

recommendations for new streets and highways as well as improvements to existing roads based 

on traffic modeling data. The thoroughfare plan for the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Urban 

Area was adopted in June 2002. The 2025 Multi modal Long Range Transportation Plan for the 

Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Urban Area was adopted in April 2002. Two of the objectives of 

the transportation plan were: 

(1) Environment - Develop a transportation system that respects and enhances the 

natural and built environments, and, 

(2) Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation - create a bikeway/sidewalk/greenway network 

that is an integral part of the transportation system which provides an alternative means of 

transportation as well as recreational opportunities. 

Regional Transportation Study 

The Winston-Salem Forsyth County, Greensboro, and High Point Area Metropolitan Planning 

organizations with Forsyth, Guilford, Davidson and Randolph counties are currently undertaking 

a regional transportation study. The study has three elements: organizational, land use and 

transportation. The organizational element has been completed with legislation authorizing the 

creation of a Regional Transportation Authority. The land use and transportation elements are 

combined. Land use projections for the region and subsequent traffic modeling have been accomplished 

for the 2025 Trend Line Plan, for the 2025 Transit Directed Plan, which concentrates 

future growth in potential transit corridors, and for the 2025 Regional Growth Concept Plan, the 

recommended land-use alternative. Adoption of a Regional Transportation Plan will follow pub- 



lic meetings and community input. 

The region’s public transit system consists of various bus routes which provide service to the more 

developed sections of the cities located within the study area. Additionally, the Piedmont Authority for Regional 

Transportation (PART) is undertaking an “Intercity Rail Study”. The focus of this study is to examine 

the feasibility of providing intercity rail travel between Raleigh and Asheville through Winston-Salem and 

Greensboro generally along the Interstate 40 corridor”. West Mountain Street in Kernersville is also under 

consideration as a possible corridor for the rail route. At the time of the creation of this Piedmont Greenway 

Master Plan document, PART has not set a time line for a final rail alignment, nor has a final rail corridor been 

identified. If this rail route becomes the final alignment, then the trail could be placed on the other side of 

West Mountain Street, however, this would require a significant amount of easement agreements, and would 

be the most expensive and disruptive choice for residents that live in this section of the corridor. 

Greenway connections to transit stops along these roadways would encourage bicycle and pedestrian 

ridership and improve the efficiency of an inter modal transportation system being developed and updated. 

Infrastructure 

Infrastructure includes public and private utilities and the transportation network that extends through, 

within and around the project corridor. Infrastructure provides opportunities and constraints to Piedmont 

Greenway development and will shape the ultimate design development of the greenway as much as natural 

features. Some types of infrastructure, such as public roads with wide rights-of-way, can link the creek-based 

Piedmont Greenway corridor with other natural and cultural resources. Other infrastructure, such as electric 

power line utility easements, may intersect or run parallel with the greenway corridor, providing alternative 

routing for greenway development. 

The project corridor extends through a mix of rural and urban landscapes in Forsyth and Guilford Counties, 

most of which are served by municipal water supply and sanitary sewer services. Public facilities for the 

Piedmont Greenway should be located in urban areas of the counties in close proximity to electrical power 

and telephone service, municipal water supply and gravity feed municipal sanitary sewer services. Infrastructure 

that will influence design decisions includes the following: 

Electrical service lines 

Overhead electrical service lines that cross the Piedmont Greenway corridor and parallel or intersect the 

stream corridors (see segments 8, 9, 10, and 11 maps, pages 43, 45, 47, and 49 for locations) provide most 

electrical service. Information was obtained from the USGS 7.5 series quadrangles for Guilford and Forsyth 

Counties, North Carolina. The North Carolina Department of Transportation Geographic Information System 

data (NCDOT GIS) and the Counties of Guilford and Forsyth Planning Departments provided data. During 

the field review, local service line corridors were identified in areas that could serve as Piedmont Greenway 

corridors. Final decisions regarding the location of these auxiliary greenway corridors will necessarily 

be left to the construction document phase of this project. For Piedmont Greenway development 

purposes, overhead transmission lines are generally not a constraint but rather an opportunity 

for shared use of a valuable land corridor. 

Natural Gas and Petroleum transmission service lines 

Natural gas and petroleum transmission lines are located within the corridor. Information was 

obtained from the USGS 7.5 series quadrangles for Guilford and Forsyth Counties, North Carolina. 

The North Carolina Department of Transportation Geographic Information System data (NCDOT 

GIS) and the Counties of Guilford and Forsyth Planning Departments provided data. A natural gas 

pipeline crosses the Moore’s Creek corridor near Faye Street to the southeast and Great Oaks to the 

northwest (see segment 11 and 12 map, pages 49 and 51 for location). Other transmission lines and 

service lines may exist within the corridor, but are not identified in the current known data layer. 

The American Natural Gas Association is on record as supporting the shared use of their transmission 

rights of way for Piedmont Greenway and conservation purposes. 

Water service 

The cities of Kernersville and Greensboro supply water through main lines and service lines 

that originate from water treatment plants located throughout the cities and counties. Most of the 

water lines observed during the site investigations were located parallel to the roadway network 

and perpendicular to the Piedmont Greenway corridor. These lines should not pose a problem for 

future development of the Piedmont Greenway. 

Sanitary Sewer service 

Gravity flow sanitary sewer lines are present throughout the Piedmont Greenway corridor and 

do not present a problem for greenway routing. Many communities use sanitary sewer easements 

as the basis for determining trail locations. A properly constructed greenway trail can also serve as 

an access road for maintenance vehicles. Sewer easements do not offer easy access points to the 

Piedmont Greenway System. However, as growth occurs, these areas should be revisited for future 

subdivision access locations. 

In areas along the Piedmont Greenway corridor, sewer lines cross over the stream channels. 

In most instances the lines are elevated in order to avoid obstructions caused by floating debris during 

high flood levels. 

Storm water service 

Storm drainage pipes carry storm water from adjacent lands to the creeks. Many storm sewer 

outfalls discharge into the creeks throughout the corridor, especially near the suburban areas sur- 



ounding Triad Park and Kernersville. Several pastures and other agricultural land uses have storm water 

drainage and irrigation pipes leading into the creek. These storm water outfalls will need to be more accurately 

defined during the construction document phase of the project. 

Flood gauging stations along the project corridor with service roads located along the corridor may be 

used for access to the Piedmont Greenway. There is one gauging station located at the confluence of Reedy 

Fork Creek and Beaver Creek (see segment 11, page 49 for location). This gauging station (02093800 USGA) 

is operated in cooperation with the city of Greensboro and could be a future link to a Beaver Creek spur trail 

segment, opening up the opportunity for linking into the Mountains-to-Sea statewide trail system. Sections of 

the statewide trail are slated to be tied to the Haw River. 

Fiber Optic Service for Data Transmission 

Piedmont Greenway Incorporated is not aware of any fiber optic transmission lines present within the 

Piedmont Greenway corridor. Advanced telecommunications equipment in and around the urban and suburban 

areas probably utilize fiber optics. 

Roadway Network 

The Piedmont Greenway corridor is surrounded and bisected by an extensive network of local streets, 

collector streets, arterials, minor and major thoroughfares and the Interstate Highway System. 

Outside existing parks, pedestrians and bicyclists are currently forced to travel on sidewalks or share the 

travel lanes of roadways. Although many low speed, low traffic residential streets are safe for non-motorized 

travel, the major east-west corridor of West Mountain Street is not. Additionally, there are no readily defined 

routes to parks and schools. The current on-road system and the lack of adequate sight distances serves to 

discourage most recreational or transportation bicyclists. 

Portions of the proposed Piedmont Greenway corridor will make use of road rights-of-way and run parallel 

to the pavement on existing sidewalks (primarily in the Kernersville segments, see segments 1 - 8, pages 

29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39, 41, and 43). The Piedmont Greenway will bisect some roads and it is anticipated that 

two types of crossings will occur: (1) at-grade crossings on local residential, collector, and arterial streets; (2) 

below-grade crossing of minor and major thoroughfares and Interstate Highways (Highway 68 and Proposed 

Interstate 73; see segment 10 and 11 maps, page 47 and 49, and Business Interstate 40; see segment 1 map, 

page 29). 

Railway Network 

The railway network that extends through the project area is significant and poses both opportunities and 

constraints to Piedmont Greenway development. The founding of the railway network gave birth to the cities 

of Kernersville and Greensboro, and was responsible for leading the communities into the Industrial Age. 

Many of the numerous rail corridors that parallel or bisect the Piedmont Greenway corridor are still 

in operation today. 

Where the Piedmont Greenway corridor crosses railway corridors, two types of crossings are 

most acceptable. At-grade crossings of rail corridors are appropriate where an existing roadway 

crossing is already in place. When a rail corridor can be crossed with an underpass, it is preferable. 

Most of the railroad bridges have been built to withstand heavy loads, so they lend themselves to 

easy conversion to pedestrian trails and maintenance connections. 

At West Mountain Street in Kernersville, the Norfolk Southern Railroad right-of-way (ROW) 

and NCDOT right-of-way will be used for the Kernersville segments (see segment 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 , 7 

and 8 maps, pages 29, 31, 33, 35, 39, 41 and 43). The proposed Piedmont Greenway will continue 

to follow West Mountain Street and Hastings Hill Road to the intersection of Nelson Street. The 

greenway trail follows the ROW on the south side of the railroad. On the east side of the creek, 

the Piedmont Greenway will provide access to central downtown Kernersville and alternative spur 

trails that will lead to historic and cultural points of interest and parks along the corridor. Interpretive 

signage relating to the railroad industry and history of the city of Kernersville could be 

placed near the former railroad depot at Main Oak Street. 

In Guilford County, the proposed Summerfield Spur Trail that would link Lake Higgins and 

Lake Brandt with Summerfield Elementary School would use an abandoned railroad corridor in 

Guilford County. The first segment of this trail would start at Strawberry Road and follow the rail 

corridor to Summerfield Road. This segment has not been thoroughly investigated for ownership 

and needs further review as it will cross wetlands via existing railroad bridge pilings that could be 

retrofitted for a pedestrian bridge/boardwalk. The existing bridge underpass at Summerfield Road 

is in good shape and will readily allow trail development. 

Parks and Recreation Lands 

In Forsyth County, numerous parks are located throughout the project corridor which offers 

important opportunities for Piedmont Greenway destination points. These parks can be directly 

linked by the Piedmont Greenway and ultimately to other regional greenway systems. Most of 

these parks are within walking and bicycling distance of the corridor. The Salem Lake Park, 

Kernersville Lake Park, Old Kernersville Lake Park, YMCA, Fourth-of-July Park, Civitan Park, 

Harmon Park and Triad Park can be a cooperative effort between Forsyth and Guilford Counties as 

destination points along the Piedmont Greenway at the southern terminus of the project corridor. 

The YMCA offers indoor and outdoor facilities for basketball, volleyball, swimming, racquetball, 

weight lifting, exercise, field and roller hockey, softball, baseball, tennis and organized events. 



A historic restored one-room schoolhouse stands in the 16-acre, wooded Fourth of July Park. Civitan Park has 

seven acres of open green parkland, a walking trail and a picnic shelter. Harmon Park, like the other parks, 

has a playground, parking and rest rooms. 

Salem Lake, Kernersville Lake Park and Triad Park will serve as major destinations in Forsyth County. 

Salem Lake serves as the southern terminus of the Piedmont Greenway. The park offers six and one-half 

miles of existing trails that follow the lake shore for hiking, biking and equestrian uses. The lake also offers 

picnic areas, fishing, boating and a marina. As part of the 2015 greenways plan for Winston-Salem and 

Forsyth County, Salem Lake will serve as a major link to an envisioned regional link to Guilford County and 

the cities of Kernersville, High Point and Greensboro. 

Kernersville Lake Park will be accessed by a spur trail that will link it to the Piedmont Greenway System. 

Kernersville Lake Park offers a picnic shelter (150 people), rest rooms, picnic tables with grills, a 60- 

acre fishing lake, pedal and fishing boats for rent, sand volleyball court, horseshoe pits, a small playground 

and a parking lot. Groups and individuals enjoy lake side picnicking and the opportunity to fish from the bank 

or a boat. Children especially enjoy the brightly colored pedal boats and a chance to observe and enjoy the 

atmosphere of animal and marine life at this local water source. 

Triad Park is a joint venture of Forsyth and Guilford Counties. The counties have purchased a total of 

426 acres as a regional centerpiece park, which has nature-based park facilities nestled in the woods and 

meadows. The park plan leaves the majority of the parkland in its natural state. Triad Park will serve as a 

central trailhead for the Piedmont Greenway. The Piedmont Greenway System will take advantage of numerous 

existing (and planned) trails and will enter the park via Reedy Fork Creek at its western boundary 

along an existing greenway easement. The Piedmont Greenway will leave the park near Cross creek Road. 

In Guilford County historic side tours of places like the Old Guilford Mill and Museum and Oak Ridge 

Military Academy are available. Lake Higgins will serve as the northern terminus of the primary Piedmont 

Greenway System. The lake offers numerous trails for hiking and biking and a marina that serves both angler 

and water enthusiasts. The system of Lake Higgins trails is often used by school groups because of the relatively 

short trails offered in some easily accessible areas, and the many opportunities to spot bald eagles and 

diverse plant and animal species. The lake has a large parking area that will easily handle trailhead parking. 

Lake Brandt is directly across Route 220 from Lake Higgins, and the alternative Summerfield Spur Trail will 

offer a direct link to Lake Brandt and a link to Summerfield Elementary School. The Greensboro Parks and 

Recreation Department maintains a diversity of park and open space resources. This planning effort is being 

coordinated with the Piedmont Greenway Master Plan to take advantage of any opportunities for joint use of 

parklands or greenway connections between recreation facilities. 

Community Facilities and Schools 

There are many local government and community recreation facilities which offer ball fields, 

soccer fields, basketball courts, playgrounds, picnic facilities, walking trails and tennis courts 

within the Piedmont Greenway corridor. Several schools are also adjacent or near the Piedmont 

Greenway corridor. 

Schools 

Local elementary, middle, and high schools can benefit directly from the development of the 

Piedmont Greenway. School curricula could incorporate themes such as the heritage of communities, 

the stream corridors, wildlife habitats and water quality. The Piedmont Greenway could also 

provide an alternative transportation route (walking and bicycling) for schoolchildren and employees. 

In addition to large recreational regional facilities along the Piedmont Greenway corridor, 

schools with the potential for access to the main Piedmont Greenway include: 

• East Forsyth High School - easy and safe access to Salem Lake and Kernersville area. 

• Cash Elementary School - access to Kernersville Lake Park and Salem Lake. 

• Kernersville Elementary School - access to city parks and Triad Park. 

• Northwest High School - access to Lake Higgins and Lake Brandt. 

• Northwest Middle School - access to Lake Higgins and Lake Brandt. 

• Summerfield Elementary School - access to Lake Higgins and Lake Brandt. 

Historic and Cultural Resources 

The Piedmont region has a long and rich history. The region’s natural geography and topography, 

its rivers and valleys, attracted its first known inhabitants. Native Americans occupied the 

land until the arrival of European settlers. The history of Piedmont’s people, places and events attracts 

many tourists each year. The region’s natural and cultural heritages are defining elements of 

the community that should continue to be protected for the enjoyment of visitors and residents for 

years to come. Some notable historic and cultural resources sites in the study area include: 

• Körner’s Folly - A National Register property since 1970, the Folly is a landmark located 

on Kernersville’s South Main Street. Long considered one of the strangest house ever 

constructed, it is considered an architectural wonder. The house can be accessed from the 



main Piedmont Greenway trail along Mountain Street and South Main Street. 

• Hester-Vance House - located on Salisbury Street in Kernersville, originally was used as slave 

quarters. 

• Fourth of July Park School House - The historic restored one-room schoolhouse stands 

in the 16-acre wooded park. 

Existing Bicycle and Trail Routes 

Many roadways in the study area are not suitable for bicycle traffic. There is a system of 

designated routes and cyclists can use the North Carolina Bicycle Transportation Map as a guide. 

This map was developed as part of a Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan funded by NCDOT, and is available 

from NCDOT. The map shows several roadways in the study area and their bicycle suitability 

rating—easy, moderate, advanced and use extreme caution—according to traffic conditions, sight 

distances and pavement width. In Guilford County, the City of Greensboro has also produced a 

• Old Mill of Guilford - Listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the mill is nestled 

just outside of Greensboro along highway 68 on the banks of Beaver Creek. The Mill 

started operation around 1764. Products from the Old Mill such as stone ground meals, grits 

and flours are sold on the premises and are shipped all over the world. 

• Oak Ridge Military Academy - The columned brick buildings of the Oak Ridge Military 

Academy have stood since the academy was established in 1852. Oak Ridge Military Academy was 

founded more than 150 years ago and continues to follow military traditions that have spanned world 

wars and other conflicts. 

Since both Körner’s Folly and the Hester-Vance House are important historical sites, the Piedmont 

Greenway could provide interpretation trail of these sites in context of the historic evolution of the Town of 

Kernersville. 

Careful planning and consideration must be given to these important cultural and historic sites in order 

to link Piedmont Greenway and future corridors within the town. Current access to these facilities from 

the corridor is generally inadequate. Many of the streets parallel to the corridor could provide access to the 

Piedmont Greenway, while others lack sidewalks and necessary width for safe walking and bicycling. The 

Piedmont Greenway can link to many of these historical and cultural sites. The proposed Piedmont Greenway 

provides an expansion of the community-related theme that in the future can extend into the neighborhoods of 

Kernersville and create an exciting partnership among its diverse socioeconomic groups. 

Existing Trail, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities 

Although the natural beauty of the region surrounds the study corridor, significant opportunities for 

outdoor recreation are generally limited to public lands located outside of city limits. Residents and visitors 

to the area must travel along narrow and/or busy roadways to reach the hiking, bicycling or equestrian trails 

located within the parks such as Salem Lake, Lake Brandt and Lake Higgins. With a few exceptions, closeto-home 

recreation and non-motorized transportation facilities are currently unavailable within the study area. 

These exceptions include opportunities provided by a few scattered, short segments of trails located within the 

cities and counties which could serve as links for a future central greenway system. The following is a description 

of the major trails and bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the Piedmont region. 

“Greensboro Area Bike & Trail Map.” This map overlays the existing road system and shows 

existing bike and tails systems. The City of Greensboro Parks and Recreation Department, Planning 

Department, and Guilford County Department of Transportation produced the map. The map 

is available from any of these departments. The Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Bike Map identifies 

County and urban bicycle routes, greenways, urban parks, schools, and other points of interest. 

This plan is available at the Winston-Salem Transportation Department and from the City/County 

Planning Department. 



Multi-Use Trails and Greenways 

The counties have developed public greenway segments. The most important segments for this study are 

the Salem Lake Greenway, Triad Park trail system, Lake Higgins trail system and Lake Brandt trail system. 

The proposed Piedmont Greenway has been part of an identified potential corridor in both counties. Each 

county has planned various segments such as Kerners Mill Creek and Reedy Fork Creek, but they have not 

addressed the continuous system that the Piedmont Greenway Master Plan presents. 

Types of Greenway Corridors 

There are numerous potential corridors within the study area that could serve as greenways. These linear 

corridors will require future research to determine their viability for greenway and trail use. The predominant 

corridor types can be divided into two main categories: off-road including river and stream corridors, abandoned 

roads, utility easements, and 

abandoned railroad corridors and 

on-road. 

Off-Road Corridors 

Rivers and Streams 

The first human inhabitants in 

what is now Piedmont Triad were 

attracted to the area in part by the 

fertile land and abundant water. The 

advent of the railroad later produced 

a major trading and transportation 

route. The creeks and streams have 

fostered economic prosperity as 

farms developed along the riverbanks, 

then suffered from floods and 

the pollution of human and animal 

waste. The area has enjoyed rather 

clean water throughout the development of the landscape, but population increases over the past decade have 

adversely affected water quality and the floodplains. The development of greenways along these creeks and 

streams can be an important part of efforts to reclaim these water bodies and reconnect the citizens to their 

historic past for sustainable future development. 

Numerous creeks meander through areas of the study corridor, as described in previous sections. Natural 

water features and floodplains in the urbanized areas of the corridor are channelized in some places and 

have been adversely affected by encroaching development. Increasing amounts of impervious surfaces within 

these floodplains are taxing both the health and basic function of these stream and creek corridors, 

resulting in the threat of poor water quality and flooding during peak storms. Most of the level land 

in the region is located within floodplains and development has occurred in these areas. Despite 

the threat of flooding, residential areas have encroached upon the creeks. In some places, houses 

have been constructed only a few feet away from running water. It will be critical in the future to 

preserve these creek corridors with greenways, not only to provide recreation and transportation 

trail resources, but also to protect floodplains from further degradation, improve water quality and 

protect lives and property from the devastation of flooding. 

Abandoned Roads 

There are abandoned farm roads in some 

sections of the floodplains along the creeks that 

could be used as greenway corridors. Although 

maps of these old roadways are not available, 

abandoned roads left chemicals in the ballast, 

soil and surrounding vegetation. Bridges and 

other facilities were removed as part of the rail 

operators’ salvage of some abandoned corridors 

and each section must be evaluated on an 

individual basis to determine its feasibility as a 

viable rail/trail conversion. 

Railroads 

Former rail corridors are well suited to 

trail development. The grades are normally 

flat to slightly sloping and the bridges, trestles 

and other support structures that lie within the 

corridor were developed to support heavy and 

frequent rail car use. It should be noted that 

existing railroad corridors also make ideal trail 

settings because impact to native vegetation and soil has already taken place and cross drainage 

of storm waters has been successfully resolved. The Summerfield Spur Trail segment in this plan 

proposes to use the abandoned railroad corridor just north of Lake Brandt. Some of the problems 

typically encountered with rail corridors conversion to trail use include title issues related to the 

possible use of the corridor, and opposition from landowners who are not acquainted with the positive 

benefits of trails. 

It will be important to monitor railroad activity in the study area. Active freight lines need to 

be identified and monitored so that action may be taken quickly should they become abandoned. 



The status of local lines could change in the future, depending on freight demand, and short-line railroads 

could be abandoned with only a brief public notice to indicate their intent. Therefore, all railroad lines in the 

region should be monitored periodically to determine their current status. 

the street system. Disadvantages include proximity to automobile traffic, lack of pedestrian scale, 

narrow roads and high volume intersections. Retrofitting public roadways for bicycle and pedestrian 

use must be coordinated with the appropriate local and state departments of transportation. 

Once a railroad has formally registered its intent to abandon a specific line, the rail bed can be preserved 

as a corridor for trail use through “rail banking.” The rail-banking program was created through the 1983 National 

Trails System Act to allow for conversion of rail lines for trail use. The window of opportunity for filing 

for rail banking requests is relatively narrow. If a line is rail-banked, the corridor is treated as if it had not 

been abandoned, and as a result the integrity of the corridor is maintained and this stops reversions to adjacent 

landowners. However, the line is subject to possible future restoration of rail service. 

Even if railroad lines are not abandoned, they can still be utilized as trail corridors in the future under 

a concept called “rails-with-trails.” Developing a rail-with-trail involves installing a multiuse public trail 

alongside an active railroad track in a way that is safe to all users. This approach is becoming an increasingly 

important tool in trail building efforts across the country, according to Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, an 

organization that has published a study evaluating 16 existing rails-with-trails. The study, “Rails-with-Trails: 

Sharing Corridors for Recreation and Transportation,” found that appropriately designed rails-with-trails are 

highly successful and extremely safe. (Source: Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, www.railtrails.org) 

On-Road Corridors 

In urban areas, greenway systems 

inevitably connect to the existing street 

system. In many cases, local streets are the 

only linear corridors available for bicycle 

and pedestrian use. Therefore, the most 

successful greenway systems across the 

country combine off-road trails with an 

extensive on-road system of bicycle facilities 

and sidewalks. This type of network 

best suits the needs of people who bicycle 

and walk for transportation reasons since 

all major destination points connect directly 

to the street system. 

Some advantages of this approach include 

availability of publicly owned land, 

presence of paved shoulders and wide 

outside lanes along some roads, ease of 

access and use and public familiarity with 



Overview 

MASTER PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Piedmont Greenway System is designed to be a network of land and water corridors in Forsyth and 

Guilford Counties. The greenway will serve to protect and promote the qualities of these corridors, places 

where land connects to water; people connect to nature; people connect to parks; home connects to work, 

school and shops; and city connects to countryside. 

The concept of a greenway in Forsyth and Guilford counties can be realized through implementation 

of the Piedmont Greenway Master Plan presented here. The plan provides background information and action 

steps for establishing a eighteen mile greenway corridor that will provide transportation, environmental, 

health, recreation, economic, educational and cultural benefits while improving air and water quality and 

preserving natural habitats. 

The Piedmont Greenway Master Plan will enhance future economic and social development in the communities 

it touches. If the recommendations contained in this visionary plan are implemented, local residents 

will find themselves connected in exciting new ways to their natural and cultural environment as they move 

forward into the 21st century. 

Eleven greenway segments are proposed as the primary Piedmont Greenway (Figure 2. page 27). The 

remaining four segments are considered alternative spur greenways and will serve as enhancements to the 

primary greenway. Together, the primary system and spur greenways make up the entire proposed Piedmont 

Greenway. This system defines the location of multi-objective greenway segments but does not reflect specific 

greenway routing or the development and location of trails and other public access facilities. A site-specific 

evaluation and plan for each corridor must be completed before final greenway routing, level of use and facility 

development is determined. 

The primary Piedmont Greenway corridor extends from the existing Salem Lake trail system in Forsyth 

County to the Lake Higgins trail system in Guilford County. It includes spur trail segments from the YMCA 

Spur Trail linkage from Old Kernersville Lake Park to an on-road segment along Cherry Street to the intersection 

of the Norfolk Southern Railroad ROW and ends at Nelson Street where it will link back to the main 

Piedmont Greenway. There is a 2.2 mile (see Segment 5, YMCA Spur Trail map, page 37) segment from the 

Kernersville YMCA to Old Kernersville Lake Park. In addition, an alternative 1.3 mile Kernersville Lake 

Park Spur Trail (see Segment 3 map, page 33) will connect Cash Elementary to Kernersville Lake Park. The 

3-mile Summerfield Spur Trail will link not only the Summerfield area with the primary Piedmont Greenway 

system, but will also link into the Lake Brandt trail system and the future Mountains-to-Sea Trail. The spur 

trails are primarily recreation-oriented and link together various landscapes and community land 

uses through a multifunctional system. The Master Plan for the Piedmont Greenway responds to 

the landscape that constitutes the project corridor and incorporates public comment. Recommendations 

include points of public entry, primary routes and spur trails. 

The public will be able to gain access to the Piedmont Greenway corridor at many locations. 

These access points are known as “trailheads.” Throughout the corridor, there are three principal 

trailheads: 

1.) Linville Road Trailhead, at the southern end of the project corridor in Forsyth County; 

2.) Triad Park Trailhead centrally located between both counties; 

3.) Pleasant Ridge Road Trailhead located in Guilford County; 

4.) Lake Higgins Trailhead, which is near the northern end of the project corridor in Guilford 

County. 

All of these trailheads exist at present and are associated with their respective parks except the 

proposed Pleasant Ridge Road Trailhead. This trailhead will serve the Moore’s Creek trail corridor 

and will provide parking for approximately 10 vehicles. Each trailhead will offer trail users access 

to other transportation modes, public parking, trail information and bike racks. Additionally, 

some of the trailheads already offer rest rooms, canoe access, drinking fountains, special events, 

concessions and tourist information. Secondary points of public entry exist throughout the project 

corridor in the form of spur connector trails and at intersections with roadways. The relevant components 

of the Piedmont Greenway recommendations will be described in the Proposed Piedmont 

Greenway Alignment section (see page 25), and Design Guidelines (see page 56). 

Opportunities and Constraints 

The consultant has thoroughly examined the Piedmont Greenway corridor and Reedy Fork 

Creek and Moore’s Creek from its confluence with Lake Higgins, using field surveys, GIS, and city 

maps. Opportunities and constraints identified during the evaluation will serve to guide Piedmont 

Greenway development. 

Opportunities: 

• Partial use of the Norfolk Southern railway right-of-way and NCDOT right-of-way along 

the north side of West Mountain Street and Hastings Hill Road to near Nelson Street in 

Kernersville. This alignment would offer the trail user the least amount of vehicular/pedestrian 

conflicts because of the low number of driveways, and the signalled intersections for the rail 

road already in place. 



• As an alternative, the south side of the West Mountain Street corridor could be used if the NCDOT or 

the Norfolk Southern railroad right-of-ways could not be obtained. 

• Most of Reedy Fork Creek has a gentle elevated bank on the east side which may be used for future 

trail development. 

• Numerous adjacent city parks, regional parks, farms, rivers, creeks, wetlands and historic and cultural 

sites provide environmental, historic and scenic interest. 

• Most road and railroad crossings are grade separated by bridge, others will use existing box culverts 

and or underpasses; some may have historic significance. 

• Some parts of the corridor are highly suitable for trail development due to the nearly flat, elevated 

slopes, making grading and other trail preparation unnecessary. 

• Canoe access can easily be provided at Piedmont Greenway trailheads. Salem Lake, Lake Higgins, 

and Lake Brandt are excellent canoeing resources. 

• Natural Heritage sites exist along Moore’s Creek where trail users will be able to observe flora and 

fauna of the area without disturbing the sites. Blue heron, turtles, kingfishers and other birds, reptiles 

and fish were sighted during the inventory. 

• The location of the Piedmont Greenway is in close proximity to many suburban areas of central 

Forsyth and Guilford Counties, while also linking trail users to the Triad Park and other destination 

points. 

• Many schools and community centers are located within the Piedmont Greenway corridor, offering 

alternative modes of transportation to these sites and opportunities for environmental education. 

• Both the Reedy Fork and Moore’s Creek corridor are rich in local history and culture. Many nearby 

sites could be interpreted with displays and markers along the Piedmont Greenway. 

• Parking areas at existing Salem Lake, Triad Park, Lake Higgins and the various schools along the 

corridor are excellent, and provide ample parking space for a diverse set of trail users, including 

people with limited abilities and even equestrian users in designated areas. 

Constraints: 

• An existing box culvert that crosses under Business Interstate 40 will have to be retrofitted 

and the use will have to be approved by the NCDOT. A boardwalk or other flood prone 

trail will have to be built on the southern side to allow users access to the box culvert. 

• The southern West Mountain Street corridor would involve a significant number of 

private land owners who may not grant easements on their property. There are numerous 

pedestrian/vehicluar conflicts with the existing driveways for the private residents. 

Facility Development and Use 

The level of facility development and use for a greenway corridor could vary significantly. Some 

might contain paved trails for walking, bicycling, rollerblading, and cross-country skiing while others 

would feature unpaved trails for multiple or single uses. Some may not contain trails. Moreover, 

levels of facility development and use could vary within individual corridors. During the 

second series of community workshops, participants were asked to complete a corridor-use survey 

to determine what they felt were the most appropriate levels of use for the primary greenway corridors. 

The detailed results of this survey are provided later in this chapter, and they indicate a need 

and willingness for a planned trail system. Levels of development and use should be assigned to 

specific corridors based on more detailed studies of each, and further community involvement. 

Level 1: No facility development 

This designation would apply to corridors containing environmentally sensitive areas, steep 

slopes, wetlands or other constraints that make greenway facility development undesirable or 

impossible. The corridor would remain primarily in a natural state and human access would be extremely 

limited. Other functions for these corridors would include floodplain management, water 

quality protection and conservation of important habitat for wildlife and plants. 

The restoration of stream banks and renegotiation of 

natural areas may be necessary to facilitate a multi-objective 

corridor. Restoration and renegotiation activity may be 

required along those greenways containing trails and other 

facilities as well in order to maximize water quality, wildlife 

habitat and other functions of Level 2 through Level 4 

greenway corridors. 

Level 2: Limited development, low impact uses 

This designation would apply to corridors containing 

environmentally sensitive areas that limit the extent of 

greenway facility development. The corridor would remain 

primarily in a natural state, with gravel or dirt trails 

(4 to 6 feet wide) for use by one or two low impact user groups such as hikers and/or equestrians. 



Trailhead facilities and other amenities (such as signage and picnic 

tables) would be limited. 

Level 3: Multi-use unpaved trail development 

This designation would apply to greenway corridors where the 

adjacent natural areas, rural landscapes or historic sites dictate a more 

natural development objective. These would be corridors located outside 

of areas which experience frequent flooding, or greenways where 

use is anticipated to be lower than in other areas and primarily recreational. 

The unpaved trails could be surfaced with gravel or crushed 

stone (10 to 12 feet wide) for use by such groups as bicyclists, joggers 

and equestrians. Wheelchair users and persons with strollers can use 

trails designed to ADA standards and surfaced with compacted crushed 

stone. Trailhead facilities and other amenities such as benches, signage 

and picnic tables would be developed as needed where appropriate. 

Level 4: Multiuse paved trail development 

This designation would apply to corridors where high use is anticipated, 

greenways that do not contain environmentally sensitive areas, 

corridors likely to be used as transportation routes, greenways located 

within frequently flooded areas or those located in urban settings. User 

groups such as bicyclists, joggers, wheelchair users and rollerblades 

would require surfacing the paved trails with asphalt or concrete (10 

to 12 feet wide). Although asphalt is the most common paved surface 

used for greenway trails, concrete is best for areas experiencing frequent 

flooding. Trailhead facilities and other amenities such as lights, 

benches and signage would be developed as needed where appropriate. 

Level 5: On-road (sidewalks and bikeways) 

This designation would apply to corridors in urban areas where an 

off-road option is not possible, or corridors which function as connections 

between off-road trails and major origins and destinations. Onroad 

greenways would consist of sidewalks for pedestrian use and bikeways 

for cyclists. Bikeways can vary from 6-foot wide bicycle lanes 

(complete with pavement striping and signage) to 4-foot wide paved 

roadway shoulders to a 14-foot wide curb lane to be shared by cyclists 

and motorists. Pedestrian-scale lighting, street trees, benches and other 

amenities could be developed to encourage sidewalk use. 

Level 6: Water-Based Trails 

This designation applies to those rivers and streams 

that can successfully accommodate and/or which are 

designated to support canoeing, kayaking and boating. 

Water-based trails can be designed with features and facilities 

that make this activity more enjoyable for residents, 

including signage systems, safety systems, etc. 

Segment Descriptions 

The primary Piedmont Greenway is the backbone of 

the entire system. Spur greenways are important components 

of the system because they will provide essential routes which support the primary corridors. 

Due to the number of these possible spur connections, only the feasible (a total of four) are described 

in detail in this Master Plan. 

Each of the primary greenway segments recommended for development is described as follows. 

The segments are not listed in priority order. The location of these corridors is depicted on 

the Greenway System Maps. 

The Master Plan for Piedmont Greenway establishes a short-term and long-term vision for 

how the community should develop new trail facilities and mange riparian landscapes adjacent to 

the Piedmont Greenway. Most importantly, this Master Plan defines a realistic and implementready 

action plan for improving the resources of Piedmont Greenway and the surrounding environs 

so that they will become a prized community and regional asset, promoting economic development 

and improved living conditions for residents of both counties. 

The recommendations of this Master Plan are the result of two primary sources of information: 

1) A technical review of the project corridor to define opportunities and constraints that 

influence Piedmont Greenway development adjacent to the Piedmont Greenway; 

2) The public input received during the master planning process through community 

workshops, and one-on-one discussions with landowners and local residents. 

This information was used to define a feasible, realistic and visionary design program for the 

Piedmont Greenway. This Master Plan owes much to local resources and citizen input. It reflects 

the desires, concerns and aspirations of the residents of Forsyth and Guilford counties, most of 

whom concur with the goals, objectives and implementation strategies developed for the Piedmont 

Greenway. 



Proposed Piedmont Greenway Alignment 

The Piedmont Greenway Master Plan offers a vision for the future economic and social development of 

the community. In order to establish the eighteen mile Piedmont Greenway in a manner that meets the opportunities, 

constraints and goals of the project, the following primary Piedmont Greenway facilities are proposed 

for future development. The following maps illustrate important “built” systems and natural systems of the 

project corridor that served to influence the final Piedmont Greenway Master Plan map. 

Of particular importance is the scope of both private and public lands that will benefit from a connection 

to the Piedmont Greenway. These connections would enable local residents to gain access to the Piedmont 

Greenway for transportation, recreation and education purposes defined within this Master Plan, and include 

elements that are directly related to development of the trail and associated support facilities. This description 

of the Piedmont Greenway alignment begins at the natural divisions that were identified as key regions for the 

generation of this master plan as follows: 

• Salem Lake Region 

• Residential and Downtown Kernersville 

• Residential Greensboro 

• Lakes Segment 

Segment 1 of the Piedmont Greenway begins at Salem Lake and extends north to Segment 14 at Lake 

Higgins; some phases are alternative spur trails that are not part of the primary Piedmont Greenway but serve 

only as connecting trail systems, they include Segments 3, 5, 6, and 14. The following description of Piedmont 

Greenway begins with a description of proposed trailheads, the major public entry points into the Piedmont 


Salem Lake 

Anchored by the Salem Lake Natural Area, this section of the Piedmont Greenway is proposed as a recreational 

and educational trail stretching from Salem Lake to the East Forsyth High School. The Salem Lake 

section was field-surveyed in October 2000. It is proposed that the Piedmont Greenway will be a multiuse 

trail in this section that will include a diverse makeup of users such as walkers, bike riders and equestrians 

(for Salem Lake portion only). This portion of the trail will reconnect the public with city and county park 

land. The trail corridor will start at the existing Leesville Road trailhead at Salem Lake and continue across 

Leesville Road where it will follow existing an sewer easement while skirting significant wetland areas until 

reaching the box culvert at Business I-40, here the trail will cross under the highway before reaching the final 

destination of East Forsyth High School. 

Residential and Downtown Kernersville 

This main arterial roadway is an urban section of the Piedmont Greenway that will serve as a central 

spine through Kernersville. Historical treasures such as Körner’s Folly offer unique destinations 

from the Piedmont Greenway. Kernersville Lake will provide a northern link and offers spectacular 

recreational opportunities. Ultimately, the Piedmont Greenway will link into an off-road 

trail that connects the YMCA with Kerners Mill Creek and the downtown commercial district of 

Kernersville and area neighborhoods with Triad Park. 

Residential Greensboro 

The Residential Greensboro section (Guilford County) including Reedy Fork Creek was fieldsurveyed 

in September 2000 and January 2001. It is proposed that the Piedmont Greenway will be 

a multiuse trail in this section that will include a diverse makeup of users such as walkers, bike riders 

and equestrians. This will be the central spine of the Piedmont Greenway network. Several segments 

of the creek will reconnect the public with city and county historic and scenic farmlands. The 

trail corridor will continue to the confluence of Reedy Fork Creek where it will follow the creek 

corridor until it reaches a major destination, Triad Park trail system. Triad Park is a joint venture of 

Forsyth and Guilford counties. With sections of trail already completed in Triad Park’s eventual 

eight-mile trail system, plans are to extend the Piedmont Greenway northward along the scenic and 

rural areas of Reedy Fork Creek. The Piedmont Greenway will utilize the existing system, following 

the Reedy Fork Creek corridor at its southern entrance and northern exit from the park system. 

Triad Park offers a unique central destination for the Piedmont Greenway and will offer trailhead 

parking. 

As the Piedmont Greenway continues northeast in Guilford County, it traverses a corridor 

made up of suburban and rural countryside. Reedy Fork Creek offers an opportunity to preserve 

a continuous green corridor from development. The trail will cross under the proposed Interstate 

73 near its confluence with Reedy Fork Creek. From this point, the trail will diverge along a drainage 

draw that will take it from Reedy Fork Creek near Northwest High School. Because of the 

fragmented traffic patterns and potential vehicular conflict areas near the adjacent schools, a highly 

visible crossing at Northwest School Road is recommended. The trail will follow Reedy Fork 

Creek and allow the corridor to act as a spine that enables users to link to schools, neighborhoods 

and historic sites including the Oak Ridge area, the Old Mill of Guilford and Northwest Middle and 

High Schools. 

Lakes Segment 

The lakes segment will serve as the central spine of the Piedmont Greenway network in northern 

Guilford County and will provide the final linkage to Lake Higgins. Plans are to extend the 

Piedmont Greenway northward along the scenic and rural environs of Moore’s Creek. The trail will 

provide recreational activities and will use an existing equestrian trail system. Several segments of 

the creek will reconnect the public with historic and scenic farmlands. Neighborhoods near the corridor 

will be able to link into the system, providing access to area schools and Lake Higgins Park. 



The trail will meet Reedy Fork Creek and continue along its floodplain and link into sections of existing trails 

in Lake Higgins Park with linkages to Bur-Mil-Park and Lake Brandt. 

The lakes segment that included the Moore’s Creek corridor section was field-surveyed in January 2001. 

On September 15-16, 2000, the field teams surveyed the areas between Stanley Huff Road and the junction 

of Moore’s Creek and Reedy Fork Creek at Lewiston Road. This survey included the last segment of Reedy 

Fork Creek to the proposed Lake Higgins trailhead. A small portion of the northernmost section of Reedy 

Fork Creek was evaluated at its confluence with Lake Brandt. Representatives from Bur-Mil-Park extensively 

surveyed this area of the creek. This survey extended from the confluence of Reedy Fork Creek south to 

Lewiston Road. In addition to the field survey, a driving tour of adjacent roads and properties along the creek 

corridor was performed to understand the surrounding land use and character of the creek. This section of 

the creek was deemed unsuitable for development because of the amount of disturbance to the watershed and 

numerous wetlands and branded stream patterns of Reedy Fork Creek in its headwaters with Lake Brandt. 

The primary trail will parallel a small portion of the road, then cross onto and use public school property 

to the confluence of Moore’s Creek. Moore’s Creek flows through a suburban corridor to Stanley Huff Road. 

A traffic crossing will be necessary to link to the other side of the trail. The Piedmont Greenway will follow 

a more rural segment as it leaves Stanley Huff Road and continues its track along the northern stream corridor 

of Moore’s Creek. This section of Moore’s Creek offers some of the most spectacular views and natural 

biodiversity of the whole corridor. The trail will share use with some equestrian trails already in place and 

then continue through the stream corridor and open fields until reaching Lewiston Road and the confluence of 

Moore’s Creek and Reedy Fork Creek. 

The trail will follow under the bridge at Lewiston Road and traverse a proposed boardwalk trail through 

the wetlands and riparian forest cover of Reedy Fork Creek. The trail takes on a more pronounced topography 

as it travels uphill and away from the creek bottom and follows the uplands to the vistas of Lake Higgins and 

Lake Brandt. The potential for pedestrian and bicycle activity within the Bur-Mil-Park to feed into the southern 

portion of the Piedmont Greenway is exciting. This connection would allow residents of nearby neighborhoods 

to access the Piedmont Greenway corridor. Important sites and schools include Lake Higgins, Lake 

Brandt, and Summerfield Elementary School. 

Spur Trails (Neighborhood) Connectors 

Intended to help spur the connectivity of neighborhoods to their surroundings, connector trails will offer 

“safe walks” along public roads that will connect open spaces and provide residents with alternative routes to 

school, shopping or work, and recreational destinations (see figure 2, page 29). 



Primary Piedmont Greenway Segments 

Spur Trail Piedmont Greenway Segments 

Figure 2. Primary & Spur Trail Piedmont Greenway Segments 



Segment 1: Salem Lake 

to East Forsyth High School 

This segment of the trail system is approximately 1.5 miles in length and will consist of a 10-foot wide 

multi-use trail constructed of asphalt, boardwalk and/or concrete where deemed necessary due to site conditions 

and maintenance issues. At the southern terminus of the Piedmont Greenway portion of the corridor, an 

existing trailhead will be used on the Salem Lake property, a city-run park managed by the Winston-Salem 

Parks and Recreation Department. The Salem Lake trailhead serves the existing Salem Lake Trail System 

and this parking area can accommodate large buses and vans, recreational vehicles, and autos with trailers. 

At Linville Road, a small parking area exists that will allow vehicle access to the Piedmont Greenway 

. The consultant recommends that a signed and/or signaled crosswalk be installed to access this greenway 

trailhead because of the heavy and high-speed traffic using this road. 

and dimensions lend itself to the retro-fit. The design will maintain the intended purpose of the 

box as a flood-prone side channel during heavy flooding. As the trail leaves the culvert underpass, 

there is a small section adjacent to Business I-40 on the northern side where boardwalk is recommended. 

City-owned land on the western side of Hastings Hill Road and a small portion of school 

property will allow easy access for both the school and trail users. Safety and controlled access to 

and from the school will need to be addressed. The trail can be fenced along the school property 

with a gated access provided in a controlled setting. 

On the Salem Lake Greenway, where the major greenway 

parking is located, an entry area is provided as a formal 

link to a 10-foot wide asphalt trail that circles the lake. This 

entry area provides bench seating, a bike rack, information 

signage and natural landscaping. The trail user can access the 

Piedmont Greenway trail by using this parking lot, or use the 

Linville Road parking lot for a more direct access point. Information 

markers will be placed at both trailheads showing the 

location and distances to various points of interest along the 

primary Piedmont Greenway trail (spur trail information can 

be added at a later date). In addition, an information kiosk to 

coordinate special events such as nature walks, historical and 

cultural walks, will be placed in the Linville Road Traihead. 

The Greenway trail will extend north along the west side of 

Kerners Mill Creek and continue to East Forsyth High School. 

Access from the Linville Road Trail Head to the box culvert 

underpass at Business I-40, will require boardwalk and a 

trail capable of withstanding flooding, as it will be sited within 

the 100-year flood plain. The consultant has carefully considered 

all options for this section of the trail. The box culvert 

will have to be retro-fitted to accept the trail. Currently the 

box culvert consists of a four-chambered culvert with each 

"box" approximately 14 feet by 14 feet. The trail will use the 

northwestern-most box as a trail as its concrete construction 

Figure 3. Location of Segment 1 

SEGMENT 1 

Primary Greenway Segments 

Spur Trail Greenway Segments 


Final Master Plan Report • 28

39 

Willow Bend 

Legend 

Deer Crossing 

Raven Ridge 

Primary Greenway Trail 

Walkertown Guthrie 

Road 

X 

Mountain 

Road 

X 

Doe Run 

Mill Brook 

Hunters 

Existing Parkland 

& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 

Hunters Path 

Road 

X 

Timber Forest 

Streams & Rivers 

Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Gaither 

Martin Mi l Creek 

Powerlines 

23 

Johnson Controls 

State Road 2347 

EAST FORSYTH HIGH 

Hastings Hill 

City Owned 

Property 

Doe Run 

Forrest Acres 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 

Athletic Field 

Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 

Existing Retaining Wall 

Utility 

Exisitng Bridge 

Exisitng Building 

Existing Canopy 

Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 

Cash Elementary School 

Johnson Control 

Hammond 

Willamont 

Deer Rack 

East Forsyth High School 

Kernersville Elem. School 

40 

Rail Road Corridor 

Mountain 

Box 

Culvert 

I 40 (Business) 

Buck Run 

Zoning 

Unknown 

CB 

GB 

GB S 

GI 

Kernersville Middle School 

100 year Flood FEMA 

NO S 

PB 

PB S 

RM12 

RM12 S 

Hastings Hill 

Old Greensboro 

GI S 

RM18 

Myer Lee 

I 40 (Business) 

Old Greensboro 

Linville 

City Owned 

Property 

Trail Inn 

Old Wood 

Woodbridge 

Ben Smith 

Hastings Hill 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

IP 

IP S 

LB 

RM18 S 

RM5 

RM8 

RM8 S 

RMU S 

RS12 

New Greensboro 

52 

Kerners Mill Creek 

Sedge Garden 

LB S 

LI 

LI S 

LO S 

RS12 S 

RS20 

RS20 S 

RS7 

Laurel 

Acorn Knolls 

Pinebark 

Road 

X 

City Owned 

Property 

MH 

MH S 

NB 

RS7 S 

RS9 

RSQ 

Ashton 

Ray West 

NB S 

Salem Lake 

Salem Lake 

& Trails 

Road 

X 

Beginning and/or end points 

of measured trail segments. 

Trail crossing at Roads, Railroads, 

and/or Driveways. 

Feet 

0 340 680 1,360 2,040 2,720 

Piedmont Greenway 

Figure 4. Map of Segment 1 

Note: The Zoning on these maps reflects County data, not individual 

city or town zoning. Zoning may differ. See cities and towns for individual 

zoning. 

Segment 1 : Salem Lake Trails to East Forsyth High 

Data From: 

Winston 

Salem GIS Dept. 

Greensboro GIS Depart. 

Forsyth County 

Guilford County 

NC DOT GIS Dept. 



Segment 2: East Forsyth High 

to Cash Elementary School 

The preferred alignment for this segment of the trail system is approximately 2.3 miles in length. The 

trail will consist of a 10-foot-wide multi-use trail constructed of asphalt. A crosswalk is required to cross 

West Mountain Street to provide access from the school to the trail. The consultant has carefully considered 

all options for crossing the road, and selected a location just north of Hastings Hill Road. This crossing will 

allow safer access to the primary trail located along the Norfolk Southern Railroad right-of-way (ROW). 

The trail will have two crossings, the first at Hastings Hill Road and the second at West Mountain Street to 

avoid the busy intersection at Hastings Hill Road and West Mountain Street. The trail will follow the existing 

ROW’s and consist of a 10-foot-wide paved asphalt trail. Because of some limitations along this route, 

the trail will need to shrink to 8 feet wide in some areas. 

Numerous driveways and road crossings will have to be properly addressed to make users 

and adjacent residents feel comfortable. It is recommended that a coordinated signage system be 

established is this urban section in conjunction with a wayfinder system that will allow users to 

know where they are on the trail. A crosswalk with a signalized pedestrian crossing will be needed 

to cross West Mountain Street at Old Hollow Road. The trail will use the existing railroad crossing 

and a proposed sidewalk along Old Hollow Road to access Cash Elementary School. 

Part of this trail will need to be built adjacent to the 

existing railroad tracks. There are three different treatments 

to satisfy safety issues for this segment of the greenway. A 

fence or a combination of a fence with a planting buffer must 

exist where the trail is within 10 feet of the center of the active 

track. This fence must be at least 6 feet in height. There 

are numerous driveways and road crossings in this phase that 

will have to be properly addressed to make users and adjacent 

businesses feel comfortable. It is recommended that a coordinated 

signage system be established is this urban section in 

conjunction with a wayfinder system that will allow users to 

know where they are on the trail. The trail will use the existing 

railroad crossing and the proposed sidewalk along Old Hollow 

Road to access Cash Elementary School. 

A second alternative trail alignment would use the southern 

side of West Mountain Street. PART is currently looking 

at the existing rail corridor (the north side) for a high-speed 

commuter rail line. At the time of this Master Plan, PART 

has not selected the corridor, but only looking at the feasibility 

of the corridor. The southern side could be used for a trail; 

however, the trail would most likely only accommodate a 

sidewalk. 


SEGMENT 2 





Croyden 

Ches 

Legend 

Morris 


Conestoga 

Magnum 

Ches 

CASH ELEMENTARY 

Kernersville Lkae 

Spur Trail 


Martin Mill Creek 

Jones Brothers 

Road 

X 

Nandina 

McCracken 

Old Hollow 

Road 

X 

Kerwin 

Sutter 

Hopkins 

Mountain 


& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 




Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 

Rubbins 

Pisgah Church 

Road 

X 

Clubb 




Wright 



Elliott 

Zoning 

Road 

X 

Unknown 

NO S 

Weeping 

Chesham 

Road 

X 

Pisgah 

CB 

PB 

Peddycord Park 

GB 

GB S 

PB S 

RM12 


Road 

X 

Road 

X 

Road 

X 

Mountain 

Deer Crossing 

Hunters Path 

Doe Run 

Doe Run 

Willow Bend 

Raven Ridge 

Timber Forest 

Mill Brook 

Hunters 

Forrest Acres 

Timber Ridge 

Hunters 


Regents Park 

Windsor Park 

Regents Park 

Essen 

Reigate 

Regents Park 

Kelvdon 

Brightington 

Westbourne 

GI 

GI S 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

IP 

IP S 

LB 

LB S 

LI 

LI S 

LO S 

MH 

RM12 S 

RM18 

RM18 S 

RM5 

RM8 

RM8 S 

RMU S 

RS12 

RS12 S 

RS20 

RS20 S 

RS7 

RS7 S 


Hastings Hill 

Mountain 

EAST FORSYTH HIGH 

Buck Run 

Raven Ridge 

Ashington 

Long Walk 

MH S 

NB 

NB S 

RS9 

RSQ 

Windsor Park 

Bluff School 

Road 

X 



Trail crossing at Roads, 

Railroads, and/or Driveways. 

Feet 

0 425 850 1,700 2,550 3,400 



Note: The Zoning on these maps reflects County 

data, not individual city or town zoning. Zoning 

may differ. See cities and towns for individual 

zoning. 

Segment 2 : East Forsyth High to Old Hollow Road 

Data From: 

Winston Salem GIS Dept. 







Segment 3: Kernersville Lake Spur Trail 

At Cash Elementary School, a major access point to the Kernersville Lake spur trail will be accessed 

by Roxbury Court. The existing roadway will lead to the trail access area. This spur will give users (including 

elementary school students) the opportunity to access Kernersville Lake Park. 

The trail will be 1.3 miles in length and will consist of a 10-foot-wide multi-use trail constructed of 

asphalt and/or gravel as it transverses through active agricultural land until it reaches Kernersville Lake 

Park. This park is noted for its unique environs, which will give students from area schools an opportunity 

to study and understand the ecosystem. The trail follows a small drainage creek that starts at a pond and 

continues to the southern end of Kernersville Lake. 

SEGMENT 3 






Brittainywood 

Roberson Farm 

Valleydale 

Legend 


Kernersville Lake 

Spur Trail 

Creekridge 

Ches 

Ches 

Beulah 

Shaddowfax 

Old Hollow 

Roburton 

West 

Brittainywood 

Jones Brothers 


West 

Ches 

Ches 

Brittainywood 

CASH ELEMENTARY 

Barry Knoll 

Rivendell 

Weather Ridge 

Roxbury Forest 

Rivendell 

Feet 

0 362.5 725 1,450 2,175 2,900 

Roxbury 

Roxbury 

Old Hollow 

McCracken 

Wright 

Road 

X 

Kerwin 

Hopkins 


Segment 3 : Old Hollow Road to Kernersville Lake Park 

Fulp 

Road 

X 

Woodland 

Morris 

Road 

X 

Hoyd 


Note: The Zoning on these maps reflects County data, 

not individual city or town zoning. Zoning may differ. 

See cities and towns for individual zoning. 

Weslo 

Eastview 

Fennell 

Hoyd 

Data From: 






Mountain 

Zoning 

Road 

X 

Unknown 

CB 

GB 

GB S 

GI 

GI S 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

IP 

IP S 

LB 

LB S 

LI 

LI S 

LO S 

MH 

MH S 

NB 

NB S 


& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 




Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 






NO S 

PB 

PB S 

RM12 

RM12 S 

RM18 

RM18 S 

RM5 

RM8 

RM8 S 

RMU S 

RS12 

RS12 S 

RS20 

RS20 S 

RS7 

RS7 S 

RS9 

RSQ 







Segment 4: Cash Elementary to YMCA 

The primary greenway trail will continue its journey from Old Hollow Road to the Kernersville 

YMCA. This segment of the trail system is approximately 1.5 miles in length and will consist of a 10-footwide 

multi-use trail constructed of asphalt. 

The trail will continue along the existing NCDOT and railroad corridors. Numerous driveways and 

road crossings will require proper signage and crosswalk placement. 

The trail will stay on the north side of West Mountain Street to reduce the number of crosswalks due 

to the lack of feasible space on the south side. The trail will offer an alternative spur connection at West 

Mountain Street and Asbury Drive. The consultant recommends that a signaled crosswalk be installed for 

this busy intersection. 

SEGMENT 4 






Legend 

Roxbury 


Fulp 

Spur Trail 


& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

CASH 

ELEMENTARY 

Old Hollow 

Road 

X 

Woodland 

Road 

X 

Hoyd 

Eastview 

Hoyd 

Road 

X 

Echols 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 




Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 

Mountain 


Morris 

McCracken 

Road 

X 

Kerwin 

Fennell 

Road 

X 

Asbury 

Deere Hitachi 

Road 

X 

Zoning 





Unknown 

NB S 

Mountain 

CB 

PB 

GB 

PB S 

GB S 

RM12 

Hopkins 

Asbury Drive 

YMCA 

GI 

GI S 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

RM12 S 

RM18 

RM18 S 

RM8 

RMU S 

Nandina 

Sutter 

Weslo 

Lowergate 

IP 

IP S 

LB 

RS12 

RS12 S 

RS20 

LB S 

RS7 

LI 

RS7 S 

Road 

X 

LI S 

LO S 

RS9 

RSQ 

MH 

Wright 

Feet 

0 315 630 1,260 1,890 2,520 


Tryon 

Timberwood 

Knightwood 


Old Orchard 




Segment 4 : Old Hollow Road to Kernersville YMCA 

Nickel Creek 

Old Orchard 

Susanna 

Data From: 






Road 

X 







Segment 5: YMCA Spur Trail 

The YMCA will serve as a major access point to the 2.2 mile YMCA Spur trail. The greenway spur will 

allow users to take a side trail to the central core of Kernersville and Kerners Mill Creek via a loop. The trail 

will turn east and allow access to Old Kernersville Lake Park and end at Bodenhamer Street and link back 

into the primary trail. 

The YMCA will serve as a minor trailhead where users can access the spur trail and/or the primary 

Piedmont Greenway Trail. Old Kernersville Lake Park is accessible via Lake Drive and Susanna Street. The 

park contains an existing parking area that will serve as a minor trailhead to the spur trail and primary trail 

system. Parking is accessible in accordance with the ADA for both the YMCA and Old Kernersville Lake 

Park. 

An Education Center could be developed by city leaders at Old Kernersville Lake Park that would provide 

trail users with information about Kerners Mill Creek and 

historical information about Old Kernersville Lake. 

The composition of the surfaces along the spur trail 

includes 10-foot-wide gravel trails, natural footpaths and 

boardwalk trails (due to flooding) and/or concrete. Greenway 

markers will be placed along the trail for mileage and natural 

or historical information about the park. 

SEGMENT 5 






Legend 


Road 

X 


Spur Trail 

YMCA Spur Trail 

Road 

X 

Road 

X 


& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 




Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 






Zoning 

Public Pedestrian Access 

Old Kernersville 

Unknown 

CB 

GB 

GB S 

GI 

GI S 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

IP 

IP S 

LB 

CB 

NBS 

PB 

PB S 

RM12 

RM12 S 

RM18 

RM18 S 

RM8 

RMU S 

RS12 

RS12 S 

RS20 


LB S 

RS7 

LI 

RS7 S 

LI S 

RS9 

LO S 

RSQ 

MH 



Road 

X 



Feet 

0 270 540 1,080 1,620 2,160 






Segment 5 YMCA Spur Trail : YMCA to Kernersville Elementary School 

Data From: 








Segment 6: Kerners Mill Creek Spur Trail 

This segment of the trail system is approximately 2.4 miles in length and will consist of a 10-foot-wide 

multi-use trail constructed of asphalt, gravel, boardwalk and/or concrete where deemed necessary due to site 

conditions and maintenance issues. 

The Kerners Mill Creek spur trail will allow residents and visitors of the Kerners Mill Creek corridor to 

access the primary trail. The trail can be accessed either via the YMCA spur trail or via the primary trail at 

Civitan Park. The spur trail link will provide views of remaining farmland in the central downtown core of 

Kernersville. Old Kernersville Lake Park will double as a destination and will also offer parking and park 

amenities. At the present time there are no maps available that show the built-out parking areas and structures 

for Old Kernersville Lake Park. 

The spur trail offers an opportunity to provide a link to Kernersville Elementary School via a portion 

of the existing railroad corridor between Cherry Street and Nelson Street. The spur trail follows the concept 

of the primary Piedmont Greenway System by providing 

school access including recreational and educational opportunities 

for students and trail users. 

SEGMENT 6 






Old Orchard 

Woodfield 

Cathi 

Nickel Creek 

Drayton Park 

Kenton 

Woodfield 

Sattlewood 

Hopkins 

Kenton 


Susanna 

Old Kernersville 

Lake Park 

Lake 


Dogwood 

Old Winston 

Irving Park 


Feet 

0 350 700 1,400 2,100 2,800 

Branchwood 

Vandyke 

Road 

X 

Beaucrest 

Mountain 

Fourth of 

July Park 

Lake 

KERNERSVILLE ELEMENTARY 

Gordon 

Mountainview 

Oakhurst 

Baxter 

Cherry Cove 

Bodenhamer 

Clifton 

Center 

Fall 

Kerner 

Cherry 

School 

Joyce 

Main 

Salisbury 

Vernon 

Highfield 

Mountain 

Hepler 

Hastings 

Tanyard 




Segment 6 Kerners Mill Creek Trail: 

Old Kernersville Lake Park to Civitan Park 

St 

Partridge 

Dobson 

Cemetery 

Harmon 

Main 

Woodbine 

Pineview 

Road 

X 

Church 

Oakland 

Mountain 

Harmon 

Nelson 

Armfield 

Hugh 

Allen 

Data From: 






Railroad 

Main 

Church 

New 

Orr 

Short 

Main 

Railroad 

Broad 

Piney Grove 

Road 

X 

King 

Bodenhamer 

Drummond 

Mountain 

Pineview 

Legend 

Zoning 

Road 

X 

Unknown 

CB 

GB 

GB S 

GI 

GI S 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

IP 

IP S 

LB 

LB S 

LI 

LI S 

LO S 

MH 



Spur Trail 

YMCA Spur Trail 


& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 




Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 






CB 

NBS 

PB 

PB S 

RM12 

RM12 S 

RM18 

RM18 S 

RM8 

RMU S 

RS12 

RS12 S 

RS20 

RS7 

RS7 S 

RS9 

RSQ 







Segment 7: YMCA to Civitan Park 

The Piedmont Greenway will leave the railroad corridor and continue east toward Fourth-of-July Park, 

Kernersville Elementary School and Civitan Park, following West Mountain Street on the northern side. A 

major access point to the YMCA spur trail will occur at Asbury Street and Bodenhamer and at Nelson Street 

for the Kerners Mill Creek spur trail. This segment will be a 10-foot-wide asphalt and/or gravel trail. Greenway 

kiosks and markers will be placed along the trail for mileage as well as natural and historical information. 

Including the two spur trails, there are two major destinations in this segment of the Greenway. Fourthof-July 

Park will offer a minor trailhead and make available use of its existing parking and bathroom facilities. 

Kernersville Elementary School is the second destination, allowing students to use the trail system. 

There are presently two alternatives to reaching Civitan Park in this segment. The first involves using 

Fourth of July Park as an extension of the primary trail, then Kernersville Elementary School’s northern 

boundary along the railroad ROW until reaching Nelson Street 

and finally Civitan Park. This first alternative is the most desirable 

because it offers a true off-road trail of approximately 0.6 

miles. 

The second alternative would be to use the existing 

sidewalk that fronts Fourth of July Park and Kernersville Elementary 

School along West Mountain Street, then continuing 

north along the sidewalk at Nelson School Road to Civitan 

Park. The major advantage to this alternative is that the sidewalks 

are already in place for this 0.7 mile segment. However, 

the trail would be restricted to a sidewalk width because 

of the lack of ROW along the road. 

SEGMENT 7 

Civitan Park can be reached by either trail alternative via 

Nelson School Road and the existing railroad crossing found 

here. Proper signage and intersection upgrades will be added 

to the existing railroad crossing for pedestrian and bicycle trail 

users. 






Asbury 

Deere Hitachi 

Kernersville Lake Spur Trail 

YMCA 

Mountain 

Dobson 

Manorwood 

Dobson 

Oakwood Forest 

KERNERSVILLE MIDDLE 

Legend 

Brown 

Oxford Ridge 


Alternative Spur Trail 


& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 


Oak Forest 

Farmwood 



Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 




Bodenhamer 

Zoning 



Unknown 

NB S 

CB 

PB 

Susanna 

Irving Park 

Branchwood 

Road 

X 

Fourth of July Park 

Beaucrest 

KERNERSVILLE ELEMENTARY 

Cemetery 

Bodenhamer 

Cemetery 

Civitan 

Park 

Road 

X 

Nelson 

Bodenhamer 

GB 

GB S 

GI 

GI S 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

IP 

IP S 

LB 

LB S 

LI 

LI S 

LO S 

PB S 

RM12 

RM12 S 

RM18 

RM18 S 

RM8 

RMU S 

RS12 

RS12 S 

RS20 

RS7 

RS7 S 

RS9 

RSQ 

Linville 

MH 

Dogwood 

Vandyke 

Mountain 

Street 



Lake 

Gordon 

Oakhurst 

Fall 

Baxter 

Nelson 

Vernon 

Dobson 

Church 

Railroad 

Road 

X 



Feet 

0 230 460 920 1,380 1,840 



Segment 7 : YMCA to Civitan Park 

Note: The Zoning on these maps reflects County data, not 

individual city or town zoning. Zoning may differ. See cities and 

towns for individual zoning. 

Data From: 








Segment 8: Civitan Park to Triad Park 

This segment of the Piedmont Greenway trail system is approximately 1.7 miles in length and will 

consist of a 10-foot-wide multi-use trail constructed of asphalt and/or concrete where deemed necessary due 

to site conditions and maintenance issues. 

This segment leaves the urban character of Kernersville and represents the most challenging link into 

Triad Park. Many alternatives were considered for this alignment. To the south there are sidewalk improvements 

scheduled, however, there are numerous automobile and trail-user conflicts along West Mountain 

Street and/or the railroad ROW. 

The Town of Kernersville has already secured some fragmented greenway easements to the north that 

would improve the alignment. As the trail leaves Civitan Park along Nelson School Road, the sidewalk system 

will need to be extended past Piney Grove Road until reaching the AutoZone store where the trail will 

cross Main Street and continue north along the southern side 

to the Sara Lee Complex. At this juncture, the trail will leave 

the road system and become a multi-use off-road trail. 

SEGMENT 8 

The trail will follow a small drainage channel until reaching 

the Town of Kernersville greenway easement near Gralin 

Street. The drainage channel becomes a small section of the 

southernmost part of Reedy Fork Creek as it exits Triad Park. 

The trail will continue along the creek's southern bank, taking 

advantage of some small segments of town easements as 

far as Triad Park. As the trail enters Triad Park, the Piedmont 

Greenway will take advantage of the planned and existing 

trails. Triad Park is the central hub for the greenway and will 

serve as a major trailhead. Trail users will be able to take advantage 

of the amenities of the park and its resources. 






Farmwood 

Legend 

Piney Grove 

Bost 

Ragland 

Main 

Chaucer Manor 


Kerners Mill Creek Spur Trail 


& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 

Smith Edwards 

Hollow Creek 

Hepler 

Vernon 

Dobson 

Cemetery 

Highfield 

Hastings 

Cemetery 

Harmon 

Main 

Road 

X 

Church 

Civitan 

Park 

Oakland 

Mountain 

Harmon 

Bodenhamer 

Cherry 

Hugh 

Allen 

Railroad 

Main 

Church 

New 

Orr 

Short 

Main 

Railroad 

Broad 

Road 

X 

Drummond 

Mountain 

King 

Corum 

Corum 

Nelson 

Bass 

Road 

X 

Pitts 

Holt 

Burke 

Bodenhamer 

Davis 

English 

Millis 

Adams 

Smith 

Vance 

Justice 

Park 

Hooker 

Green 

Jefferson 

Trent 

Mountain 

Main 

Road 

X 

Sara Lee 

Sam 

Branch 

Jefferson 

Oak 

Graves 

Gralin 

Town of 

Kernersville 

Existing 30’ greenway 

easement. 

Longview 

Corjon 

Broken Saddle 

Furlong Industrial 

Clay Flynt 

Thomas Drake 

Marylebone 

Reedy Fork Creek 

Berry Garden 

Kensal Green 

Running Springs 

Existing 30’ greenway 

easement . 

Berry Garden 

Huntington Run 

Eastgrove 

Lear 

Existing Powerline 

37 

TRIAD 

PARK 

Zoning 

Road 

X 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 




Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 



Kernersville Elementary School 



Existing Greenway Easement 

Unknown 

CB 

GB 

GB S 

GI 

GI S 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

IP 

IP S 

LB 

LB S 

LI 

LI S 

LO S 

MH 

CB 

NB S 

PB 

PB S 

RM12 

RM12 S 

RM18 

RM18 S 

RM8 

RMU S 

RS12 

RS12 S 

RS20 

RS7 

RS7 S 

RS9 

RSQ 





Feet 

0 330 660 1,320 1,980 2,640 



Segment 8 : Civitan Park to Triad Park 




Data From: 








Segment 9: Triad Park to Reedy Fork Creek 

The Piedmont Greenway will continue as an off-road trail as it leaves Triad Park near the confluence 

of the existing power line easement at Crosscreek Road in Guilford County. The power line easement will 

serve as part of the trail corridor until it reaches Beeson Road to the north. 

The intent is to provide a linkage to Reedy Fork Creek. However, the creek is heavily encroached upon 

by numerous subdivisions. The power line offers a wide, fairly level corridor of large lots and rural farmland. 

At Beeson Road the trail will exit the power line and follow a small tributary of Reedy Fork Creek until 

it meets the main channel. Because the primary greenway alignment will take advantage of the existing and 

planned trail system in Triad Park, the Piedmont Greenway segment will begin at or near Crosscreek Road 

(the approximate length of the built trail is 1.3 miles). The route will consist of a 10-foot-wide multi-use 

trail constructed of asphalt and/or concrete (where deemed 

necessary due to site conditions and maintenance issues) and 

the trail will end at the main channel of Reedy Fork Creek. 

SEGMENT 9 






0 

Ira 

Main 

Chaucer Manor 

Clay Flynt 

Marylebone 

Thomas Drake 

Maple 

Kensal Green 

Hicks Edwards 

Smith Edwards 

Eastgrove 

Lear 

County Line 

Chelsea Place 

37 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Willow Creek 

FORSYTH COUNTY 

GUILFORD COUNTY 

Willow Creek 

0 

0 

Eden Bridge 

TRIAD 

PARK 

Bay Brook 

0 

0 

Eden Terrace 

0 

0 

Crosscreek 


0 

0 

0 

Parcel Data not Available 

0 

0 

0 

Morning Glory 

Road ROAD 

X 


0 

0 

County Line 

0 

Cherry Blossom 

Hollow Hill 


0 


0 

0 

Beeson 

0 

ROAD 

X 

Road 

X 

0 

0 

Joywood 

Stafford Mill 

Bull 

0 


00 

0 

0 

0 

Atkins Lake 

Marshall Smith 

0 

Legend 



& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 

obscured area 




Pool 

Sidewalk 

Tennis Court 






Forsyth County Parcels 

ZONING 

Unknown 

CB 

GB 

GB S 

GI 

GI S 

GO S 

HB 

HB S 

NB S 

PB 

PB S 

RM12 

RM12 S 

RM18 

RM18 S 

RM8 

RMU S 

Berry Garden 

Pratt 

Crouse 

0 

Seacrest 

El Toro 

Sherbow 

Bunker Hill 


IP 

IP S 

LB 

LB S 

LI 

LI S 

LO S 

MH 

RS12 

RS12 S 

RS20 

RS7 

RS7 S 

RS9 

RSQ 

Graves 

Lakeview 

El Matador 

Guilford County Parcels 

ZONING information not availble 

Parcel color relates to property 

information found in GIS data table. 

Spring 

Market 

Market 

Kidd 

Kidd 

Parcel data with 

property information 

Parcel data without 


Mountain 

81 

Pratt 

Sherfield 



Road 

X 



Feet 

0 600 1,200 2,400 3,600 4,800 



Segment 9 : Triad Park to Reedy Fork Creek 




Data From: 








Segment 10: Reedy Fork Creek 

to Highway 68 Underpass 

As the trail continues north, the alignment of the trail in close proximity to the creek channel will allow 

users to enjoy the riparian forestlands of this segment. The trail will travel wholly within the flood zone to 

maximize the rural character of the creek. 

Land use in this section is low density housing and active farms. There is a significant number of 

equestrian enthusiasts that either own farmland along this segment or live in close proximity to it. 

The trail will be a multi-use corridor that will accommodate pedestrian, biking and equestrian uses. 

The primary trail will be 10 feet wide for all users but equestrians. A 2- to 5-foot-wide crushed granite dust 

trail parallel to the main trail, and separated by a vegetated barrier is proposed for equestrians. 

There is an opportunity to provide a loop trail in the 

future that would link this segment with Beaver Creek to the 

north (which parallels Reedy Fork Creek). This segment of 

the trail system is approximately 2.6 miles in length. Three 

bridges will be needed to span small drainage tributaries of the 

main channel. The northern bank will be the primary location 

of the trail in order to minimize creek crossings and maximize 

future links to residential areas. 

SEGMENT 10 






Bunker Hill 

Saddle Brook 

Dapple Grey 

Beeson 


Jerry 

Benbow Merrill 

Existing Powerlines 

Williard 

Beaver Creek 

Grayleigh 

Millstaff 

Stafford Mill 

Brittains Field 

Beckenham 

Hwy 68 

Underpass 

Peeples 

Legend 



& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 

State Highway 68 


Beaver Creek 

Baxter 

Stafford Mill 

Millstone 


Access 

Riding Trail 



Stream Crossing 


ZONING information not available 







County Line 



Brynwood 

Road 

X 




ROAD 

X 

Ballard 

Castleford 

Lyon Creek 

Leabourne 

Barton 

Chrisfield 

Ballard 

Joywood 


Clairese 


Cude 

Bull 

Atkins Lake 


Atkins Lake 

Feet 

0 550 1,100 2,200 3,300 4,400 





Segment 10 : Reedy Fork Creek to Highway 68 Underpass 

Data From: 








Segment 11: Highway 68 to Northwest School Road 

Along the Piedmont Greenway Trail, the Highway 68 and the proposed I-73 corridor divides the 

trail corridor. Because of its central location and proximity to major transportation facilities, the area surrounding 

NC 68 has been experiencing rapid land use development and growth. The city of Greensboro is 

looking at the corridor of NC 68 below Pleasant Ridge Road as a potential Scenic Corridor Overlay District. 

This overlay seeks to maintain the appearance of the corridor while improving travel mobility along NC 68. 

Because the level of NC 68 was raised to reduce the potential of flooding, there exists an opportunity 

to install an underpass (box-culvert) to provide trail access beneath the highway trail. An overland crossing 

at the road level would be feasible. However, providing a signal light on this busy road may not be possible. 

The existing culvert of Reedy Fork Creek where it passes under the road is not large enough for the 

trail. The underpass could be installed as any part of NC 68 improvements occur to accommodate the rapid 

growth projected for this road corridor. 

SEGMENT 11 

The proposed I-73 will be a major link between NC 68 

and Battleground Avenue (US 220). Reedy Fork Creek contains 

an ever-enlarging flood zone as you pass Alcorn Road. 

This area becomes a wetland that is impassable from this 

point north. The trail corridor will follow a small drainage 

channel to an existing power line east of the creek and continue 

north along this easement until the I-73 overpass. The 

corridor will pass over Reedy Fork Creek near Brigade Trail 

and Wesscott. 

The Piedmont Greenway Trail will take advantage of a 

small tributary that is between Northwest Middle and High 

Schools, and the main channel of Reedy Fork. The I-73 road 

alignment will require the construction of a new bridge in this 

area and the trail will be able to pass under the bridge. As the 

trail leaves the small tributaries, it will proceed south for a 

short distance along the north side of Northwest School Road 

before linking to Northwest Middle/High Schools. 

The trail will be a multi-use corridor that will accommodate 

pedestrian and biking uses. The primary trail will be 

10 feet wide for all users. This segment of the trail system is 

approximately 2.0 miles in length. One bridge will be needed 

to span a small drainage tributary of the main channel. 






Morganshire 


Fogleman 


Beaver Creek 

Northwest School 

Macintosh 

Bunch 

Lomond 

Legend 



& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 



Hunting Cog 

Maloe 

Stafford Mill 

Beaver Creek 

Old Mill of Guilford 

Historic Site 


ROAD 

X 

PROPOSED I 73 CONNECTOR 


Northwest Middle 

School 

Moore’s Creek 

Utility 



Wetlands 



Data From: 
















Grayleigh 

Brittains Field 

Gold Ridge 

Golden Acres 


Northwest High 

School 

Road 

X 



Note: The Zoning on these maps 

reflects County data, not individual city 

or town zoning. Zoning may differ. See 

cities and towns for individual zoning. 

Beckenham 

Millstaff 

Hwy 68 

Underpass 

Peeples 


Knollcrest 

Alcorn 

Wallingford 

Wilder 

McAllen 

Feet 

0 462.5 925 1,850 2,775 3,700 



Segment 11 : Highway 68 to Northwest Middle School 

NOTE: Alignment of proposed I 73 Connector 

not yet determined, this map only should be 

used for general location of connector. 

Data From: 








Segment 12: Moore's Creek Corridor 

The Moore's Creek corridor will start at Northwest School Road, will follow the eastern boundary of 

the school property and terminate at the confluence of Moore's Creek and Reedy Fork Creek at the Pleasant 

Ridge Road Trailhead. This segment is approximately 3.5 miles in length and has some of the most beautiful 

views along the Piedmont Greenway Trail. There are four known areas that will require pedestrian bridges. 

These areas could also provide access to the neighborhoods to the north of the primary trail. One existing 

gas pipeline crosses the trail and creek near Timber Peg Road. It is not known at this time if a bridge or 

another type of crossing over the pipeline will be needed. 

As the trail continues on the north side of the creek, it will merge with an existing farm road west of 

Stanley Huff Road. This farm road parallels the creek for 600 feet more or less, and its use should help 

reduce overall trail costs. The farm road continues to Stanley Huff Road where the trail will cross-at-grade. 

Upon crossing Stanley Huff Road the trail parallels a large field on the left and the Moore's Creek floodplain 

on the right. Although the floodplain could support a natural 

foot trail, a paved trail would require the acquisition of the 

edge of the field for trail purposes. The trail continues past 

the farmland and will use an abandoned utility easement that 

still has poles (no wires were observed) until crossing over 

to the southern side of Moore's Creek near Deer Trail Road. 

A small section on either side of this crossing will require 

boardwalk for approximately 150 feet on the northern side 

and 40 feet on the southern side. 

will run parallel to the main trail separated by a vegetated barrier. This segment of the trail is approximately 

3.5 miles in length. Three bridges will be needed to span small drainage tributaries of the main channel and 

one bridge will be needed to cross Moore's Creek. The northern bank will be the primary location of the 

trail in order to minimize creek crossings. 

SEGMENT 12 

Moore's Creek is influenced by more pronounced topography 

and ridges in this section. The floodplain and associated 

wetlands will cause the trail to be located at the toe of 

sloping land. There are existing equestrian trails in this area 

and it is proposed that the trail use them to minimize cost and 

land disturbance. As the trail nears Pleasant Ridge Road it 

will skirt an open section of farmland and then drop down to 

where Moore's Creek meets Reedy Fork Creek. A concrete 

ramp will allow trail users to access the proposed trailhead on 

the north side. 


pedestrian, biking and equestrian uses. The primary 

trail will be 10 feet wide for all users but equestrians who will 

use a 2- to 5-foot-wide adjacent crushed granite dust trail that 






Gaylord 

Morganshire 

Faye 

Legend 



0 



Equestrian 

Trail Area 

Reedy Fork C 



& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 

Bunch 



Westcott 

0 

Northwest School 

Macintosh 

Lomond 

Gwynedd 

Great Oaks 

Oak Glenn 

Timber Pegg 

Larue 

Windsor Farme 

Creed 

Trotter Ridge 

Dylan 

Existing Gas Pipeline 

Percheron 

Stanley Huff 

Horse Trail 

Deer Trail 

Ashbey 

Early 

Fitzhugh 

Ridge Trail 

Carlson Dairy 

Windcrest 

Hamburg Mill 

Data From: 






City Property 

Wetlands 













Northwest Middle 

School 

0 


Pleasant Ridge 

Road 

X 



Note: The Zoning on these maps 

reflects County data, not individual 

city or town zoning. Zoning may 

differ. See cities and towns for 

individual zoning. 

Lewiston 

Northwest High 

School 

0 


White Blossom 

Highland Grove 

Shoreline 

Long Valley 

Cedar Field 

0 

0 

0 

Feet 

0 600 1,200 2,400 3,600 4,800 



Segment 12 : Northwest Schools to Reedy Fork Creek 

Data From: 








Segment 13: Pleasant Ridge Road Trail Head 

to Lake Higgins Trail Head 

The Piedmont Greenway trail will continue northeast passing under the Pleasant Ridge Road Bridge. 

At this point the trail proceeds northeast along Reedy Fork Creek via a combination of boardwalk and paved 

trail tread. A pedestrian boardwalk will span the creek's floodplain and wetlands just beyond the bridge for 

approximately 100 feet. At the end of the boardwalk section, the trail will continue northeast and follow the 

Reedy Fork ridge line that parallels the creek. One bridge will be needed to span a small drainage tributary. 

For the most part the trail will stay within the city of Greensboro. However as stated previously, a section 

of boardwalk will be required or an easement will need to be acquired along a sloping ridge line outside 

of the city limits. After passing a small tributary, the city-owned land is fenced off from the surrounding 

neighborhoods to protect the critical watershed area, but there is ample room for a trail in this section that 

will follow the fence. 

SEGMENT 13 

While completing the field survey, a series of small loop 

(unpaved) trails were discovered in the adjacent floodplain. 

The proposed ridge line trail alignment will not allow for 

users to view Reedy Fork Creek because the creek becomes a 

rather large braided series of side channels and wetlands from 

this point until reaching Lake Brandt. This section of trail 

can provide a loop trail that will offer users the opportunity to 

view Lake Brandt from a beautiful vantage point as it makes 

it way to Hamburg Road and the Lake Higgins Trailhead. 


pedestrians and cyclists. The primary trail will be 10 

feet wide for all users. There is an opportunity to provide 

a connection to the neighborhoods near Oak Forest Road 

and Horseshoe Road in the future. This segment of the trail 

system is approximately 1.9 miles in length. One bridge 

will be needed to span a small drainage tributary of the main 

channel. The southern ridge line will be the primary location 

of the trail to help minimize creek disturbance and maximize 

future links to residential areas. 






Windcrest 

Bronco 

Wooden Rail 

Waterton 

Arabian 

Strawberry 

Legend 


Summerfield 

Trail crosses under 

existing bridge 

Annry 

Spur Greenway Trail 



& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 

Horseshoe Bend 


Bunch 

Trail crosses under 




Summerfield Spur Trail 

Abandoned Rail Road Corridor 

Strawberry 

Strawberry 

Horseman 

Polo Farms 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 

Hydro Buffers 

Wetlands 


City Property 


Data From: 






Lake Brandt 







Horseshoe 

Hamburg Mill 

Road 

ROAD 

X 





Horse Trail 

Ashbey 

Early 

Deer Trail 

Fitzhugh 

Ridge Trail 


Oak Forest 

Lake Higgins 

Trail Head 

Lake Higgins 

Battleground 

Bur Mill Club 

Road 

X 



Note: The Zoning on these maps reflects County 

data, not individual city or town zoning. Zoning 

may differ. See cities and towns for individual 

zoning. 

Data From: 






Feet 

0 445 890 1,780 2,670 3,560 



Segment 13: Pleasant Ridge Road Trail Head to Lake Higgins Trail Head 



Segment 14: Summerfield Spur Trail 

This segment of the trail will take advantage of the future road improvements of US Highway 220. 

The spur trail will to the primary greenway trail at Hamburg Road. The Hamburg Road section will follow 

the roadway and cross over US Highway 220 at their intersection. With the improvements of US Highway 

220, the trail will be able to run parallel to the road on the Lake Brandt side as far as Strawberry Road. This 

alignment and spur trail section seeks to resolve two long-awaited outcomes: a connection to Lake Higgins 

Trailhead, and access to the Lake Brandt trail system and surrounding parks. 

At Strawberry Road, the trail will connect with the small parking area adjacent to the road and then 

turn north toward Summerfield Road using an abandoned rail road corridor. This section will require retrofitting 

of existing remnants of the old railroad bridge adjacent to Strawberry Road and will cross wetlands 

and a small drainage tributary that flows into Lake Brandt. The railroad corridor will offer an excellent 

route, avoiding the busy US Highway 220. The trail will pass under US Highway 220 at the intersection of 

Summerfield Road by way of the old railroad bridge. The 

trail will use either existing or additional sidewalks and/or 

bike lanes at this point until reaching Summerfield Elementary 

School. The off-road trail segment will be a multiuse 

corridor that will accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. 

SEGMENT 14 

The primary trail will be 10 feet wide for all users. 

There is an opportunity to provide a connection to the 

neighborhoods and town hall near Summerfield Elementary 

School. This segment of the trail system is approximately 

2.4 miles in length for the off-road segment and 0.5 miles for 

the on-road or sidewalk segment. One bridge will be needed 

to span a drainage tributary of Lake Brandt near Strawberry 

Road. Five at-grade crossings will be needed for the off-road 

segments: Hamburg Road and US Highway 220, Strawberry 

Road and existing parking trail head, Parsonage Road, 

Auburn Road, and Summerfield Road and Rhondan Road. 

There will be two at-grade crossings needed for the on-road 

or sidewalk section: Rhondan and Shadyside, and Rhondan 

and Pleasant Ridge Road. 






Legend 

Hepatica 

Summerfield 

Summerfield 

Elementary School 

Centerfield 

Greenlawn 

Trainer 

Myers Fork 

Shadyside 

ROAD 

ROAD 

X 

X 

Rabbit Hollow 

Loire 

Oak 

United States Highway 220 

Addison 

Rhondan 

Parsonage 

ROAD 

X 

ROAD 

X 

Tuttle 

Auburn 

Denison 


Roselle 

Strader 

Winchester Trail 

Appolossa 

Strawberry 


Latta 

Walker’s Farm 


Spur Greenway Trail 


& Open Space 

Roads 

Road UC 

Road EOP 


Road Unpaved 

Parking 

Power lines 

Railroads 

Railroad OBS 


Fence 

Ruins 

Exisitng Wall 


Utility 

Hydro Buffers 

Summerfield 

Martin Lake 

Crestfield 

Trail to cross under 


Bronco 

Wooden Rail 

Waterton 

Arabian 

Stallion 

Annry 

Strawberry 

Alley 

Palomino Ridge 

Wetlands 

Data From: 







City Property 





rk Creek 

Stanley Huff 

Bunch 


Trail to cross under 




Oak Forest 

Hamburg Mill 

Abandoned Rail Road Corridor 

ROAD 

X 

Existing Trail 

Battleground 

Existing Parking for 

Lake Brandt 

Strawberry 

Horseman 

Strawberry 

Polo Farms 

Blacksmith 

Mustang 

Equestrian 

Lake Brandt 

Cross Hook 

Polo Farms 

Road 

X 









Note: The Zoning on these 

maps reflects County data, not 

individual city or town zoning. 

Zoning may differ. See 

cities and towns for individual 

zoning. 


Horse Trail 

Early 

Ridge Trail 

Windcrest 

Horseshoe 

Lake Higgins 

Lake Higgins 

Trail Head 

Data From: 






Feet 

0 700 1,400 2,800 4,200 5,600 



Segement 14: Summerfield Spur Trail : Hamburg Mill Road to Summerfield Elementary School 



DESIGN GUIDELINES 

Introduction 

This section provides guidelines to both public and private entities for the future development of the 

Piedmont Greenway. The guidelines noted herein are based on the best practices in use throughout the 

United States, as well as accepted national standards for greenway facilities. 

The guidelines should be used with the understanding that each greenway segment described in this 

plan is unique and that design adjustments will be necessary in certain situations in order to achieve the best 

results. Each segment should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, in consultation with local or state bicycle 

and pedestrian coordinators, a qualified engineer and a landscape architect. 

Facility design is a broad topic that covers many issues. This section provides guidelines for typical 

greenway facilities and is not a substitute for more thorough design and engineering work. For more indepth 

information and design development standards, the following publications should be consulted: 

Greenways: A Guide to Planning, Design and Development 

Published by Island Press, 1993 

Authors: Charles A. Flink and Robert Searns 

Trails for the Twenty-First Century 

Published by Island Press, 2nd ed. 2001. 

Authors: Charles A. Flink, Robert Searns, Kristine Olka 

Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities 

Updated in 1999 by the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials 

(AASHTO). 

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 

Updated in 2000. Published by the U. S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 

Mountain Bike Trails: Techniques for Design, Construction and Maintenance 

Published by Bike-Centennial, Missoula, MT 

Construction and Maintenance of Horse Trails 

Published by Arkansas State Parks 

Universal Access to Outdoor Recreation: A Design Guide 

Published by PLAE, Inc., Berkeley, CA, 1993 

In all cases, the recommended guidelines in this report meet or exceed national standards. 

Should these national standards be revised in the future and result in discrepancies with this chapter, 

the national standards should prevail for all design decisions. 

Primary Trail 

Based on the field review of the Piedmont Greenway, the consultant recommends that a multiuse, 

10-foot-wide trail tread be developed throughout the project corridor. The tread should be 

paved with either asphalt, gravel or concrete depending on the proximity of the trail to creeks. In 

areas where jurisdictional wetlands are encountered, the trail should be a 14-foot-wide boardwalk. 

For all on-grade trail treads, a 2-foot cleared shoulder is required on both sides of the trail for maneuverability 

and safety. 

This 10-foot width will provide ample room for a diversity of users. In heavily used sections, 

the trail will be divided by a centerline stripe in two 5-foot travel ways. At intersections 

with roads, the trail will be enlarged to 12 feet and divided into separated pedestrian and bicycle 

lanes. Lane striping, signage and pavement 

markings will help distinguish 

direction of travel, separation between 

user groups and other information that is 

essential to safe use of the facility. 

The primary trail will be accessible 

to all persons in accordance with ADA 

(where the trail is paved). The trail will 

be designed and posted to accommodate 

bicycle travel at a maximum speed of 20 

m.p.h. The trail will also be designed 

to support vehicle loading of 6.5 tons 

at a maximum travel speed of 15 m.p.h. 

for maintenance and security vehicles. 

When the trail is located adjacent to a 

creek, the trail will be located 20 to 25 

feet (minimum 15 feet) from the creek or sensitive areas. 

The Piedmont Greenway corridor has many different types of cross sections. It is important 

to understand the different cross sections, their drainage and safety to users. Most of the corridor 

offers flat and level grades for trail construction. In some areas, however, the existing grade is 

not level or drops off steeply which may create problems for trail users, especially in areas where 

slopes exceed 3:1 and a significant drop in elevation occurs. The consultant recommends that 



safety railings be installed where the distance from the edge of the trail to the top of a slope is less than 5 

feet, a slope of 2:1 exists, and the drop in elevation is more than 4 feet. 

Along portions of the trail, changes in elevation are required to conform with existing topography, 

avoid significant natural features (such as rock outcropping, or ridge line) or compensate for fill materials in 

the floodplain. In these areas of transition, the consultant recommends the installation of concrete ramped 

trail treads. All ramped trails will have a maximum 5-percent vertical slope in conformance with ADA 

guidelines for accessibility. 

In accordance with the American Association of State Highway Transportation Official (AASHTO) and 

the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), the entire trail will be signed with appropriate 

regulatory, warning and information signs. Pavement striping will be installed where necessary to separate 

user groups. Specific recommendations will be illustrated on appropriate design development drawings in 

the next phase of the design process for each segment. 

Asphalt Trail 

The most popular surface to use in flood-prone landscapes 

is asphalt. It is a durable, flexible pavement surface that is cost 

effective to build, relatively easy to maintain if built correctly, 

and provides a surface that can be used in all seasons. 

The key to developing asphalt trails is to make certain that 

the sub-grade and subbase are properly built. The asphalt surface 

is a reflection of how well the subbase and sub-grade have 

been constructed. Asphalt trails can also be made cost effective 

by using recycled materials. 

Concrete Trail 

Concrete trails are an excellent choice in urban landscapes 

and, again, in flood-prone areas. Concrete trails are generally 

more expensive to build than asphalt trails, however, they are 

easier to shape and mold to a particular site. Concrete can be 

colored, imprinted, shaped, hand formed and poured-in-place. 

It is a very durable surface and generally has a longer life expectancy 

than other surfaces. 

Natural Surface Trail 

Natural surface trails can consist of many different surface materials including gravel, soil cement, 

wood mulch or dirt. While they are easily and inexpensively installed, they are not recommended for 

floodplain environments as they will require more 

maintenance than asphalt and do not last nearly as 

long. Natural surface trails often have a wood, brick 

or similar edging to help define trail edges and contain 

surface material. 

Boardwalk Trail 

Boardwalk trails, while expensive, are often necessary 

to traverse poorly-drained and wetland areas. 

They are typically built of pressure-treated lumber but can also be constructed of recycled plastic 

lumber. Boardwalks can be built in a variety of styles depending on the intended user groups. A 

boardwalk intended for bicyclists and pedestrians 

should be at least 10 feet wide (preferably 14 feet 

wide) with 42-inch high safety railings. Boardwalks, 

intended for pedestrians only and placed low to the 

ground, do not need to be as wide (8 feet to 10 feet) 

and can be built without railings, greatly reducing 

construction cost. 

At-Grade Railroad Crossings 

At-grade railroad crossings that are rough and 

uneven, as well as those that are set at an acute angle to the roadway, are a particular obstacle to 

bicyclists. Some streets with trolley tracks can also be difficult for cyclists to negotiate due to 

deteriorating pavement adjacent to the rail. 

A rough and uneven railroad crossing can be 

made smooth for bicyclists in the same manner 

that they are improved for smoother crossing by 

motor vehicles. Such railroad crossings should 

be upgraded wherever possible, particularly on 

streets with bike lanes or bike routes, or on streets 

that are otherwise popular among bicyclists. 

On streets with trolley tracks, additional 

measures should be taken to ensure that the gap 

next to the rail (called the “flangeway”) is as narrow 

as possible. Repairs should be made in locations 

where deteriorating pavement has resulted 

in a wider gap, particularly where these coincide 



with bike lanes, bike routes or streets that are frequently used by bicyclists. 

On diagonal railroad crossings, the flangeway can trap a bike’s front wheel causing it to divert. The 

end result is a quick fall for the bicyclist. This problem is most serious when the track crosses at an angle 

less than 45 degrees to the direction of travel. One solution is to provide a way for bicyclists to approach 

the track at a 60 degree angle or greater, by flaring the street. This solution allows the bicyclist to cross at a 

right angle without swerving into the path of passing motor vehicle traffic. 

Another solution is to install a commercially-available rubberized flangeway filler strip. The filler 

normally fills the gap between the inside railbed and the rail. When a train wheel rolls over it, the flangeway 

filler compresses. This solution, however, is not acceptable for high-speed rail lines, as the filler will not 

compress fast enough and the train may derail (North Carolina Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines, 1994). 

Secondary Trails 

Several other trail types are defined within the Master Plan. These range from natural surface footpaths 

to sidewalk trails. Footpaths along creeks should be maintained as natural surface trails. The only construction 

necessary will be the removal of stumps, fallen limbs, rocks and trash. These trails will be usable most 

of the time except when heavy rain have made the surface exceptionally muddy. 

Secondary trails also include sidewalk trails from adjacent neighborhoods and businesses to the primary 

trial, and signage that includes all on-road bicycle routing. Sidewalk trails are constructed from concrete 

or asphalt where they are missing from the existing route plan, and should be at least 6 feet wide. The 

additional trails should consider usage by cyclists where possible. The cyclists should be encouraged to use 

existing roadways and follow the appropriate signage. Some joint use of sidewalks may be necessary due to 

constrained roadway width. 

Concrete trails will be used at all bridge underpasses 

and in areas that are near the creeks such as box-culverts or 

along sewer easements. Sidewalk trails will be (preferably) 

8 feet wide. Sidewalk trails should also consider usage by 

cyclists; especially in and near the downtown Kernersville 

areas. Where possible, cyclists should be encouraged to use 

existing roadways, although some joint use of sidewalks 

may be necessary due to constrained roadway width. All 

ramps will be constructed of concrete for a sturdy trail tread. 

has existing equestrian trails which will share access with some sections of the corridor and will be 

maintained along the length of the greenway. At the Pleasant Ridge Road Trailhead, both gravel 

trails and boardwalk trails will be used throughout the site to the north. The boardwalk trails are 

located in areas that are usually wet or are considered jurisdictional wetlands. 

Bicycle Facilities 

A bicycle route is a “suggested way” for a cyclist to get from a point of origin to a destination. 

Bike routes do not necessarily require physical improvements in order to accommodate bicyclists 

as they meet minimum safety criteria in their present conditions. Bike routes are preferable for the 

on-road trail sections for a number of reasons including directness, scenery, less congestion and 

lower speed limits. 

Location and Use 

Bicycle routes may be used by all types 

of cyclists. In the urban areas of the Piedmont 

Greenway they will be designated on residential 

streets with low traffic volumes where their use will 

be to direct cyclists to a destination within the community 

(parks, historic areas, etc.), or to provide a 

through-route for bicyclists. Additionally, the routes 

will serve as alternatives when the primary greenway 

is closed due to flooding and/or general maintenance. The routes will also serve as linkages 

for existing and proposed greenways within the corridor. 

Safety Criteria 

Residential streets do not necessarily have to be physically widened in order to be designated 

as bicycle routes. Most roads meet the minimum 12 foot standard wide lanes (or less) that can be 

designated as a bike route with appropriate signage, given that each condition below is met: 

Bike route signage should be used according to the standards in the MUTCD, which provides 

several choices in styles. Bicycle route signs should be placed at all areas where new incoming 

traffic enters the roadway. The recommended distance between signs should not be greater than 

two miles. In urban areas, directional arrows and captions are recommended to indicate nearby 

destinations of interest, particularly at intersections and railroad crossings. 

Where the elevation is higher and the soil is dryer 

(such as the Moore's Creek section), the trail tread will be 

densely compacted granular stone. The Moore's Creek trail 



ADA Requirements 

The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that portions of the Piedmont Greenway System trail 

be accessible to persons with varying motor skills and abilities. Perhaps the best way to comprehend the 

importance of ADA is to understand that most of us, at some time in our life, will experience a temporary 

disability which will affect the way in which we make use of outdoor resources. The best examples include 

relying on crutches due to a broken leg; limited ambulatory movement due to a sprained muscle; or carrying 

two sacks of groceries from the car to the front door and not being able to see the ground or stairs below 

your feet. ADA benefits all Americans by making the outdoor environment more accessible. 

For the Piedmont Greenway Trail and spur trails, the consultant and client need to focus on several important 

issues related to ADA. One of these involves the "path of travel", which essentially means that from 

the point where an individual parks an automobile, the path of travel from the auto to the desired public resource 

and the length of trail throughout that resource all need to be clearly defined and free of barriers. For 

persons confined to a wheelchair, this means that parking spaces should be located in an area that provides 

optimal access to the greenway trail and complementary facilities. The consultant is proposing a 10-footwide 

asphalt or concrete paved primary trail which is wide enough to accommodate a variety of users, 

including persons who depend on wheelchairs for mobility. The consultant does not foresee circumstances 

at this time that would require special design solutions along the trail, or within designated trailheads, to accommodate 

users with special physical challenges. 

Trail Signage System 

A comprehensive system of signage is required throughout the project to ensure that information is 

provided to trail users regarding the safe and appropriate use of all facilities. Signage includes post- or polemounted 

signs and pavement striping. Signage is further divided into information signs, directional signs, 

regulatory signs and warning signs. Trail signage should be developed to conform to the (2001) Manual on 

Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the American Association of State Highway Transportation Official 

Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities . The needs of cyclists will require special attention, since 

this project is designed to accommodate bicycle traffic. 

The graphic below illustrates the type of signage system 

proposed for installation along the Piedmont Greenway. 

The consultant recommends the use of recycled waste 

materials and products in the construction of all signage 

for the project. Greenways Incorporated has already constructed 

one greenway project using all recycled waste materials 

which offer design versatility, often have a long life 

span, and require less long-term maintenance than similar 

products constructed from natural materials. Recycled 

3 feet 

(min.) 

10 feet (min.) 

10 to 12 ft. Trail 

3 feet 

(min.) 

plastic lumber and or concrete can be used for the construction of posts and poles, and recycled 

aluminum can be used for signs. 

Wayside Exhibits and Greenway Kiosk 

In addition to signage, the consultant also recommends educational and historical wayside 

exhibits throughout the project at selected sites. Wayside exhibits should be built adjacent to the 

main trail (or spur trails), or at the terminus of a connecting trail and should provide information 

on the environment or an important historic event that occurred in close proximity to the greenway. 

The trail user will become more aware of the landscapes they are traversing with exhibits relating 

to stream ecology, Native American history, flood control or water quality. These wayside exhibit 

areas can also provide rest areas where people can sit and relax. 

The history of the surrounding area is rich in both environmental and educational opportunities. 

The Kernersville portion will have exhibits on the history in the area as Kernersville is the 

site of important historic landmarks such as the one-room school house located in Fourth-of-July 

Park. The greenway will provide an excellent opportunity to tell the history of the town of Kernersville 

and allow local citizens to become more familiar with important events in the area’s past. 

There are numerous opportunities to use small informational sites to tell the story of Forsyth and 

Guilford counties and the entire greenway system. 

The consultant notes that it is difficult in some areas to view the creeks and greenway from 

the higher elevations of adjacent roads, such as Highway 68 and the Pleasant Ridge Road Trail 

Head. Therefore, the consultant proposes placing greenway kiosks at the intersection of Highway 

68 and Alcorn Road and at the Pleasant Ridge Road Bridge to inform passing motorists of 

the greenway site. The 

landscape surrounding 

the kiosk would be 

simple, consisting of a 

walkway system connected 

to the main trail, 

trees and groundcover. 



ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE 

CONSTRUCTION COSTS 

Itemized below and on the following pages is the design team's estimate of probable construction costs 

for the Piedmont Greenway. These estimates are based on national greenway industry averages for building 

greenway facilities using contract labor, materials and high-quality construction practices. These 

estimates have not been adjusted for local construction values. Typically, more accurate estimates would be 

compiled during the preparation of construction documents for each phase of the project. 

Primary Greenway Trail Phasing 

Costs are divided into Phase I - Phase XIV. Phases are recommended in priority order. 

• Phase I encompasses the southern portion of the greenway (segment 1), including the Business I-40 

underpass to the intersection of West Mountain Street and Hastings Hill Road. 

• Phase II will include the greenway segment 13 that starts at Lake Higgins Trail Head until reaching 

the confluence of Reedy Fork Creek and Moore's Creek. 

• Phase III will begin at the Lewiston Road Trail Head (segment 12) and will follow Moore's Creek to 

Northwest School Road. 

• Phase IV will include segment 8 that will start at Civitian Park and continue until reaching Triad Park 

to the north. • Phase V will include segment 7 and Kernersville Elementary School, and will run from 

the YMCA to Civitan Park. 

• Phase VI will contain all of segment 2. This section of the trail will start at the end of Phase 1 (East 

Forsyth High School) and includes the urban corridor from the intersection of West Mountain Street 

and Hastings Hill Road and continues until reaching Old Hollow Road to the north. 

• Phase VII will include the greenway segment 4. This section runs from Old Hollow Road to the 

YMCA. 

• Phase X incudes all of segment 11. This is the last segment of the primary greenway to be completed 

due to the underpasses that will be needed at the proposed I-73 corridor and at Highway 

68 to the south. 

Alternative Spur Trail Phasing 

• Phase's XI, XII and XIII involve the alternative segments 3, 5, 6 and 14. 

• Phase XI includes segment 5 and segment 6. 

• Phase XII includes the alternative spur trail of segment 3. This trail will use existing sidewalks 

until turning north at the end of Roxbury. The final destination will be Kernersville Lake Park. 

• Phase XIII will include segment 14. This trail will take advantage of the widening of US 220 

and will use an existing abandoned railroad corridor to the north to reach Summerfield Elementary 

School. 

These cost estimates assume that all work will be completed by contract labor. These projects 

are viewed as long-term development objectives and no time frame for development has been established. 

Costs are divided into Phases I to Phases XIV. 

Phases are recommended in priority order. 

These cost estimates as of 2002 assume that all work will be 

completed by contract labor. 

These projects are viewed as long-range development objectives 

and no time frame for development has been established. 

• Phase VIII will include segment 9 that starts at Triad Park (as it exits the park at Crosscreek Road) 

and will end near Beeson Road and the confluence of Reedy Fork Creek. 

• Phase VIIII will include segment 10. This section will follow Reedy Fork Creek until reaching Highway 

68. 



COST ESTIMATE FROM SALEM LAKE & LINVILLE ROAD TO LAKE HIGGINS MARINA 

PHASE I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, VIIII, X, XI, XII, XIII 

No. Item Qty. Unit Price Total 

I. Linville Rd. (Salem Lake) to West Mountain Street 8,020 lf or 1.52 miles 

A. OFF ROAD FACILITIES 

12' Boardwalk 200 lf $170.00 $34,000.00 

10' Asphalt Trail 7,520 lf $35.00 $263,200.00 

10' Concrete Trail 200 lf $70.00 $14,000.00 

B 

SITE FURNISHINGS 

Benches 2 each $400.00 $800.00 

Bicycle Racks 2 each $250.00 $500.00 

Information Kiosk w/tables 2 each $3,500.00 $7,000.00 

Trash Receptacles 2 each $200.00 $400.00 

Bollards 6 each $250.00 $1,500.00 

C. ELECTRICAL 

Phones 1 each $3,500.00 $3,500.00 

lighting for box-culvert 4 each $1,800.00 $7,200.00 

D. SIGNAGE 

Mile Markers 2 each $250.00 $500.00 

Warning Signs 4 each $250.00 $1,000.00 

Directional 4 each $250.00 $1,000.00 

Educational 1 each $2,000.00 $2,000.00 

Minor Trailhead Signs 2 each $1,750.00 $3,500.00 

E. STRUCTURAL 

Business I-40 Box Culvert Retro 

by others 

Concrete Ramps either side 100 lf $70.00 $7,000.00 

Safety Railing 40 lf $40.00 $1,600.00 

F. LANDSCAPING (Allowance) 

Reseed disturbed areas along School property $1,000.00 

PHASE ONE 

ITEM 

COST 

A. OFF ROAD FACILITIES $311,200.00 

B. SITE FURNISHINGS $10,200.00 

C. ELECTRICAL $10,700.00 

D. SIGNAGE $8,000.00 

E. STRUCTURAL $8,600.00 

F. LANDSCAPING $1,000.00 

SUBTOTAL $349,700.00 

10% Design Fee $34,970.00 

15% Contingency $52,455.00 

GRAND TOTAL: $437,125.00 


II. Lake Higgins TH and ends at Pleasant Ridge Road TH 10,624 lf or 2.1 miles 


12' Boardwalk 300 lf $170.00 $51,000.00 

10' concrete Trail 200 lf $70.00 $14,000.00 


12' wide Pedestrian Bridge 50 lf $1,000.00 $50,000.00 

10' Asphalt Connector Trail 300 lf $35.00 $10,500.00 

B. ON ROAD FACILITIES 

Minor TrailHead Pleasant Ridge Road 

Crosswalks 60 lf $22.00 $1,320.00 

Route Signage 1 each $250.00 $250.00 

Access Road to Parking area 20lf X32lf $3,500.00 

10-car gravel parking lot $32,000.00 

C. SITE FURNISHINGS 

Benches 1 each $400.00 $400.00 

Bicycle Racks 2 each $500.00 $1,000.00 



Bollards 2 each $250.00 $500.00 

D. ELECTRICAL 

Lighting Under Bridge 2 each $1,800.00 $3,600.00 

Phones 1 each $3,500.00 $3,500.00 

E. SIGNAGE 

Mile Markers 4 each $250.00 $1,000.00 

Warning Signs 2 each $250.00 $500.00 






PHASE TWO 

ITEM 

COST 


B. ON ROAD FACILITIES $37,070.00 

C. SITE FURNISHINGS $5,500.00 

D. ELECTRICAL $7,100.00 

E. SIGNAGE $10,750.00 

F. LANDSCAPING $1,000.00 

SUBTOTAL $537,040.00 

10% Design Fee $53,704.00 



Figure 28. Phase 1 Cost Estimates 





III. Pleasant Ridge Rd. TH to Northwest High School 13,364lf or 2.53 miles 


12' Boardwalk 200 lf $170.00 $34,000.00 


Pedestrian Bridge (4) 120 lf $1,000.00 $120,000.00 


Crosswalks (2) 120 lf $22.00 $2,640.00 

Route Signage 2 each $250.00 $500.00 


Benches 4 each $400.00 $1,600.00 


Drinking Fountains 1 each $2,200.00 $2,200.00 



Bollards 6 each $250.00 $1,500.00 

D. SIGNAGE 






E. LANDSCAPING (Allowance) 


PHASE THREE 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $13,250.00 

E. LANSCAPING $1,000.00 

SUBTOTAL $638,490.00 

10% Design Fee $63,849.00 



IV. Civitan Park to Triad Park 9,089lf or 1.72 miles 





Crosswalks (4) 240 lf $22.00 $5,280.00 


Benches 2 each $400.00 $800.00 


D. SIGNAGE 






Reseed disturbed areas $1,000.00 

PHASE FOUR 

ITEM 

COST 


B. SITE FURNISHINGS $5,280.00 

C. SIGNAGE $6,750.00 

D. LANDSCAPING $1,000.00 

SUBTOTAL $352,190.00 

10% Design Fee $35,219.00 









V. Kernersville Elementary School to Civitan Park 3,288lf or 0.62 miles 




Crosswalks (2) 120 lf $22.00 $2,640.00 

Retrofit of Existing R.R tracks 1 each $10,000.00 $10,000.00 


Bollards 4 each $250.00 $1,000.00 

D. SIGNAGE 







PHASE FIVE 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $7,000.00 

E. LANDSCAPING $1,000.00 

SUBTOTAL $132,520.00 

10% Design Fee $13,252.00 




VI. East Forsyth High School to Old Hollow Road 12,444lf or 2.35 miles 




Crosswalks (5) 300 lf $22.00 $6,600.00 


Bollards 16 each $250.00 $4,000.00 

C. SIGNAGE 






PHASE SIX 

ITEM 

COST 



C. SIGNAGE $6,000.00 

D. LANDSCAPING $1,000.00 

SUBTOTAL $472,640.00 

10% Design Fee $47,264.00 








VII. Old Hollow Rd. to YMCA 8,220lf or 1.56 miles 




Crosswalks (5) 300 lf $22.00 $6,600.00 



Bollards 14 each $250.00 $3,500.00 

C. SIGNAGE 







PHASE SEVEN 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $7,250.00 


SUBTOTAL $305,550.00 

10% Design Fee $30,555.00 





VIII. Triad Park to Reedy Fork Creek 7,154lf or 1.35 miles 


12' Boardwalk 200 lf $170.00 $34,000.00 




Crosswalks (2) 120 lf $22.00 $2,640.00 


Bollards 6 each $250.00 $1,500.00 

D. SIGNAGE 



Directional 2 each $250.00 $500.00 




PHASE EIGHT 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $5,250.00 


SUBTOTAL $314,630.00 

10% Design Fee $31,463.00 







VIIII. Reedy Fork Creek to Highway 68. 13,818lf or 2.60 miles 


Pedestrian crossing at Hwy 68 to be determined by others (box culvert or at grade crossing) 




Crosswalks (1) 60 lf $22.00 $1,320.00 


Bollards 4 each $250.00 $1,000.00 

D. SIGNAGE 






PHASE NINE 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $2,000.00 


SUBTOTAL $515,800.00 

10% Design Fee $51,580.00 





X. Highway 68 to Northwest School Rd. 10,740lf or 2.0 miles 


12' Boardwalk 100 lf $170.00 $17,000.00 




Crosswalks (2) 120 lf $22.00 $2,640.00 


Benches 2 each $400.00 $800.00 

Bicycle Racks 1 each $500.00 $500.00 

Information Kiosk 1 each $5,000.00 $5,000.00 


Bollards 8 each $250.00 $2,000.00 

D. SIGNAGE 






PHASE TEN 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $2,000.00 


SUBTOTAL $457,440.00 

10% Design Fee $45,744.00 







XI. This includes segments five and six to minimize disturbance 24,678lf to 4.7 miles 


12' Boardwalk 150 lf $170.00 $25,500.00 




Crosswalks (5) 300 lf $22.00 $6,600.00 



Benches 4 each $400.00 $1,600.00 




Bollards 18 each $250.00 $4,500.00 

D. SIGNAGE 






PHASE ELEVEN 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $7,500.00 


SUBTOTAL $1,003,330.00 

10% Design Fee $100,333.00 

15% Contingency $150,499.50 

GRAND TOTAL: $1,254,162.50 


XII. Kernersville Lake Spur Trail and On Road segement from Cash Elm. School 

this phase does not include additions to sidewalk system 6,924lf or 1.31 miles 




Crosswalks (1) 60 lf $22.00 $1,320.00 



Bollards 4 each $250.00 $1,000.00 

D. SIGNAGE 






PHASE TWELVE 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $2,000.00 


SUBTOTAL $250,560.00 

10% Design Fee $25,056.00 








XIII. Lake Higgins to Summerfield Elementary. 12,972lf or 2.46 miles 




Crosswalks (5) 300 lf $22.00 $6,600.00 


Bollards 10 each $250.00 $2,500.00 

D. SIGNAGE 








PHASE THIRTEEN 

ITEM 

COST 




D. SIGNAGE $5,000.00 


SUBTOTAL $458,620.00 

10% Design Fee $45,862.00 


Grand Total Phase Probable Costs 

ITEM 

COST 

A. Core Phase Segments I - X 

I $437,125.00 

II $671,300.00 

III $798,112.50 

IV $440,237.50 

V $165,650.00 

VI $590,800.00 

VII $381,937.50 

VIII $393,287.50 

VIIII $644,750.00 

X $571,800.00 

$5,095,000.00 

B. Alternative Phase Segemnets XI, XII, XIII 

XI $1,254,162.50 

XII $313,200.00 

XIII $573,275.00 

$2,140,637.50 

GRAND TOTAL: $7,235,637.50 

Primary Greenway (18.9 miles) cost per mile = $269,576.78 

Alternative Spur Greenway Segments (8.5 miles) cost per mile = $251,839.70 

Figure 41. Total Phase Cost Estimates 





Estimate of Probable Trail Maintenance 

and Management Costs 

The consultant recommends that the cities, towns and counties adopt a clear and concise maintenance 

and management program for the Piedmont Greenway. The primary objective of this maintenance and management 

plan is to assure that the public's health and safety are protected during normal use of the greenway. 

The greenway should be classified as a linear park and should be maintained in a clean, safe and usable 

condition like all other parks within the city. Greenway lands should be maintained in a natural condition to 

the largest extent possible so that they may fulfill multiple functions including passive recreation, alternative 

transportation, stormwater management, environmental and historical interpretation and plant and wildlife 

habitat protection. 

The cities, towns and counties can administer an Adopt-a-Greenway Program, or it can be administered 

by creating a Piedmont Greenway Alliance. The city, town and county staffs are best able to coordinate 

the activities of local volunteers providing equipment and materials to support management and maintenance 

activities. An Adopt-a-Greenway Program will create positive public relations for the cities, towns 

and counties for the greenway. The program offers a way to bring local residents out to the greenway and 

enables them to participate in meaningful community activities. An Adopt-a-Greenway Program is a proven 

method of achieving a clean and safe greenway. 

Long-term maintenance of the fully built Piedmont Greenway will require a consistent source of annual 

funds. Based on the experience of the consultant with similar projects in other communities, the following 

maintenance costs are provided for the fully built (primary trail only) Piedmont Greenway in tax year 2001 

dollars. It is important to bear in mind that it may take several years for the greenway to reach a fully built 

condition. 

Description of Activity 

Annual Costs 

Drainage and storm channel maintenance (4 x per year) $ 6,800.00 

Sweeping /blowing debris from trail tread (24 x per year) $15,600.00 

Pick-up and removal of trash and debris (24 x per year) $15,600.00 

Weed control and vegetation management (10 x per year) $ 6,500.00 

Mow 3-foot grass safe-zone along trail edge (24 x per year) $16,000.00 

Minor repairs to trail furniture/safety features (as needed)* $ 5,000.00 

Park Ranger Patrol (Part-time employee) $15,000.00 

Supplies for labor force $ 4,000.00 

Equipment fuel, repairs and replacement parts $10,000.00 

Grand Total Operation and Maintenance Costs $94,500.00 

Cost per mile (divided by 18.9) $ 5,000.00 

* may increase as project ages 



Estimate of Probable Land Acquisition Costs 

Land Ownership Inventory 

Greenways, Inc. has completed a comprehensive land ownership inventory of the entire Forsyth 

County Piedmont Greenway corridor. The Guilford County parcel information is missing from this report 

because the County and the City of Greensboro will not release the information. Information that 

was obtained came from the Forsyth County Geo-Data web-site, and Winston-Salem/Forsyth County 

GIS and Planning Department data sets. The goal of identifying every parcel of land along both sides of 

the greenway corridor and spur trails was not met due to the lack of information available from Guilford 

County. The research should be updated to reflect recent real estate transactions involving portions of the 

greenway corridor not yet included in tax records. It should be noted that city and county tax records are far 

from complete and, in some cases, may be out of date. In several instances, identification of owners of land 

in the greenway corridor was not possible. 

The ownership of the Piedmont Greenway corridor is highly fragmented. The corridor includes public, 

private and private nonprofit landowners. Information about the public-private land ownership pattern was 

used in developing the proposed greenway trail alignment in order to maximize to the greatest extent possible 

utilization of publicly owned land for the greenway, thereby minimizing the cost of the public acquisition 

of land or easements for the greenway. 

A large portion of the land base required for the Piedmont Greenway is currently in public or private 

ownership. As discussed elsewhere in the Master Plan report, there are three large segments of the greenway 

owned by various city and county municipal governments. Public landowners in the corridor include 

the city of Winston Salem, city of Greensboro, the counties of Forsyth and Guilford and Duke Power Company. 

Public acquisition of land in public or private nonprofit ownership is not included in the land acquisition 

cost estimate. However, although properties owned by these entities will not require public purchase 

for the greenway, land protection or management agreements must also be secured from public or private 

nonprofit landowners. 

In all, there are 148 individual parcels of privately/publicly owned land in the greenway corridor (by 

an undetermined number of owners). A list of landowners is not included in the Master Plan, but can be 

obtained from the planning departments of Forsyth and Guilford Counties. Some information may also be 

available from Winston-Salem, Greensboro, and Kernersville 

Land Acquisition Cost Estimate 

Based on the parcel depictions contained in tax maps, an approximate acreage for the greenway trail 

was calculated. As the entire parcel owned by each individual private landowner will not be required for the 

greenway, these acreage figures were reduced based on acquisition of a minimum 15-foot-wide easement 

(for an eight foot wide trail), in the urban Forsyth County section, and a 20-wide easement (for a ten foot 

wide trail) in the Guilford County section. Two alternatives trail segments were considered for the Forsyth 

Forsyth County Primary Trail 

Alignment 8 foot-wide trail 

15 foot easement needed 

Guilford County Trail Alignment 

10 foot-wide trail 

20 foot easement needed 

Figure 45. Total Easement Acres 

County portion of the trail due to the pending high speed 

rail corridor that PART is studying. The first segment 

would follow the railway ROW, and an alternative trail 

would follow the southern side of West Mountain Street 

(see segments 1- 8, pages 29 - 43). Segment costs may 

be more or less depending on the final alignments and 

agreements with the landowners. Acreage for each 

parcel of private land over which the greenway will cross 

was then calculated using figures for linear front footage 

along the Piedmont Greenway. The total amount of land 

within the proposed primary greenway corridor is 3,423 

acres, of this approximately 1,268 acres are in the Forsyth County section and 2,155 acres are in the 

Guilford County section. As an alternative, the total amount of land within the alternative trail alignment 

is 3, 619 acres, of this approximately 1,464 acres are in Forsyth County and 2,155 acres are in 

Guilford County. 

Land acquisition costs are based on estimates only and are qualified by several factors. First, 

land acquisition costs are based on estimates from other recent sales of similar properties in the area. 

Until a qualified appraisal is performed by an NC State certified appraiser, the “fair market value” 

of these properties 

Forsyth 

County 

Guilford 

County 

Primary 

Parcel Acres 

Figure 46. Total Parcel Acres 

34 

58 

Total Easement Acres 92 

Number 

of Parcels 

Alternative 

Parcel Acres 

Number 

of Parcels 

1,268 74 1,464 250 

2,155 72 2,155 72 

Total 3,423 146 3,619 322 

will not be known. 

Secondly, these 

acquisition cost 

estimates are based 

on estimated acreage 

figures. Although 

general acreage can 

be obtained from 

public records, until 

an official boundary 

survey of the corridor 

is made, exact acreage 

is unknown. 

These land acquisition cost estimates are also based on one further very important assumption: 

that the privately owned parcels to be acquired for the greenway are located within the 100-year 

floodplain of the creeks (where needed). Typically, property within the 100-year floodplain has a 

significantly reduced value due to the fact that the development potential of such property is highly 

limited. In many cases, properties within the 100-year floodplain of the various creeks may also 

contain jurisdictional wetlands, which greatly reduces the property’s development potential, and thus 



its value. It should be noted that if the acquisition of uplands is required for the greenway, acquisition costs 

would be substantially increased. 

The acquisition cost per acre is based on recent sales of property in the corridor. Recent sales in the 

corridor (a general fee simple cost for Guilford and Forsyth Counties) are between $6,000 per acre to $5,000 

per acre on average. The price per acre establishes a general range for the cost of property in the Piedmont 

Greenway corridor. Costs may be higher or lower. 

Based on this average cost, the estimated easement acquisition costs for the Greenway corridor is as 

follows: 

$5,000/acre x 92.00 acres = $460,000 

Based on the experience of the Piedmont Land Conservancy in negotiating the acquisition of land in 

the region, it is reasonable to also assume that acquisition costs for the Piedmont Greenway could be significantly 

reduced by securing the donation of land or conservation easements. 

Pre-acquisition Costs 

Pre-acquisition costs include the cost of those services necessary to complete the acquisition of the 

corridor. These services are appraisals, surveys, title reports and environmental audits. Pre-acquisition 

costs vary widely, depending on the contractor used and the standard of service required. In general, preacquisition 

costs for greenways are considerably higher than for other types of parkland due to the appraisal 

problems posed by linear parcels. At this time, pre-acquisition costs are not available for the Piedmont 


It should, however, be noted that pre-acquisition costs to date for the donation of land or conservation 

easements for greenways have been very low. If a property owner donating land or a conservation easement 

is not interested in the federal income tax benefits available for such a donation, it will not be necessary to 

obtain an appraisal. Further, due to the fact that floodplain properties do not generally have a history of any 

past use, the presence of hazardous or toxic waste is unlikely. Therefore, the acquisition of such properties 

will probably not warrant the expense of an environmental audit. 

Accurate boundary surveys and title information will be necessary for the acquisition of any parcel of 

land in the Piedmont Greenway corridor. 



GREENWAY FUNDING SOURCES 

The most successful method of funding greenways is to combine private sector funds with funds from 

local, state and federal sources. Many communities involved with greenway implementation will seek to 

leverage local money with outside funding sources to increase resources available for greenway acquisition 

and development. 

To implement this project, local advocates and government staff should pursue a variety of funding 

sources. Those listed in this chapter represent some of the greenway funding opportunities that have typically 

been pursued by other communities. 

Federal Government Funding Sources 

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) 

The primary source of federal funding for greenways is through the Transportation Equity Act for the 

21st Century (TEA-21, http://www.apta.com/govt/legis/tea21). This money is targeted at greenway projects 

that serve a transportation purpose and is administered through the state departments of transportation. All 

funded projects must meet certain design standards set forth by the state and because this may add to the 

cost of the project, this funding source should be investigated carefully before an application is completed. 

Many sections of the act support the development of bicycle and pedestrian transportation corridors. Those 

sections that could apply to the creation of the Piedmont Greenway include: 

Section 1302: Symms National Recreational Trails Fund Act (NRTFA) 

A component of TEA-21, the NRTFA is a funding source to assist with the development of non-motorized 

and motorized trails. The act uses funds paid into the highway trust fund from fees on non-highway 

recreation fuel used by off-road vehicles and camping equipment. States can grant funds to private and 

public sector organizations. NRTFA projects are 80 percent federally funded; grant recipients must provide 

a 20 percent match. Projects funded must be consistent with the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation 

Plan. 

Surface Transportation Program (STP) Funds 

These funds can be used for bicycle and pedestrian facility construction or non-construction projects 

such as brochures, public service announcements and route maps related to bicycle safety. The projects 

must be related to bicycle and pedestrian transportation and must be part of a long-range transportation plan. 

STP Transportation Enhancements Program 

Ten percent of North Carolina’s annual STP funds are available for transportation enhancements, which 

include projects such as scenic byways, historic transportation preservation, landscaping and the development 

of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. These funds are available to all cities and counties in the 

state. There are several key requirements that projects must meet in order to receive these funds. 

Contact the North Carolina State Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator for more information. (http: 

//www.fhwa.dot.gov/tea21/factsheets/stp.htm) 

Community Development Block Grant Program 

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) offers financial grants to 

communities for neighborhood revitalization, economic development and improvements to community 

facilities and services, especially in low and moderate-income areas. Several communities have 

used HUD funds to develop greenways, including the Boscobel Heights’ “Safe Walk” Greenway in 

Nashville, TN. (http://www.hud.gov) 

Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Grants 

This federal funding source was established in 1965 to provide “close-to-home” park and recreation 

opportunities to residents throughout the United States. Money for the fund comes from the 

sale or lease of nonrenewable resources, primarily federal offshore oil and gas leases and surplus federal 

land sales. LWCF grants can be used by communities to build a variety of park and recreation 

facilities, including trails and greenways. 

LWCF funds are distributed by the National Park Service to the states annually. Communities 

must match LWCF grants with 50 percent of the local project costs through in-kind services or cash. 

All projects funded by LWCF grants must be used exclusively for recreation purposes, in perpetuity. 

(http://www.ncrc.nps.gov/programs/lwcf) 

Wetlands Reserve Program 

The US Department of Agriculture also provides direct payments to private landowners who 

agree to place sensitive wetlands under permanent easements. This program can be used to fund the 

protection of open space and greenways within riparian corridors. It is administered by the North 

Carolina Resource Conservation Service in North Carolina. (http://www.itc.nrcs.usda.gov) 

Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention (Small Watersheds) Grants 

The USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) provides funding to state and local 

agencies or nonprofit organizations authorized to carry out, maintain and operate watershed improvements 

involving less than 250,000 acres. The NRCS provides financial and technical assistance to 

eligible projects to improve watershed protection, flood prevention, sedimentation control, public 

water-based fish and wildlife enhancements and recreation planning. The NRCS requires a 50 percent 

local match for public recreation and fish and wildlife projects. (http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/cfda/ 

p10904.htm) 



State Funding Sources 

North Carolina Parks and Recreation Trust Fund 

This relatively new funding source provides more than $5 million in matching funds annually for local 

recreation land acquisition, development and renovation to communities across the state. The funding 

source, which comes from a real estate transfer tax, requires a 50/50 match from local government and no 

more than $250,000 can be requested. The Recreation Resources Service should be contacted for additional 

information (919-515-7118). 

Clean Water Management Trust Fund 

In 1996, the General Assembly established the Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) to provide 

grants to local governments, state agencies and nonprofit conservation organizations for projects that 

address water pollution problems. The state budget of the North Carolina General Assembly includes $66.5 

million for the Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF), nearly the full level of scheduled funding 

for the CWMTF in the 2002-2003 fiscal year. 

An appropriation of the unreserved credit balance in the state’s general fund, or a minimum is allocated 

to the CWMTF. CWMTF grants are selected by an independent 18-member Board of Trustees for projects 

that: 1) enhance or restore degraded waters; 2) protect unpolluted waters; and/or 3) contribute toward a network 

of riparian buffers and greenways for environmental, educational, and recreational benefits. Projects 

range from land acquisition for greenways and riparian buffers to sewage treatment plant upgrades to planning 

and mapping for water quality protection. (http://www.cwmtf.net) 

North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) 

The NC Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is an innovative, non regulatory program established 

by the NC General Assembly in 1996 to restore wetlands, streams and streamside (riparian) areas throughout 

the state. The goals of the NCWRP are to: 

• Protect and improve water quality by restoring wetland, stream and riparian area functions and 

values lost through historic, current and future impacts. 

• Achieve a net increase in wetland acreage, functions and values in all of North Carolina’s major river 

basins. 

• Promote a comprehensive approach for the protection of natural resources. 

• Provide a consistent approach to address compensatory mitigation requirements associated with 

wetland, stream, and buffer regulations, and to increase the ecological effectiveness of compensatory 

mitigation projects. (http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp) 

Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Program 

The USDA provides small grants of up to $10,000 to communities for the purchase of trees to 

plant along city streets and for greenways and parks. To qualify for this program, a community must 

pledge to develop a street-tree inventory; a municipal tree ordinance; a tree commission, committee 

or department; and an urban forestry-management plan. (for addition information contact Barry New, 

Grant Contact Administrator and Urban Forestry Specialist at (919) 733-2162, ext. 249. 

email: Barry.New@ncmail.net 

Small Business Tree Planting Program 

The Small Business Administration provides small grants of up to $10,000 to purchase trees for 

planting along streets and within parks or greenways. Grants are used to develop contracts with local 

businesses for the planting. (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/15/651.html) 

Design Arts Program 

The National Endowment for the Arts provides grants to states and local agencies, individuals 

and nonprofit organizations for projects that incorporate urban design, historic preservation, planning, 

architecture, landscape architecture and other community improvement activities, including 

greenway development. Grants to organizations and agencies must be matched by a 50 percent local 

contribution. Agencies can receive up to $50,000. (http://www.nea.gov) 

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 

This commission, through small grants, annually funds projects that increase wildlife habitat 

or improve public access and education related to wildlife. This money can be used for interpretive 

signage on local wildlife habitat along greenways. (http://216.27.49.98/fs_index_07_ 

conservation.htm) 

North Carolina Department of Corrections 

Minimum-security prison labor can be used to construct and maintain greenways. Amenities 

such as picnic tables, signs and benches can be constructed using prison labor. An example of where 

this has been successful is in Guilford County, where prisoners regularly maintain the Bicentennial 

Greenway. (http://www.doc.state.nc.us/eprise/index.htm) 

North Carolina Division of Water Resources 

Greenway projects involving stream restoration or recreation can receive money from the Water 

Resources Development Grant Program, administered by the Division of Water Resources. (contact: 

Tina Dixon (919) 715-5429) 



PL 566-Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act 

Local communities can receive funding for greenway projects that incorporate flood prevention and 

watershed protection through this act. (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/watershed/index.html, contact: 

Bruce Julian, National Policy Coordinator, Water Resources, 202-720-3042) 

Local Funding Sources 

Taxes 

Greenways can be funded through sales tax revenues. One example of a community that is using sales 

tax dollars to fund bicycle and pedestrian facilities is Cobb County, Georgia, where citizens voted to implement 

a one percent local sales tax to provide funding for transportation projects. Over four years, Cobb 

County DOT will receive $3.8 million of this sales tax revenue for bicycle improvements alone, to be used 

as a match for federal dollars. Another example is Oklahoma City, where voters approved a temporary 

$0.01 sales tax, which generated millions of dollars for greenway acquisition and development. 

In order to raise the sales tax above the current level, the cities and/or counties will need approval from 

the General Assembly, which may be currently reluctant to grant an additional statewide local option sales 

tax. 

Impact Fees 

Impact fees are monetary onetime charges levied by a local government on new development. Unlike 

required dedications, impact fees can be applied to finance greenway facilities located outside the boundary 

of development. The General Assembly has permitted a “small but growing number of local governments to 

impose impact fees.” These fees can be levied through the subdivision or building permit process to finance 

greenways. 

Bond Referendums 

Communities across the nation have successfully placed propositions on local ballots to support 

greenway development. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg County, NC, area passed four consecutive referenda 

that generated more than $3 million for greenways. In 1988 Guilford County, NC also passed a referendum 

that appropriated $1.6 million for development of the Bicentennial Trail. If a city chooses to propose a bond 

referendum, the city should consider combining the needs of the pedestrian thoroughfare plan and parks and 

recreation plan with the greenways plan. Since bonds rely on the support of the voting population, an aggressive 

education and awareness program will need to be implemented prior to any referendum vote. 

Local Capital Improvements Program 

Some local governments have initiated a yearly appropriation for greenway and trail development in 

the capital improvements program. In Raleigh, NC, greenways continue to be built and maintained, year 

after year, due to a dedicated source of annual funding that has ranged from $100,000 to $500,000, 

administered through the Parks and Recreation Department. 

Trail Sponsors 

A sponsorship program for trail amenities allows smaller donations to be received from both 

individuals and businesses. The program must be well planned and organized, with design standards 

and associated costs established for each amenity. Project elements that may be funded can include 

wayside exhibits, benches, trash receptacles, entry signage and picnic areas. Usually, plaques recognizing 

individual contributors are placed on the constructed amenities or at a prominent entry point 

to the trail. 

Local Private Sector Funding 

Local industries and private businesses may agree to provide support for development of the 

greenway through: 

• Donations of cash to a specific greenway segment; 

• Donations of services by large corporations which reduce the cost of greenway implement 

ation, including equipment and labor to construct and install elements of the greenway; 

• Reductions in the cost of materials purchased from local businesses that support greenway 

implementation and can supply essential products for facility development. 

One example of a successful endeavor of this type is the Swift Creek Recycled Greenway in 

Cary, NC. A total of $40,000 in donated construction materials and labor made this trail an awardwinning 

demonstration project. This method of raising funds requires a great deal of staff coordination. 

(Note: Some materials used in the “recycled trail” were considered waste materials by local 

industries.) 

Volunteer Work 

Community volunteers may help with greenway construction, as well as conduct fund-raisers. 

Individual volunteers can be recruited with those from local organizations such as church groups, 

civic groups, scout troops and environmental groups. 

A case in point is Cheyenne, Wyoming’s volunteer greenway program. The Greater Cheyenne 

Greenway has motivated an impressive amount of community support and volunteer work. The program 

has the unusual problem of having to insist that volunteers wait to begin landscaping the trail 

until construction is completed. A manual for greenway volunteers was developed in 1994 to guide 

and regulate volunteer work. The manual includes a description of appropriate volunteer efforts, 



equest forms, waiver and release forms, and a completion form (volunteers are asked to summarize their 

accomplishments). Written guidelines are also provided for volunteer work in 100-year floodplains. 

To organize volunteers, Cheyenne developed an “Adopt-a-Spot” program. Participants who adopt a 

segment of trail are responsible for periodic trash pickup, but can also install landscaping, prune trail side 

vegetation, develop wildlife enhancement projects and install site amenities. All improvements must be 

consistent with the greenway development plan and must be approved by the local greenway coordinator. 

Adopt-a-Spot volunteers are allowed to display their names on a small sign along the adopted section of 

greenway. (http://www.cheyennecity.org/greenway.htm, David Romero, Director (307) 637-6423) 

“Buy-a-Foot” Programs 

“Buy-a-Foot” programs have been successful in raising funds and awareness for trail and greenway 

projects within North Carolina. Under local initiatives, citizens are encouraged to purchase one linear foot 

of the greenway by donating the cost of construction. An excellent example of a successful endeavor is the 

High Point Greenway “Buy-a-Foot” campaign, in which linear greenway “feet” were sold at a cost of $25/ 

foot. Those who donated were given a greenway T-shirt and a certificate. This project provided more than 

$5,000 in funds. (http://www.americantrails.org/resources/funding/Funding.html) 

Private Foundations and Corporations 

Many communities have solicited greenway funding from a variety of private foundations and other 

conservation-minded benefactors. 

Walking Magazine Trail Restoration Fund 

Walking Magazine, hoping to encourage more volunteer efforts among trail users, established this fund 

for the restoration of urban, suburban or rural walking trails. The magazine provides small grants, generally 

from $200 to $500, to help walking clubs and other groups purchase trail maintenance equipment or supplies. 

To obtain an application, write to Trail Restoration Fund, Walking Inc., 9-11 Harcourt St., Boston, MA 

02116. 

Coors Pure Water Grants 

Coors Brewing Company and its affiliated distributors provide funding and in-kind services to grassroots 

organizations that are working to solve local, regional and national water-related problems. Coors 

provides grants, ranging from a few hundred dollars to $50,000, for projects such as river cleanups, aquatic 

habitat improvements, water quality monitoring, wetlands protection, pollution prevention, water education 

efforts, groundwater protection, water conservation and fisheries. (Contact: Coors Pure Water 2000 Initiative, 

1 - 800 - 642 - 6116) 

implement innovative strategies for the conservation of natural resources. Grants are offered to support 

projects which: 

1. Conserve wetlands; 

2. Protect endangered species; 

3. Preserve migratory birds; 

4. Conserve coastal resources; and 

5. Establish and sustain protected natural areas, such as greenways. 

Innovation grants can help pay for the administrative costs for projects including planning, 

technical assistance, legal and other costs to facilitate the acquisition of critical lands; retaining 

consultants and other experts; and preparing visual presentations and brochures or other conservation 

activities. The maximum award for a single grant is $10,000. (http://www.worldwildlife.org) 

Local Foundations 

Local philanthropic foundations have among their priorities funding for community projects 

like greenways and an interest in environmental and conservation issues. All local foundations have 

differing eligibility requirements, application procedures and funding guidelines. Foundations that 

may fund greenway activities should be carefully researched. An initial letter of inquiry is usually 

the best way to determine if a foundation will consider an application for funding a greenway project. 

American Greenways DuPont Awards 

The Conservation Fund’s American Greenways Program has teamed with the DuPont Corporation 

and the National Geographic Society to award small grants ($250 to $2,000) to stimulate the 

planning, design and development of greenways. Piedmont Land Conservancy has been a recipient 

of such grants for this Master Plan. These grants can be used for activities such as mapping, conducting 

ecological assessments, surveying land, holding conferences, developing brochures, producing 

interpretive displays, incorporating land trusts, building trails and other creative projects. Grants 

cannot be used for academic research, institutional support, lobbying or political activities. For more 

information contact The Conservation Fund, 1800 N. Kent St., Suite 1120, Arlington VA 22209 (703/ 

525-6300). 

World Wildlife Fund Innovative Grants Program 

This organization awards small grants to local, regional, and statewide nonprofit organizations to help 



METHODS OF GAINING PUBLIC ACCESS 

Acquisition Tools 

The development of parks has traditionally occurred on land owned outright by the cities and counties. 

The expansion of these holdings usually have been through fee simple acquisition; that is, the city or county 

buys the property outright without any encumbrances or limitations upon the property title. Fee simple acquisition 

can be modified to allow life tenancy by the seller. While fee simple acquisition remains a primary 

tool in the effort to assemble land for recreational purposes, other tools for resource protection and use are 

being utilized. Alternatives to fee simple acquisition include: 

Greenway Easements 

The purpose of greenway easements is to establish legally binding contracts based on a mutual understanding 

of the specific use, treatment and protection that greenway lands will receive. Property owners 

who grant easements retain all rights to the property except those which have been extinguished by the 

easement. The property owner is responsible for all taxes associated with the property, less the value of the 

easement granted. Easements are generally restricted to certain portions of property, although in some cases 

an easement can be applied to an entire parcel. Easements are transferable through title transactions, thus 

the easement can remain in effect forever. Three components of greenway easements which may be appropriate 

for use in the Piedmont Greenway study corridor are: 

Conservation Easements 

This type of easement generally establishes permanent limits on the use and development of land in 

order to protect the natural resources of that land. A conservation easement may simply involve a property 

owner's agreement not to develop a particular site or it may provide for active management of the site by a 

city, county or land trust. 

For example, a scenic easement may establish a buffer zone adjacent to a creeks watershed where no 

development or clearing of vegetation could occur. The Upper Neuse Watershed management Plan Project, 

as an example, held workshops June 2002 with cities and towns, and private landowners to explain the 

benefits for dedicating greenway easements along the river for land within the 100-year flood plain or 150 

feet of its bank, whichever is less. This will allows the cities and towns, and private landowners the ability 

to develop and use a greenway trail. It is recommended that a provision of this type be implemented along 

the Reedy Fork and Moore's Creek corridors. The Conservation Easement language can be strengthened by 

changing the wording to establish a greenway easement over the 100-year flood plain or within 150 feet of 

the creek bank, whichever is greater. 

Preservation Easements 

This type of easement is intended to protect the historical integrity of a structure or important elements 

of the landscape by sound management practices. Preservation easements may qualify for the same federal 

tax deductions and state tax credits as conservation easements. 

Donation/Tax Incentives 

A donation occurs when a local government agency agrees to receive full title to a parcel of land at virtually 

no cost. The city, county and land trust may accept gifts of property as a low-cost strategy for enlarging 

the Piedmont Greenway while providing a legacy for the donors. In most cases, the donor is eligible to 

receive federal and state deductions on personal income. In addition, property owners may be able for this 

for a piece of land to avoid inheritance taxes, capital gains taxes and recurring property taxes. 

North Carolina Conservation Tax Credits 

Donations of below fair market sales of conservation easements usually qualify landowners for federal 

income tax deductions and state income tax credits. The North Carolina Conservation Tax Credit allows: 

• State income tax credit is equal to 25 percent of the fair market value of open space or farmland, not 

to exceed $250,000. 

• Any unused portion of the credit may be carried over for the following five years. 

• (N.C. Gen. Stat., §105-130.34, §105-151.12). 

For more information contact Piedmont Land Conservancy (336 - 691 - 0088) 

Life Tenancy 

Property owners can sell or give the city or county property but retain the right to live on the land for 

the rest of their lives. 

Fee-Simple Purchase 

This is a common method of acquisition where a local government agency or private greenway manager 

purchases property outright. Fee simple ownership conveys full title to the land and the entire “bundle” 

of property rights including the right to possess land, to exclude others, to use land and to alienate or sell 

land. 



Easement Purchase 

This mechanism is the fee simple purchase of an easement. Full title to the land is not purchased, only 

those rights granted in the easement agreement. Therefore the easement purchase price is less than full land 

value. 

Purchase/Lease Back 

A local government agency or private greenway organization can purchase a piece of land and then 

lease it back to the seller for a specified period of time. The lease may contain restrictions regarding the use 

and development of the property. 

Bargain Sale 

A property owner can sell property at a price less than the appraised fair market value of the land. 

Sometimes the seller can derive similar benefits as if the property were donated. Bargain sale is attractive to 

sellers when the seller wants cash for the property, the seller paid a low cash price and thus is liable for high 

capital gains tax, and/or the seller has a fairly high current income and could benefit from a partial donation 

of the property as federal and state income tax deductions, and for North Carolina Tax Credit. 

Option/First Right of Refusal 

This is when a local government agency or private organization establishes an agreement with a public 

agency or private property owner to provide the right of first refusal on a parcel of land that is scheduled to 

be sold. This form of agreement can be used in conjunction with other techniques, such as an easement, to 

protect the land in the short term. An option would provide the agency with sufficient time to obtain capital 

to purchase the property or successfully negotiate some other means of conserving the greenway resource. 

Land Banking 

Creating city and/or county partnerships with non-profit conservation groups can be beneficial to the 

objectives of both groups. These conservation groups can often acquire potential park land and critical 

greenway links on behalf of public agencies. They have the advantage of being able to move quickly to 

purchase and hold open space while a public agency secures financing -- in effect land banking the site until 

public ownership can occur. The Piedmont Land Conservancy, the Nature Conservancy, Trust for Public 

Land, or others, may be able to assist the cities and counties in this manner. 

Management Agreements 

A management agreement between a private landowner and the city and/or county may improve the 

condition of a natural landscape or protect the quality of land owned privately through the use of staff expertise 

and other resources. For example, an agreement to install additional storm water retention or to reestablish 

vegetation along the river in some areas could improve the overall water quality of the creeks, thus 

improving the resource for all. 

Zoning 

Zoning can be used as a tool to control certain aspects of a private land owner’s property for the benefit 

of the broader community. The use of a Conservation Buffer District as an overlay can be used to protect 

the 100-year flood plain in the portions of the corridor most recently rezoned or annexed into the city from 

the county. This type of protection could be strengthened by expanding a district that would use the overlay 

to allow for the protection of resources in the public interest. 

Condemnation 

The practice of condemning private land for use as greenways is viewed as an absolute last resort 

policy. Using condemnation to acquire property or property rights can be avoided if private and public 

support for the greenway program is present. Other successful greenway communities have seldom used 

condemnation for the purpose of dealing with an unwilling property owner. In most cases, condemnation 

for greenway purposes has been exercised when there has been absentee property ownership, when title to 

the property is not clear or when it becomes apparent that obtaining the consent for purchase will be difficult 

because there are numerous heirs located in other parts of the United States or in different countries. The 

community must exercise caution in using Eminent Domain. 

Impact Fees 

Impact fees are monetary one-time charges levied by a local government on new development to offset 

some of the cost of providing public facilities for new development. Unlike subdivision exactions, impact 

fees can be applied to finance facilities located outside a specific land-use development and can account for 

the impact of a development on facilities beyond the boundary of the development. The purpose of impact 

fees is not to raise revenue but to ensure that adequate capital facilities will be provided to serve and protect 

the public. They can be levied through the subdivision or building permit process. 

Each of these strategies could be implemented to help the cities and counties reach the goals of this 

project. Each strategy has times when it is the most appropriate solution. These strategies can often be used 

to greatest advantage in tandem. Certain of these tools can also be used as interim solutions working toward 

outright acquisition. 



Greenway Facility Safety and 

Security 

Safety is a duty and obligation of all public facility managers. Therefore, as the construction, documents 

for the Piedmont Greenway are completed in the next planning phase, appropriate local, state, and 

federal agencies should review these plans and specifications to ensure that they meet all existing regulations. 

In order to provide reasonable and ordinary safety measures, the Cities, Towns, and Counties impacted 

by the Piedmont Greenway should develop a cohesive coalition and implement a Safety and Security Program. 

This program should consist of well-defined safety and security policies; the identification of trail 

management, law enforcement, emergency and fire protection policies; and a system that offers timely 

response to the public for issues or problems related to safety and security. The coalition of governments 

will need to implement internal coordination for safety and security between Parks and Recreation, Police, 

Fire, Public Works, and Legal Departments. Additionally, procedures and policies should be established for 

external coordination between the Cities and counties of the Piedmont Greenway and local alliances, local 

neighborhood watch associations, and “Adopt-a-Greenway” organizations. Important components of the 

Safety and Security Program should include: 

1) Establishment of a Safety Committee or Coordinator in each county; 

2) Preparation of a Trail Safety Manual for employees and agencies; 

3) Establishment of User Rules and Regulations; 

4) Development of Greenway and Trails Emergency Procedures; 

5) Preparation of a Safety Checklist for the trail; 

6) Preparation of a trail user response form; 

7) A system for accident reporting and analysis; 

8) Regular Maintenance and Inspection Program; 

9) Site and Facility Development and Review; 

10) Public Information Program; 

11) Employee Training Program for Safety and Emergency Response; and 

12) Ongoing Research and Evaluation of Program Objectives. 

The program should always discourage the general public from using any segment of the Greenway 

that is under construction. Trail segments should not be considered officially opened for public use until a 

formal dedication ceremony and authorized agents of the county and or cities and towns have completed official 

opening. Individuals who use greenway segments that are under construction, without written permission 

from an authorized agent, should be deemed in violation of the Piedmont Greenway Hours of Operation 

policy. 

Hours of Operation 

The consultant recommends that the Piedmont Greenway be operated like all other non-lighted City 

park and recreation facilities open for public use from dawn to dusk, 365 days a year, except as specifically 

designated by the local Parks and Recreation Departments. The consultant recommends that individuals who 

are found using these facilities after dusk and before dawn, be deemed in violation of these hours of operation 

and subject to fines and/or prosecution. 

Trail User Rules and Regulations 

One of the emerging safety issues in greenway trail planning, design, and development is multi-user 

conflict. Typically, these conflicts are caused by overuse of a trail. However, other factors may be lead to 

user conflicts and problems including poorly designed and engineered trail alignments, inappropriate user 

behavior, or inadequate facility capacity. The most effective trail use management plan is a well-conceived 

safety program that provides the individual user with a Code of Conduct for the trail, sometimes called a 

Trail Ordinance. Several multi-use trail systems across the United States have adopted progressive ordinances 

for public use. The consultant recommends that the following Rules and Regulations be implemented 

for the Piedmont Greenway. These rules should be displayed in both brochures and on information signs 

throughout the Trail. The consultant recommends that these rules and regulations be reviewed by the appropriate 

authorities and legally adopted by the Cities, towns, and counties. 

1) Be Courteous: All Trail users, including bicyclists, joggers, walkers, wheelchairs, 

skateboarders and skaters, should be respectful of other users regardless of their mode of 

travel, speed, or level of skill. Never spook animals; like horses and dogs - talk to them in a 

calm voice as you approach. Respect the privacy of adjacent landowners. 

2) Keep Right: Always stay to the right as you use the Trail, or stay in the lane that has been 

designated for your user group. The exception to this rule occurs when you need to pass 

another user. 

3) Pass on the Left: Pass others going in your direction on their left. Look ahead and behind to 

make sure that your lane is clear before you pull out an around the other user. Pass with 

ample separation. Do not move back to the right until you have safely gained distance and 

speed on the other user. Faster traffic should always yield to slower and oncoming traffic. 

4) Give Audible Signal When Passing: All users should give a clear warning signal before 

passing. This signal may be produced by voice, bell, or soft horn. Voice signals might 

include “Passing on the Left!” or “Cyclist on the left!” Always be courteous when providing 

the audible signal - profanity is unacceptable. 

5) Be Predictable: Travel in a consistent and predictable manner. Always look behind before 

changing position on the Trail, regardless of your mode of travel. 

6) Control Your Bicycle: Inattention, even for a second can cause disaster —always stay alert! 

Maintain a safe and legal speed at all times. 



7) Don’t Block the Trail: When in a group, including your pets, use no more than half the 

trailway, so as not to block the flow of other users. If users approach your group from both 

directions, form a single line, or stop and move to the far right edge of the Trail to allow safe 

passage by these users. 

8) Yield when entering or Crossing Trails: When entering or crossing a Trail at uncontrolled 

intersections, yield to traffic already using the other trail. 

9) The Use of Lights: When using a Trail during periods of low visibility each cyclist should 

be equipped with proper lights. Cyclists should have a white light that is visible from five 

hundred feet to the front, and a red or amber light that is visible from five hundred feet to the 

rear. Other Trail users should use white lights (bright flashlights) visible two hundred fifty 

feet to the front, and wear light or reflective clothing. 

10) Don’t Use this Trail Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs: It is illegal to use this Trail 

if you have consumed alcohol in excess of the statutory limits, or if you have consumed 

illegal drugs. Persons who use a prescribed medication should check with their doctor or 

pharmacist to ensure that it will not impair their ability to safely operate a bicycle or other 

wheeled vehicle. 

11) Cleanup Your Litter: Please keep this Trail clean and neat for other users to enjoy. Do not 

leave glass, paper, cans, or other debris on or near the trail. Please clean up after your pets. 

Pack out what you bring in —and remember to always recycle your trash. 

12) Keep Pets on Leashes: All pets must be kept on a secure and tethered leash. Failure to do so 

will result in fines and possible detention of the pet. 

13) Use the Buddy System: Use the Trail system with a friend! 

14) Trail Subject to Flash Flooding: Please be aware that the Piedmont Greenway is officially 

closed during times when floodwaters overflow the creek banks and cover the Trail surface. 

For your personal safety, please be prepared to leave the Trail immediately during periods of 

heavy rainfall. 

15) Swimming Prohibited: Swimming is prohibited in creeks and tributary streams. 

16) Vegetation Removal: It is illegal to remove vegetation of any type, size, or species from the 

Greenway. Please contact the appropriate Parks and Recreation Department or Planning 

Department should you have concerns about noxious weeds, poisonous vegetation, dying or 

dead vegetation, or other concerns about vegetation growth in the greenway. 

17) Share the Trail! Always exercise due care and caution when using the Trail! 

Police/Park Ranger Patrol and Emergency 

Response System 

In order to provide effective patrol and emergency response to the needs of trail users and adjacent 

property owners, the consultant recommends that the various cities and county Police and Sheriff Departments 

and Parks and Recreation Departments work together, to develop a specific patrol and emergency response 

plan for the Piedmont Greenway. This plan should define a cooperative law enforcement strategy for 

the Trail based on the capabilities of different agencies and services typically required for the facility. There 

will be numerous phases of the greenway until completion, each consultant as they are hired for each phase 

should be required to work with the designated departments/agencies to deliver a site plan that illustrates: 

points of access to the trail; approved design details for making these access points safe, secure, and accessible 

to law enforcement officials; and potential locations for a system of cellular-type emergency phones. 

The consultant will also work with appropriate officials to locate other mechanisms or project elements that 

will aid local agencies in managing the trail in a safe and secure manner. 

The Police, Sheriffs, Parks, and Recreation Departments should also define an emergency response 

system in conjunction with appropriate local Fire Stations and Paramedical units that defines which agencies 

should respond to 911 calls, and provides easy-to-understand routing plans and access points for emergency 

vehicles. Local hospitals should be notified of these routes so that they may also be familiar with the size 

and scope of the project. The entire Trail system will be designed and developed to support a minimum 

gross vehicle weight of 6.5 tons to allow emergency vehicle access. 

At all public entrances to the Piedmont Greenway, appropriate signage should be installed to notify 

Trail users of the potential for flash flooding and the need to quickly exit the Greenway during periods of 

heavy rainfall. 

Risk Management and Liability 

The design, development, management, and operation of the Piedmont Greenway must be carefully and 

accurately executed in order to provide a resource that protects the health, welfare, and safety of the public. 

Liability most often occurs when a facility has been under-designed for the intended volume of use; 

when management of the facility is poor; or when unexpected accidents occur because the trail manager 

failed to recognize the possibilities of a potentially hazardous situation. To reduce the exposure to liability, 

the Cities, Towns, and Counties should have in place the following measures prior to opening the first phase 

of the trail: 

1) a complete maintenance program that provides the appropriate duty or level of care to 

Greenway users; 



2) a risk management plan that appropriately covers all aspects of the trail 

3) a comprehensive working knowledge of public use laws and recent case history applicable in 

North Carolina 

Public use of the Piedmont Greenway should be covered under existing municipal policies for the 

use of parkland and public spaces. The Cities, Towns, and Counties should exercise reasonable care in the 

construction of all Greenway facilities to reduce hazardous, public nuisance and life threatening situations. 

The Piedmont Greenway is available for public use as defined by the Hours of Operation Policy; therefore, 

any individual found using the Trail outside the normal hours of operation would not be covered by the municipal 

insurance policies for public use. 

The Cities, Towns, and Counties should exercise reasonable care in the design and construction of all 

trail facilities to reduce hazardous, public, nuisance and life threatening situations. The trail should become 

available for public use as defined under the Hours of Operation Policy; any individual found using the Trail 

outside the normal hours of operation should be treated as a trespasser. 

Studies of Trail Liability 

A recent study by the Rails to Trails Conservancy (RTC) provides a primer on trail-related liability issues 

and risk management techniques. Below is a section of the report that addresses concerns in the proposed 

Haw River Greenway corridor. The report was written by Hugh Morris of RTC in cooperation with 

the National Park Service: Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program. 

Concerns and Solutions 

There are two primary categories of people who might be concerned about liability issues presented 

by a trail: the trail managing and owning entity (typically a public entity) and private landowners. Private 

landowners can be divided into two categories, those who have provided an easement for a trail over their 

land and those who own land adjacent to a trail corridor. 

Similarly, there may be a pre-existing corridor traversing or lying adjacent to their property such as a 

former rail corridor that has been converted to a trail. In either situation, private landowners may have some 

concerns about the liability should a trail user stray onto their land and become injured. In the first instance, 

where an easement is granted, the concern may be over injuries on both the granted right-of-way as well as 

injuries that may occur on land under their control that is adjacent to the trail. Under the latter condition, 

where the landowner has no ownership interest in the trial, the landowner will only be concerned with injury 

to trail users wandering onto their property and getting hurt or perhaps a tree from their property falling onto 

the trail. 

In general, people owning land adjacent to a trail -- whether the trail is an easement granted by them or 

is held by separate title -- foresee that people using the trail may be endangered by a condition on their land. 

Potential hazards such as a pond, a ditch, or a dead tree may cause the landowner to worry about liability for 

a resulting injury. The landowners may reduce their liability by taking the following actions (BCEMC 1997, 

p. 58): 

• Work with trail designers to have the trail located away from hazards that cannot be corrected 

• Make it clear that trail users are not invited onto the adjoining land. This can be aided by 

having the trail designer develop signs, vegetative screening, or fencing. 

• If a hazardous condition does exist near the trail, signs should be developed to warn trail 

users of the hazard if it cannot be mitigated. 

Of particular concern to adjacent landowners are attractions to children that may be dangerous, such 

as a pond. Many states recognize that children may trespass to explore an attractive nuisance. These states 

require a legal responsibility to children, even as trespassers, that is greater than the duty of care owed to 

adults (BCEMC 1997, p.58). 

If a landowner provides an easement for a public-use-trail, the easement contract should specify that 

the managing agency will carry liability insurance, will design the trail to recognized standards and will develop 

and carry out a maintenance plan. The landowner may also request that an indemnification agreement 

be created in their favor. 

Abutting property owners frequently express concerns about their liability to trail users. In general, 

their liability, if any, is limited and is defined by their own actions in relation to the trail. If an abutting 

property owner possesses no interest in the trail, then he or she does not have any right or obligation to warn 

trail users about defects in the trail unless the landowner creates a dangerous condition on the trail by his 

own act or omission. In that event, the abutting landowner would be responsible for his own acts or omissions 

that caused the injury to a third party using the trail, just as the operator of one car is responsible to the 

operator of another for an accident he caused on a city street (Montange 1989, p. 127). 

Forms of Protection 

There are three legal precepts, either alone or in combination that define and in many cases limit liability 

for injury resulting from trail use. The first is the concept of duty of care, which speaks to the responsibility 

that a landowner (private or public) has to anyone on his or her land. Second is the Recreational Use 

Statute (RUS), which is available in all 50 states and provides protection to private landowners and some 

public landowners who allow public free access to land for recreational purposes. For those public entities 

not covered by a RUS, states tend to have a tort claims act, which defines and limits governmental liability. 

Third, for all private and public parties, liability insurance provides the final line of defense. Trail owners 



can also find much protection through risk management. 

Duty of Care 

Tort law, with regard to finding fault for an incident that occurs in a particular location is concerned 

with the “class” of person who incurs the injury, and the legal duty of care that a landowner owes a member 

of the general public varies from state to state but is generally divided into four categories. In most states, 

a landowner’s responsibility for injuries depends on the status of the injured person. A landowner owes 

increasingly greater duties of care (i.e.; is more at risk) if the injured person is a “trespasser”, a “licensee”, 

an “invitee”, or a “child”. 

Trespasser -- a person on land without the landowner’s permission, whether intentionally or by mistaken 

belief that they are on public land. Trespassers are due the least duty of care and therefore pose the 

lowest level of liability risk. The landowner is generally not responsible for unsafe conditions. The landowner 

can only be held liable for deliberate or reckless misconduct, such as putting up a trip wire. Adjacent 

landowners are unlikely to be held liable for injuries sustained by trespassers on their property. 

Licensee -- a person on land with the owner’s permission but only for the visitor’s benefit. This situation 

creates a slightly higher liability for the landowner. For example, a person who is permitted to hunt 

on a farm without paying a fee, if there were no RUS, would be classified as a licensee. If the landowner 

charged a fee, the hunter would probably be classified as an invitee. Again, the landowner is not responsible 

for discovering unsafe conditions; however, the landowner must provide warning of the known unsafe 

conditions. 

Invitee -- a person on the owner’s land with the owner’s permission, expressly or implied, for the owner’s 

benefit, such as a paying customer. This is the highest level of responsibility and therefore carries the 

highest level of liability. The owner is responsible for unknown dangers that should have been discovered. 

Put in a different way, the landowner has a duty to: 

1) Inspect the property and facilities to discover hidden dangers; 

2) Remove the hidden dangers or warn the user of their presence; 

3) Keep the property and facilities in reasonably safe repair: and 

4) Anticipate foreseeable activities by users and take precautions to protect users from 

foreseeable dangers. 

The landowner does not insure the invitee’s safety, but must exercise reasonable care to prevent injury. 

Generally, the landowner is not liable for injuries caused by known, open, or obvious dangers where 

there has been an appropriate warning. For example, customers using an ice rink open to the public for a fee 

would be invitees. 

Child -- even if trespassing, some states accord children a higher level of protection. The concept of 

“attractive nuisance” is particularly relevant to children. Landforms such as ponds can be attractive to children 

who, unaware of potential danger, may be injured if they explore such items. 

Prior to the widespread adoption of RUS’ by the states (see discussion below), this classification 

system defined the liability of adjacent landowners. Even now, trail managers or private landowners who 

charge a fee are at greater risk of liability because they owe the payee a greater responsibility to provide a 

safe experience. 

Thus, where no RUS exists or is unavailable, trail users would be of the licensee class, provided the 

trail manager does not charge an access fee. If a trail manager charges a fee, the facility provider tends to 

owe a greater duty of care to the user and thus has a greater risk of liability if a trail user is injured due to a 

condition of the trail. 

Recreational Use Statutes (RUS) 

The Council of State Governments produced a model recreational use statute (RUS) in 1965 in an effort 

to encourage private landowners to open their land for public recreational use by limiting the landowner’s 

liability for recreational injuries when access was provided without charge (Kozlowski, p. V1D1). 

Recreational use statutes are now on the books in all 50 states. These state laws provide protection to 

landowners who allow the public to use their land for recreational purposes. The theory behind these statutes 

is that if landowners are protected from liability they would be more likely to open up their land for 

public recreational use and that, in turn, would reduce state expenditures to provide such areas. To recover 

damages, an injured person must prove “willful and wanton misconduct” on the part of the landowner, essentially 

the same duty of care owned to a trespasser. However, if the landowner is charging a fee for access 

to the property, the protection offered by the recreational use statue is lost in most states. 

The preamble of the model RUS is clear that it was designed for private landowners but the actual 

language of the model legislation does not differentiate between private and public landowners. The result 

is that while some states have followed the intent of the model statute and limited the immunity to private 

landowners, other states have extended the immunity either to cover public landowners legislatively or judicially 

(Goldstein 1997, p. 788). 

Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the federal government is liable for negligence like a private landowner 

under the law of the state. As a result, RUS’s intended for private individuals have been held applicable 

to the federal government where it has opened land up for public recreation (Kozlowski, p. V1D1). 

Under lease arrangements between a public agency and a private landowner, land can be provided for 

public recreation while the public agency agrees to defend and protect the private landowner. The private 



landowner may still be sued but the public agency holds the landowner harmless, taking responsibilities for 

the cost of defending a lawsuit and any resulting judgments (Kozlowski, p. V1D2). 

While state RUS’s and the court interpretations of these laws vary somewhat, a few common themes 

can be found. The statues were created to encourage landowners to make their land available for public 

recreation purposes by limiting their liability provided they do not charge a fee. The RUS limits the duty of 

care a landowner would otherwise owe to a recreational licensee to keep his or her premises safe for use. It 

also limits a landowner’s duty to warn of dangerous conditions provided such failure to warn is not considered 

grossly negligent, willful, wanton, or reckless. The result of many of these statues is to limit landowner 

liability for injuries experienced by people partaking in recreational activities on their land. The existence 

of a RUS may also have the effect of reducing insurance premiums for landowners whose lands are used for 

recreation (BCEMC 1997, p. 58). 

These laws do not prevent somebody from suing a trail manager/owner or a private property owner 

who has made his or her land available to the public for recreational use, it only means the suit will not 

advance in court if certain conditions hold true. Thus, the trail manager/owner may incur costs to defend 

himself of herself. Such costs are the principal reason for purchasing liability insurance. 

Risk Management 

All of the above-mentioned forms of protection aside, perhaps the best defense a trail manager has are 

sound policy and practice for trail maintenance and usage. Developing a comprehensive technique is the 

best defense against an injury-related lawsuit (BCEMC 1997, p. 60). 

Trails that are properly designed and maintained go a long way to ward off any potential liability. There 

are some general design guidelines (AASHTO and MUTCD) that, if adhered to, can provide protection by 

showing that conventional standards were used in designing and building the trail. Trails that are designed 

in accordance with recognized standards or “best practices” may be able to take advantage of any design immunities 

under state law. Within the spectrum of public facilities, trails are quite safe, often less risky than 

roads, swimming pools and playgrounds. 

The managing agency should also develop a comprehensive maintenance plan that provides for regular 

maintenance and inspection. These procedures should be spelled out in detail in a trail management 

handbook and a record should be kept of each inspection including what was discovered and any corrective 

action taken. The trail manager should attempt to ward off or eliminate any hazardous situations before an 

injury occurs. Private landowners that provide public easements for a trail should ensure that such management 

plans are in place and used to reduce their own liability. Key points include (BCEMC 1997, p. 57); 

(LTA 1991, p. 8). 

During trail design and development: 

• Develop an inventory of potential hazards along the corridor; 

• Create a list of users that will be permitted on the trail and the risks associated with each; 

• Identify all applicable laws; 

• Design and location of the trail such that obvious dangers are avoided. Warnings of potential 

hazards should be provided, and mitigated to the extent possible; 

• Trail design and construction should be completed by persons who are knowledgeable about 

design guidelines, such as those listed in AASHTO and MUTCD documents; 

• Trail regulations should be posted and enforced. 

Once the trail is open for use: 

• Regular inspections of the trail by a qualified person who has the expertise to identify 

hazardous conditions and maintenance problems. 

• Maintenance problems should be corrected quickly and documented. Where a problem 

cannot be promptly corrected, warnings to trail users should be erected. 

• Procedures for handling medical emergencies should be developed. The procedures should 

be documented as well as any occurrence of medical emergencies. 

• Records should be maintained of all inspections, what was found, and what was done about 

it. Photographs of found hazardous conditions can be useful. 

These risk management techniques will not only help to ensure that hazardous conditions are identified 

and corrected in a timely manner, thereby averting injury to trail users, but will also serve to protect the trail 

owner and managing agency from liability. Showing that the agency had been acting in a responsible manner 

can serve as an excellent defense in the event that a lawsuit develops (BCEMC 1997, p. 58). 

Managing Special Situations 

The following are circumstances that the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy has heard about through numerous 

conversations with local trail advocates who have expressed concern about situations that might 

present themselves. For the most part, these situations can be addressed through management techniques. 



Hunting adjacent to Trails 

Some trails traverse public and/or private land that may at certain periods permit hunting. Such proximity 

can expose trail users to potential injury. Like pesticide use, hunting tends to take place at limited 

times during the year. Thus a similar mitigation technique can be used: post signs at the trail heads when 

hunting season is open. While the landowner may technically be liable for such an incident because it is 

generally unlawful to conduct a hazardous activity that can migrate into adjacent property, simple warnings 

to trail users can provide trail mangers with notification of when such activity will occur. Trails can also be 

closed during specific times of the year to allow hunting to take place unabated. 

10. RTC, 2000. “Rails-with-Trails: Design, Management, and Operating Characteristics of 61 Trails Along Active Rail 

Lines.” Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. Washington, D.C., 2000. 

11. TCRP, 1998. “Strategies to Minimize Liability under Federal and State Environmental Laws.” Transit Cooperative Research 

Program, Legal Research Digest. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C. 

Use of Volunteers for Trail Work 

Trail mangers often use volunteers for routine trail maintenance or even for trail construction. What 

happens if the volunteer is injured while performing trial-related work What happens if an action taken 

by a volunteer leads to an injury of a trail user First, make sure your insurance covers volunteer workers. 

Second, the trail manager should be protected from any user injury created by an act of a volunteer provided 

the act is not one of willful or reckless misconduct. The Federal Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 protects 

the volunteer worker. This act protects volunteers of nonprofit organizations or governmental entities. The 

Act states that such volunteers are not liable for harm caused by their acts of commission or omission provided 

the acts are in good faith. 

References 

1. BARTC, 1998. “California’s Recreational Use Statute and Landowner Liability.” Bay Area Ridge Trail Council, San 

Francisco, CA. 

2. BCEMC, 1997. “Community Trails Handbook.” Brandywine Conservancy Environmental Management Center. Chadds 

Ford, PA. 

3. Drake, B. 1995. “Risk Management and Tort Liability.” Publication unknown. 

4. Ferster, A. and M. Jones. 1996. “Addressing Liability to Rails with Trails.” Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, Washington, 

D.C. 

5. Goldstein, D. 1997. The Recreation Use of Land and Water Act: Lory v. City of Philadelphia.” Duquesne Law Review, 

Vol. 35, Num. 3, Spring 1997. 

6. Kozlowski, J. C. et al._____. “The Supply of Recreational Land and Landowner Liability: Recreational Use Statutes 

Revisited.” 

7. LTA, 1991. “Land Trust Liability and Risk Management.” Exchange: Journal of the Land Trust Alliance. Vol. 10, No. 1. 

8. Montange, C., 1989. “Preserving Abandoned Railroad Rights-of-Way for Public Use: A Legal Manual.” Rails-to-Trails 

Conservancy, Washington, D.C. 

9. RTC, 1996. “Acquiring Rail Corridors: A How To Manual.” Edited by Jeff Allen and Tom Iurino, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy 

in Cooperation with the National Park Service. Washington, D.C. 



NORTH CAROLINA TORT CLAIMS ACTS 

AND RECREATIONAL USE STATUTES 

Tort Claims Act: NC General Statute ss 143-291 to 143-300.I 

Recreational Use Statute: NC General Statute Section 113A-95 

North Carolina Recreational Use Statute 

CHAPTER 113A: Pollution Control and Environment. 

ARTICLE 6: North Carolina Trails System. 

§113A-83. Short title. 

This Article shall be known and may be cited as the “North Carolina Trails System Act.” 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, § 1. 

§ 113A-84. Declaration of policy and purpose. 

(a) In order to provide for the ever-increasing outdoor recreation needs of an expanded population and in 

order to promote public access to, travel within, and enjoyment and appreciation of the outdoor, natural and 

remote areas of the State, trails should be established in natural, scenic areas of the State, and in and near 

urban areas. 

(b) The purpose of this Article is to provide the means for attaining these objectives by instituting a State 

system of scenic and recreation trails, coordinated with and complemented by existing and future local 

trail segments or systems, and by prescribing the methods by which, and standards according to which, 

components may be added to the State trails system. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1; 1993, c. 184, s. 1. 

§ 113A-85. Definitions. 

Except as otherwise required by context, the following terms when used in this Article shall be construed 

respectively to mean: 

(1) “Department” means the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 

(2) “Political subdivision” means any county, any incorporated city or town, or other political subdivision. 

(3) “Scenic easement” means a perpetual easement in land which 

a. Is held for the benefit of the people of North Carolina, 

b. Is specifically enforceable by its holder or beneficiary, and 

c. Limits or obligates the holder of the servient estate, his heirs, and assigns with respect to their use and 

management of land and activities conducted thereon, the object of such limitations and obligations being 

the maintenance or enhancement of the natural beauty of the land in question or of areas affected by it. 

(4) “Secretary” means the Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources, except as otherwise specified in 

this Article. 

(5) “State trails system” means the trails system established in this Article or pursuant to the State Parks Act, 

Article 2C of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes, and including all trails and trail segments, together with 

their rights-of-way, added by any of the procedures described in this Article or Article 2C of Chapter 113 of 

the General Statutes. 

(6) “Trail” means: 

a. Park trail. -- A trail designated and managed as a unit of the North Carolina State Parks System under 

Article 2C of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes. 

b. Designated trail. -- A trail designated by the Secretary pursuant to this Article as a component of the 

State trails system and that is managed by another governmental agency or by a corporation listed with the 

Secretary of State. 

c. A State scenic trail, State recreation trail, or State connecting trail under G.S. 113A-86 when the intended 

primary use of the trail is to serve as a park trail or designated trail. 

d. Any other trail that is open to the public and that the owner, lessee, occupant, or person otherwise in 

control of the land on which the trail is located allows to be used as a trail without compensation, including 

a trail that is not designated by the Secretary as a component of the State trails system. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1; 1977, c. 771, s. 4; 1989, c. 727, s. 218(63); 1989 (Reg. Sess., 1990), c. 1004, 

s. 19(b); 1993, c. 184, s. 2; 1997-443, s. 11A.119(a). 

§ 113A-86. Composition of State trails system. 

The State trails system shall be composed of designated: 

(1) State scenic trails, which are defined as extended trails so located as to provide maximum potential for 

the appreciation of natural areas and for the conservation and enjoyment of the significant scenic, historic, 

natural, ecological, geological or cultural qualities of the areas through which such trails may pass. 

(2) State recreation trails, which are defined as trails planned principally for recreational value and may 

include trails for foot travel, horseback, nonmotorized bicycles, nonmotorized water vehicles, and twowheel- 

and four-wheel-drive motorized vehicles. More than one of the aforesaid types of travel may be 

permitted on a single trail in the discretion of the Secretary. 

(3) Connecting or side trails, which will provide additional points of public access to State recreation or 

State scenic trails or which will provide connections between such trails. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1; 1993, c. 184, s. 3. 

§ 113A-87. Authority to designate trails. 

The Department may establish and designate trails on: 

(1) Lands administered by the Department, 

(2) Lands under the jurisdiction of a State department, political subdivision, or federal agency, or 

(3) Private lands provided, fee-simple title, lesser estates, scenic easements, easements of surface ingress 

and egress running with the land, leases, or other written agreements are obtained from landowners through 

which a State trail may pass. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1; 1979, c. 6, s. 1; 1991, c. 115; 1993, c. 184, s. 4. 

§ 113A-88. North Carolina Trails Committee; composition; meetings and functions. 

(a) Repealed by Session Laws 1973, c. 1262, s. 82. 

(b) The Committee shall meet in various sections of the State not less than two times annually to advise the 



Department on all matters directly or indirectly pertaining to trails, their use, extent, location, and the other 

objectives and purposes of this Article. 

(c) The Committee shall coordinate trail development among local governments, and shall assist local 

governments in the formation of their trail plans and advise the Department quarterly of its findings. 

(d) The Secretary, with advice of the Committee, shall study trail needs and potentials, and make additions 

to the State Trails System as needed. He shall submit an annual report to the Governor and General 

Assembly on trail activities by the Department, including rights-ofway that have been established and on 

the program for implementing this Article. Each report shall include a short statement on the significance of 

the various trails to the System. The Secretary shall make such rules as to trail development, management, 

and use that are necessary for the proper implementation of this Article. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1; c. 1262, s. 82; 1987, c. 827, s. 132. 

§ 113A-89. Location of trails. 

The process of locating routes of designated trails to be added to the system shall be as follows: 

For State scenic trails, the Secretary or a designee, after consulting with the Committee, shall recommend 

a route. For State recreation trails and for connecting or side trails, the Secretary or a designee, after 

consulting with the Committee, shall select the route. The Secretary may provide technical assistance to 

political subdivisions or private, nonprofit organizations that develop, construct, or maintain designated 

trails or other public trails that complement the State trails system. When a route shall traverse land within 

the jurisdiction of a governmental unit or political subdivision, the Department shall consult with such unit 

or such subdivision prior to its final determination of the location of the route. The selected route shall be 

compatible with preservation or enhancement of the environment it traverses. Reasonable effort shall be 

made to minimize any adverse effects upon adjacent landowners and users. Notice of the selected route 

shall be published by the Department in a newspaper of general circulation in the area in which the trail 

is located, together with appropriate maps and descriptions to be conspicuously posted at the appropriate 

courthouse. Such publication shall be prior to the designation of the trail by the Secretary. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1; 1993, c. 184, s. 5. 

§113A-90. Scenic easements within right-of-way. 

Within the boundaries of the right-of-way, the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Administration 

may acquire, on behalf of the State of North Carolina, lands in fee title, or interest in land in the form of 

scenic easements, cooperative agreements, easements of surface ingress and egress running with the land, 

leases, or less than fee estates. Acquisition of land or of interest therein may be by gift, purchased with 

donated funds or funds appropriated by the governmental agencies for this purpose, proceeds from the sale 

of bonds or exchange. Any change in value of land resulting from the grant of an easement shall be taken 

into consideration in the assessment of the land for tax purposes. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1. 

§113A-91. Trails within parks; conflict of laws. 

Any component of the System that is or shall become a part of any State park, recreation area, wildlife 

management area, or similar area shall be subject to the provisions of this Article as well as any other laws 

under which the other areas are administered, and in the case of conflict between the provisions the more 

restrictive provisions shall apply. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s.1. 

§113A-92. Uniform trail markers. 

The Department, in consultation with the Committee, shall establish a uniform marker for trails contained in 

the System. An additional appropriate symbol characterizing specific trails may be included on the marker. 

The markers shall be placed at all access points, together with signs indicating the modes of locomotion 

that are prohibited for the trail, provided that where the trail constitutes a portion of a national scenic trail, 

use of the national scenic trail uniform marker shall be considered sufficient. The route of the trail and the 

boundaries of the right-of-way shall be adequately marked. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1. 

§ 113A-92.1. Adopt-A-Trail Program. 

The Department shall establish an Adopt-A-Trail Program to coordinate with the Trails Committee and 

local groups or persons on trail development and maintenance. Local involvement shall be encouraged, and 

interested groups are authorized to “adopt-a- trail” for such purposes as placing trail markers, trail building, 

trail blazing, litter control, resource protection, and any other activities related to the policies and purposes 

of this Article. 

HISTORY: 1987, c. 738, s. 153. 

§113A-93. Administrative policy. 

The North Carolina Trails System shall be administered by the Department according to the policies and 

criteria set forth in this Article. The Department shall, in addition, have or designate the responsibility for 

maintaining the trails, building bridges, campsites, shelters, and related public-use facilities where required. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1. 

§113A-94. Incorporation in National Trails System. 

Nothing in this Article shall preclude a component of the State Trails System from becoming a part of the 

National Trails System. The Secretary shall coordinate the State Trails System with the National Trails 

System and is directed to encourage and assist any federal studies for inclusion of North Carolina trails 

in the National Trails System. The Department may enter into written cooperative agreements for joint 

federal-State administration of a North Carolina component of the National Trails System, provided such 

agreements for administration of land uses are not less restrictive than those set forth in this Article. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 670, s. 1. 

§ 113A-95. Trail use liability. 

(a) Any person, as an owner, lessee, occupant, or otherwise in control of land, who allows without 

compensation another person to use the land for designated trail or other public trail purposes or to 

construct, maintain, or cause to be constructed or maintained a designated trail or other public trail owes the 

person the same duty of care he owes a trespasser. 

(b) Any person who without compensation has constructed, maintained, or caused to be constructed or 

maintained a designated trail or other public trail pursuant to a written agreement with any person who is an 

owner, lessee, occupant, or otherwise in control of land on which a trail is located shall owe a person using 

the trail the same duty of care owed a trespasser. 

(c) Repealed by Session Laws 1993, c. 184, s. 6. 

HISTORY: 1987, c. 498; 1991, c. 38; 1993, c. 184, s. 6. 



Supplemental Information 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Text of Code also available at http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/statutes/ 

statutes%5Fin%5Fhtml/chp113a.html on 11/13/00. 

CHAPTER 113A: Pollution Control and Environment. 

ARTICLE 5: North Carolina Appalachian Trails System Act. 

§113A-72. Short title. 

This Article may be cited as the North Carolina Appalachian Trails System Act. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 545, s. 1. 

§113A-73. Policy and purpose. 

(a) In order to provide for the ever-increasing outdoor recreation needs of an expanded population and in 

order to promote public access to, travel within, and enjoyment and appreciation of the open-air, outdoor 

areas of the State, the Appalachian Trail should be protected in North Carolina as a segment of the National 

Scenic Trails System. 

(b) The purpose of this Article is to provide the means for attaining these objectives by instituting a North 

Carolina Appalachian Trail System, designating the Appalachian Trail lying or located in the North Carolina 

Counties of Avery, Mitchell, Yancey, Madison, Haywood, Swain, Graham, Macon, and Clay, as defined in 

the Federal Register of the National Trails Act as the basic component of that System, and by prescribing 

the methods by which, and standards according to which, additional connecting trails may be added to the 

System. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 545, s. 2. 

§ 113A-74. Appalachian Trails System; connecting or side trails; coordination with the National Trails 

System Act. 

Connecting or side trails may be established, designated and marked as components of the Appalachian Trail 

System by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources in consultation with the federal agencies 

charged with the responsibility for the administration and management of the Appalachian Trail in North 

Carolina. Criteria and standards of establishment will coincide with those set forth in the National Trails 

System Act (PL 90- 543). 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 545, s. 3; 1977, c. 771, s. 4; 1989, c. 727, s. 218(61); 1997-443, s. 11A.119(a). 

§ 113A-75. Assistance under this Article with the National Trails System Act (PL 90-543). 

(a) The Department of Administration in cooperation with other appropriate State departments shall consult 

with the federal agencies charged with the administration of the Appalachian Trail in North Carolina and 

develop a mutually agreeable plan for the orderly and coordinated acquisition of Appalachian Trail rightof-way 

and the associated tracts, as needed, to provide a suitable environment for the Appalachian Trail in 

North Carolina. 

(b) The Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the federal agencies charged with the 

responsibility of the administration of the Appalachian Trail in North Carolina shall give due consideration 

to the conservation of the environment of the Appalachian Trail and, in accordance with the National 

Trails System Act, may obtain advice and assistance from local governments, Carolina Mountain Club, 

Nantahala Hiking Club, Piedmont Appalachian Trail Hikers, Appalachian Trail Conference, other interested 

organizations and individuals, landowners and land users concerned. 

(c) The Board of Transportation shall cooperate and assist in carrying out the purposes of this Article and the 

National Trails System Act where their highway projects cross or may be adjacent to any component of the 

Appalachian Trail System. 

(d) Lands acquired by the State of North Carolina within the 200-feet right-of-way of the Appalachian Trail 

and within the exterior boundaries of the Pisgah or Nantahala National Forests, will be conveyed to the 

United States Forest Service as the federal agency charged with the responsibility for the administration and 

management of the Appalachian Trail within these specific areas. 

(e) Lands acquired by the State of North Carolina outside of the boundaries of the Appalachian Trail rightof-way 

will be administered by the appropriate State department in such a manner as to preserve and 

enhance the environment of the Appalachian Trail. 

(f) In consultation with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the federal agency charged 

with the responsibility of the administration of the Appalachian Trail in North Carolina shall establish use 

regulations in accordance with the National Trails System Act. 

(g) The use of motor vehicles on the trails of the North Carolina Appalachian Trail System may be 

authorized when such use is necessary to meet emergencies or to enable adjacent landowners to have 

reasonable access to their lands and timber rights provided that the granting of this access is in accordance 

with limitations and conditions of such use set forth in the National Trails System Act. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 507, s. 5; c. 545, s. 4; 1977, c. 771, s. 4; 1989, c. 727, s. 218(62); 1997-443, s. 

11A.119(a). 

§113A-76. Acquisition of rights-of-way and lands; manner of acquiring. 

The State of North Carolina may use lands for trail purposes within the boundaries of areas under its 

administration that are included in the rights-of-way selected for the Appalachian Trail System. The 

Department of Administration may acquire lands or easements by donation or purchase with funds donated 

or appropriated for such purpose. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 545, s. 5. 

§ 113A-77. Expenditures authorized. 

The Department is authorized to spend any federal, State, local or private funds available for this purpose to 

the Department for acquisition and development of the Appalachian Trail System. 

HISTORY: 1973, c. 545, s. 6; 1977, c. 771, s. 4; 1989, c. 727, s. 125. 

§§113A-78 to 113A-82. Reserved for future codification purposes. 



End Notes: 

1) There is a long history in the United States of private landowners allowing public use of their land 

for recreation. This can happen in an informal way such as for hunting or fishing, or in a more formal 

way where a trail is established. 

2) Recreational Use Statute protects the property “owner.” While the definition of “owner” can vary 

somewhat from state to state, most define it broadly to include the legal owner of the land, a tenant, 

lessee, occupant or person in control of the premises. Some statutes specifically include public entities 

in the definition of owner while other states specifically exclude public entities, while still others have 

left it for the courts to decide. 

3) Most states define recreational use in the statute by listing a broad range of activities such as swimming 

and hiking and may even include the phrase “includes, but is not limited to” in order to prevent a 

narrow interpretation of the term recreation. 

4) “Guide for the Developments of Bicycle Facilities”. American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 1999. More information can be found at: www.aashto.org Manual 

on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). More details can be found at: wwwohs.fhwa.dot.gov/ 

devices/mutcd.html. 

5) “Rails-Trails and Liability -- A Primer on Trail-Related Liability Issues and Risk Management 

Techniques.” Published by the Rails-to-Trail Conservancy in cooperation with National Park Service 

Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program. September, 2000. 



THE WATERSHEDS OF FORSYTH 

AND GUILFORD COUNTIES 

Effects of Land Use on Watersheds 

Land use dramatically effects creeks, rivers and estuaries. Understanding the impacts of land use is 

essential to effective watershed management planning. To assess the effects in a meaningful way requires 

careful analysis at the watershed level. Rural watershed management plans generally consider spatial 

relationships -- how close are grazing lands or manure storage to streams These plans also consider social 

and demographic aspects -- who owns the land and who takes care of it By contrast, federal mandates for 

urban areas generally require use of “best management practices”. The impacts of urbanization are closely 

linked to the spatial pattern of development. Pattern matters more than the proportion of the entire watershed 

that is urbanized, and more than the relative proportions of urban land uses. Urbanization causes by far 

the most severe impacts on the basin’s creeks, rivers and lakes. 

Non-urban land uses are factors, but the biggest challenge is to preserve and enhance streams in urban 

areas. Nor can the effects of urbanization be reduced to questions of pollutants per acre. A host of interrelated 

changes must be considered such as changes that accelerate runoff, alter patterns of erosion and deposition 

and alter the flow of water, sediment and nutrients between riparian areas and streams. 

Most municipalities have not made preservation of aquatic resources a goal of their comprehensive 

plans. They have the authority to undertake a variety of initiatives, but usually do not have a methodology 

for developing and carrying out measures on an appropriate watershed-wide scale. 

Effects of Urbanization on Forsyth 

and Guilford County Basin Watersheds 

Land Uses 

Changes in the land use characteristics of a watershed, individually or in combination, can alter its 

structure or impair key ecological functions. The interrelated components are connected and can be described 

as follows: changes in land use lead to changes in the shapes and contours of streams, thence to 

changes in the way water flows through them and how they carry and deposit sediment, with the result of 

changing the way stream habitats function, both physically and ecologically. 

Suburban Sprawl 

Sprawl is characterized by segregation of land uses, overall low density and dependency on automobiles 

for transportation. These characteristics have a direct effect on the water quality and natural resources 

in the watershed. Vast areas covered by houses and workplaces affect watersheds principally by altering the 

way they drain. Particularly significant is the narrowing of streamside corridors and their division into non 

contiguous segments by roads and other development. 

Urbanization and Imperviousness 

A major effect of urbanization is imperviousness. This term is often applied to surfaces -- roads, sidewalks, 

rooftops, parking lots -- that prevent or inhibit rainfall from sinking into groundcover and groundwater. 

Urbanization and increased imperviousness can produce smaller, more frequent floods. During 

extreme events, increased imperviousness has little effect on flows. The reason is that at such times rainfall 

saturates the natural soils and renders them effectively impervious. Nevertheless, urbanization and increased 

imperviousness can increase smaller, more frequent flooding -- 1.5- to 2-year floods -- by up to 10 times, 

particularly during smaller storms and in smaller streams. Greater imperviousness is also correlated to reduced 

habitat quality as measured by biological indices. To understand how this process happens it is necessary 

to examine the relationship 

Changes to stream structure and disconnection from floodplains are the most significant and characteristic 

impacts of land use on streams in the Piedmont Greenway Corridor. They include: 

• Destabilization of streambeds and banks (caused by the change in amount of timing and 

flows as the result of increased impervious cover), increased drainage density, and changes to 

sediment inputs. 

• Agricultural and urban encroachment on riparian corridors (especially along Reedy Fork 

Creek and Beaver Creek Corridors). 

• Increased subdivision building (including the Moore’s Creek corridor and areas of Reedy 

Fork, Beaver Creek, and Kerners Mill Creek outside of the critical watershed boundary). 

• Disconnection of streams from floodplains, caused by erosive down cutting of streambeds 

and by construction of channels (stormwater uses from roads, housing etc). 

Imperviousness is most significant during the smaller but more frequent storm events because these 

bankfull flows most strongly influence stream characteristics. They do the major “work” of a perennial 

stream in moving sediment and thereby determining the stream’s form. The configuration of the drainage 

patterns of the study corridor suggest a gently sloping plain underlain by alluvial material interspersed with 

clays, created by this work of streams, carrying sediment down from hillsides (see figures 7, 14, and 15). 

The relatively flat alluvial plain (Reedy Fork as an example) was created by streams moving back and forth 

over the valley floor. Periodic flooding is essential to some riparian plants such as willow, and helps to 



eplenish floodplains with sediments and nutrients. The flooding yields a “pulsed” increase in habitat, which 

is essential for invertebrate communities of amphibians and reptiles, and fish spawning. Flooding also replenishes 

shallow groundwater and extends stream flows longer into the summer. 

Riparian Areas 

“Riparian buffers” is a term developed to convey the importance of both aquatic and terrestrial resources 

ecologically linked to river systems. No standard definition exists and municipalities have used 

various approaches. For the purpose of this study, we will define riparian corridors to include “. . . any 

defined stream channels including the area up to the bankfull flow line, as well as all riparian (streamside) 

vegetation in contiguous adjacent uplands.” Characteristic woody riparian vegetation species could include 

(but are not limited to) willow, alder, box elder, red maple, river birch, sycamore and oaks. Stream channels 

include all perennial and intermittent streams shown as a solid or dashed blue line on U.S. Geological 

Survey topographic maps. Riparian corridors and associated buffers provide a variety of important benefits 

for both wildlife and humans. They can: 

• Provide food and habitat for aquatic and some terrestrial organisms. 

• Preserve water quality by filtering sediment from runoff before it enters surface water bodies. 

• Protect streambanks from erosion. 

• Provide a storage area for floodwaters. 

• Preserve open space and aesthetic surroundings. 

Preserving riparian corridors often competes with other land uses, especially in growing urban areas. 

To address this problem, many municipalities have established either numeric or non-numeric development 

setbacks. Some numeric setbacks are 100 feet from creek center beds; others are wider -- 100 feet from the 

edge of riparian vegetation or the top of stream bank, whichever is wider. Non-numeric setbacks use language 

to describe buffers between adjacent land uses and natural creek side areas. At least as important as 

the width of riparian corridors is keeping them connected along their lengths, something often overlooked 

in setting policies. In highly urbanized areas, corridors are often fragmented, particularly by road crossings 

that disrupt habitat and introduce disturbances and pollutants to streams. The proposed I-73 corridor 

is an example of a major road that will affect the Reedy Fork Creek corridor in Guilford County. The total 

amount of land within riparian corridors in the study area varies by the watershed of each creek. 

Areas in need of protection or restoration 

Although the relative proportions of land uses within each watershed’s riparian corridors vary, several 

patterns exist: 

• The Kerners Mill Creek corridor is heavily impacted by subdivisions and other urban uses. 

experiencing rapid growth from residential land use. 

• The Moore’s Creek watershed contains steep ridge lines and erodible soils that are in need of 

riparian and watershed buffers. 

The effect of land use on riparian areas is well known. Except for the critical watershed boundary (in 

Guilford County) and wetland areas, the creeks and rivers that historically supported relatively wide corridors 

of natural vegetation over their floodplains now support narrow bands of vegetation within their banks 

or have been modified for flood protection and water supply. Standing water and drainage of stormwater are 

significant problems throughout the Reedy Fork Creek watershed. Reedy Fork has large tracts of wetlands 

associated with its floodplain as it leaves Lake Brandt and approaches its confluence with Beaver Creek to 

the south. A problem that continues to occur in the project area is the encroachment of buildings and other 

land-use development into flood-prone areas outside of the critical area boundary. 

The purpose of a buffer is to reduce, diffuse and filter pollutants by providing vegetated areas along 

perennial and intermittent streams. The buffers reduce stormwater runoff from adjacent development and 

allow water and pollutants to infiltrate the soil where natural processes mitigate and slow their rapid movement 

in the water body. This is particularly important along the Guilford County portion of the Piedmont 

Greenway where streams flow directly into drinking water supply areas. 

Most ecological studies have demonstrated how, in studying relationships between land use and aquatic 

communities, the scale of investigation influences the findings. They found land use within 50 meters of 

tributaries to correlate more closely with the health of biological communities and in-stream structure than 

land use measured beyond 50 meters. 

In the state of North Carolina, the Department of Water Quality (DWQ) has two types of buffer requirements: 

an agricultural buffer and a development buffer. For agricultural practices, the buffer is only 

required (as are BMP’s) in the critical watershed area and is measured from the stream bank landward for a 

distance of 10 feet. For developments throughout a watershed, buffers are required along all perennial waters 

with a minimum width of 30 feet for low-density development and a minimum 100 feet for high-density 

development. The buffer is measured perpendicularly from the stream bank and serves as a setback for new 

structures such as houses, barns, and other buildings. Property owners are encouraged, but not required, to 

maintain at least the first 25 feet of the buffer next to the stream in a naturally vegetated or undisturbed state. 

Property owners and land developers are given recommendations to leave the buffer areas in public ownership 

and/or to dedicate them as linear greenway or parks. 

(Source: NCDENR, Dept. of Water Quality (DWQ). 

• The Reedy Fork Creek from the critical watershed boundary to Triad Park is 



By designating buffers within floodplains and developing the Piedmont Greenway, the encroachments 

can be better managed and open space increased, creating an amenity and reducing future watershed degradation. 

Summary: Effects of Urbanization 

The pattern of urbanization in the study corridor (a continuous urbanized area) is the dominant effect 

of land use on the corridor’s watershed. The effects on water bodies are not so much due to the intensity of 

land use as to the fact that the land is often developed without considering the natural structure and functions 

of stream corridors. 

many buffer recommendations should consider potential impacts associated with in-stream flood control 

and water supply infrastructure including dams, modified channels and fish ladders. The above-mentioned 

“buffers” are site specific to each creek and drainage channel. The needed setbacks for each creek and 

watershed will have to be investigated on a case-by-case basis rather than under the broad cover of the “one 

size fits all” mentality often used in these protection policies. As stated above, the function of buffers is to 

reduce stormwater runoff from developed areas nearby and allow pollutants to infiltrate the soil where natural 

processes mitigate and slow their rapid movement in the water body. 

To preserve and enhance the watershed will require changing land use in the basin so that more intensely 

urbanized areas are separate from broad, continuous streams. Floodplains should be reconnected to 

streams, where feasible, and development in the floodplain should be prevented to accommodate flooding. 

Such changes may take many decades, but the rapid growth of the region is already under way to alter the 

urban fabric. 

Efforts to reduce the impact of developed sites are shifting their emphasis to limiting imperviousness 

and to dispersing and infiltrating runoff rather than collecting and treating it. Proposed methods tend to 

mix urban planning and design objectives -- for example, control of sprawl and a more pedestrian-oriented 

urban environment -- with site planning and design methods. Design standards must mature beyond “do 

what you can, where you can.” If urban watersheds are to be managed effectively, site location and drainage 

to streams need to be explicitly considered. Imperviousness may be critical in a medium-density area with 

moderate slopes and an intact riparian corridor. 

Land use in the study corridor is characterized by continuous urban development on the valley floors. 

The primary effects on watersheds of the creeks are increased imperviousness, increased frequency of flooding, 

destabilized stream configurations, disconnection of streams from floodplains and loss of riparian corridors. 

Pollutants and toxicity are a secondary concern. Improving the streams in the urbanized parts of the 

watersheds will require reconnecting the streams with their floodplains where feasible, and restoring riparian 

cover. To do so will require changing land-use patterns in the watersheds. In new and redeveloped areas, 

low-impact site design, where appropriate, will be most effective when aimed at a specific location within 

a sub-watershed. Similarly, municipal urban runoff pollution prevention programs will be most effective 

when they are targeted to subwatershed-scale objectives. Riparian buffers are some of the most effective 

tools to meet goals of improving and protecting water quality. 

Finer resolution of land-use data (GIS information) would provide a more precise estimate of land-use 

acreages. A comprehensive creek coverage mapped at fine resolution would also help to accurately map 

riparian corridors. In addition to analyzing patterns of land uses within watersheds and riparian corridors, 



Appendix A: Master Plan Alignment 



Appendix-1

Appendix B: Public Meeting & Workshop Flyer 

This first Flyer was sent out to over 200 people including adjacent landowners, and interested citizens. 



Appendix-2

Appendix C: Public Meeting & Workshop Flyer 

What Should be accomplished by 

Greenway development 

What is a Greenway 

A greenway is: 

Who should manage and care 

for the Greenway 

Additional Comments 

and Special Concerns 

Please check all that you feel should be accomplished 

Improve access to surrounding 

urban, suburban, and rural areas 

Build a trail system along stream corridors 

Remove unnecessary barriers that 

block access to the stream corridors 

Acquire more land for improving water quality 

of the area streams 

Acquire more land for public uses 

* A way of connecting people and places along natural 

or made-made corridors. 

* A linear feature that protects the natural, 

historic and social character of an area 

* Areas for people to play, walk, bicycle, socialize and 

relax. 

What activities are you most 

likely to do in the Greenway 

Please check all that are applicable 

Walk along a stream corridor 

Please choose only one 

The communities of Winston- 

Salem, Greensboro, and 


The Counties of Guilford and Forsyth 

The State of North Carolina 

A Partnership of Public and 

Private Organizations 

Clean the water that flows in the 

stream corridors 

Ride a bike for fitness and fun 

Private Sector Organizations and Landowners 

Other: 

Link neighborhoods to 

the existing park systems 

Interpret the unique history of 

the landscapes between Winston- 

Salem and Greenboro 

Ride a horse 

Picnic with friends or family 

Volunteer to plant native trees and other vegetation 

within the stream buffers 

Do you support using public 

funds for the development of 

the Greenway 

Yes 

Please choose only one 

Volunteer to help with clean up of the public 

lands along the corridor 

Learn about the environment and history of 

the corridor from interpretive signs 

No 

Other: 

Not certain at this time 



Appendix-3

Appendix D: Public Meeting & Workshop Categories 

Activities within Greenways 

What activities are you most likely to do in the Greenway: 

The goals and objectives listed below were analyzed and compiled from the lists developed by local 

citizens during the public workshops held on January 22 & 23, 2000. Participants that filled out comment 

sheets and surveys contributed to this base information, each making several additions. In order for 

public comments to be more useful to the design team, further discrete categories needed to be made. The 

categories consisted of the following objectives: goal of greenway, Recreation/Fitness, management, and 

funding. Those who participated stated their own objectives within these categories and an overall list was 

made. These objectives were then ranked by citizens at the workshop. 

Greenway Goal 

What should be accomplished by Greenway Development: 

Objectives and Results 

1) Improve access to surrounding urban, suburban, and 

rural areas. 

2) Build a trail system along stream corridors 

3) Remove unnecessary barriers that block access to the 

stream corridors 

4) Acquire more land for improving water quality of the 

area streams. 

5) Acquire more land for public uses. 

6) Clean the water that flows in the stream corridors. 

7) Link neighborhoods to the existing park systems. 

8) Interpret the unique history of the landscapes between 

Winston-Salem and Greensboro. 

9) Other: 

Total 

30 

32 

17 

26 

29 

22 

32 

23 

12 

Percentage Response 

75% 

80% 

43% 

65% 

0% 

55% 

80% 

58% 

30% 


1) Walk along a stream corridor 

2) Ride a bike for fitness and fun 

3) Ride a horse 

4) Picnic with friends or family 

5) Volunteer to plant native trees and other vegetation 

within the stream buffers 

6) Volunteer to help with clean up of the public lands along 

the corridor 

7) Learn about the environment and history of the corridor 

from interpretive signs 

8) Other: 

Management of the Greenway 

Who should manage the care of the Greenway: 


1) The communities of Winston-Salem, Greensboro, and 


2) The Counties of Forsyth and Guildford 

3) The State of North Carolina 

Total 

29 

39 

1 

20 

22 

22 

14 

6 

Total 

5 

7 

3 


73% 

98% 

3% 

50% 

55% 

55% 

35% 

15% 


17% 

23% 

10% 

4) A partnership of public and private organizations 

19 

63% 

5) Private sector organizations and landowners 



Appendix-4

6) No Response 

Total 

0 


0% 

10 

25% 

Funding the Greenway 

Do you support using public funds for the development of the Greenway: 


1) Yes 

2) No 

3) Not certain at this time 

4) No Response 

Total 

28 

0 

2 

10 


93% 

0% 

7% 

25% 

Note: figures reflect the results of 40 respondents from public meetings. 



Appendix-5

Appendix E: NC News Piedmont Greenway Articles 



Appendix-6



Appendix-7



Appendix-8

GLOSSARY 

AASHTO: American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials. 

ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act. 

At-Grade Crossing: refers to a trail/roadway intersection where trail users are routed 

onto the road, rather than above (pedestrian bridge) or below (tunnel). 

BMP: best management practices. These practices reflect the most up-to-date 

technology to solve or improve design issues. 

Bollards: metal, wooden or concrete posts designed to restrict vehicle access to a trail. 

CAC: Citizens Advisory Committee. 

EPA: United States Environmental Protection Agency. 

Floodplain: the lowland that borders a stream, creek, river or water conveyance 

and is subject to flooding when the stream overflows its banks. 

“Gene-ways”: routes by which genetic diversity can occur, such as greenways, 

through the migration and breeding of plant and animal species. 

Greenway: a linear corridor of natural land, usually following features such as 

rivers, creeks, ridges, old railroad lines or utility lines. Greenways generally contain 

trails. 

Gabions: rectangular, rock-filled, wire baskets which are building blocks that are used 

to stabilize stream banks. 

LRTP: Long Range Transportation Plan. The Winston-Salem/Forsyth County 

Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) is a comprehensive plan for the total 

transportation system encompassing each mode: transit, rail, bicycle, pedestrian, 

airport and streets and highways. The LRTP must be fiscally constrained and 

meet air quality conformity standards for the 2025 horizon year. 

MUTCD: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 

Non-attainment area: The Clean Air Act and Amendments of 1990 define a “non 

attainment area” as a locality where air pollution levels persistently exceed 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Designating an area non-attainment is a formal 

rule making process and EPA normally takes this action only after air quality standards have 

been exceeded for several consecutive years. http://www.epa.govairs nonattn.html 

NCDOT (GIS): North Carolina Department of Transportation Geographic Information 

Survey. This public department provides and maintains a comprehensive road configuration 

and attributed digital data base for GIS, mapping, and road inventory. 

PART: Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation. PART is a Regional 

Transportation Authority with a goal to improve transportation through regional 

cooperation. In 1997 the North Carolina General Assembly approved enabling 

legislation to form a regional transportation authority whereby local triad governments can 

work together to develop transportation systems throughout the region. 

Riparian: associated with a river or creek. 

Rip Rap: large angular rocks that are traditionally used to armor eroding 

banks of small streams. 

ROW: right-of-way. ROW is associated with NCDOT easements. 

Stormwater: rainfall or snowmelt which travels into streams and rivers during and after 

storm events. 

Trail tread: the surface of a trail. 

Trail head: a designated public access point along a greenway which can include bicycle 

and paved or gravel automobile parking, rest room facilities, drinking fountains, signage, 

benches and picnic tables. 

Watershed Ratings: North Carolina Department of Water Quality Classification. 

WS-I: watersheds are entirely composed of publicly owned land, and are used as 


Final Master Plan Report i

sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes for those users desiring maximum 

protection for their water supplies. WS-I waters are those within essentially natural and undeveloped 

watersheds with no permitted point source (wastewater) discharges. 

WS-II: waters are generally located within predominantly undeveloped watersheds. Waters used as sources 

of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes for those users desiring maximum 

protection for their water supplies where a WS-I classification is not feasible. 

WS-III: waters are generally located within low to moderately developed watersheds. Waters used as 

sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes for those users where a more 

protective WS-I or WS-II classification is not feasible. 

WS-IV: waters are generally located within moderately to highly developed watersheds. Waters used as 

sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes for those users where a WS-I, 

WS-II, or WS-III classification is not feasible. 

WS-V: has no categorical restrictions on watershed development or wastewater dischargers like other WS 

classifications, and local governments are not required to adopt watershed protection ordinances. Waters 

protected as water supplies which are generally upstream and draining to WS-IV waters or waters used by 

industry. 


Final Master Plan Report ii

Acknowledgements 

The Piedmont Land Conservancy would like to extend a sincere thank you to the following individuals and organizations that have made the production of this Master Plan possible. 

The vision for this plan is based on the work of many passionate and hard working people who have combined their talents to form the basis for this planning effort. This master plan 

would not have been possible without the generous support and financial contributions of: 

Donors: 

Foundations: 

Cemala Foundation 

Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro 

Winston-Salem Foundation 

Individuals: 

Other: 

Mike and Sylvia Berkelhammer 

John and Terrie Davis 

Jodi Dietrich 

Heather and Jeffrey Morgan 

Kathy and Lary Treanor 

Great Outdoor Provision Company 

St. Andrews Episcopal Church 

St. Paul the Apostle Church 

The Conservation Fund - Kodak American Greenways Award 

Technical Assistance and Partners: 

Government Partners: 

Marylin Moniquette-John, Forsyth County & Winston-Salem Planning Board 

Judy Hunt, Forsyth County & Winston-Salem Planning Board 

Margaret Bessette, Forsyth County & Winston-Salem Planning Board 

Roger Bardsley, Guilford County 

Michael Brandt, Guilford County 

Jeff Hatling, Town of Kernersville 

Mike Simpson, City of Greensboro, Parks and Recreation 

Other Technical Assistance and Community Volunteers: 

Dr. Ken Bridle, PLC Board of Directors 

Herb Pennington, community volunteer 

Kathy Treanor, PLC Sr. Executive Officer 

Bill Craft, community volunteer 

Tom Berry, community volunteer 

And several hundred outdoor enthusiasts who gave us ideas and 

encouragement. 


Final Master Plan Report AK-1

Piedmont Greenway Master Plan - Town of Kernersville

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?