Utilities & Infra- structure - City of Manhattan

Utilities & Infra-

structure

Table of Contents

Section Summary UIEx-1

Utilities & Infrastructure Implementation Table and Key UIEx-6

Map UI-1. Recent/Planned Development Activity UIEx-9

Map UI-2. Junction City Water Lines UIEx-10

Map UI-3. Junction City Sewer Lines UIEx-11

Map UI-4. Manhattan Sewer Lines UIEx-12

Map UI-5. Riley/Pottawatomie County Water Districts and Water Lines UIEx-13

Map UI-6. New Residential Development in Manhattan UIEx-14

Map UI-7. Konza Sewer System (Riley County Public Works) UIEx-15

A. Introduction and Methodology UI-1

B. Relationship to Previous Plans and Studies UI-2

B.1 Strategic Action Plan and Growth Impact Assessment for the Flint Hills Region

Fort Riley, Kansas, 2006 prepared by RKG Associates, Inc. UI-2

B.2 Junction City | Geary County Comprehensive Plan First Draft –July 2006. Prepared

by Gould Evans UI-2

B.3 City of Manhattan, Kansas Public Works Department Water Distribution System

and Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master Plan Update, July 2003. Prepared by Camp

Dresser & McKee, Inc. UI-3

B.4 Manhattan Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, April 2003. (Joint effort of the City of

Manhattan and Riley County) UI-3

C. Needs Assessment UI-4

C.1 Pottawatomie County UI-4

C.2 Geary County UI-4

C.3 Riley County UI-5

C.4 Junction City UI-5

C.5 Manhattan UI-5

C.6 Wamego UI-6

C.7 Abilene UI-6

C.8 Private Utilities UI-6

D. Recommendations UI-7

D.1 Junction City UI-7

D.2 Manhattan/ U.S. Highway 24 Corridor UI-8

D.3 Riley County UI-9

D.4 Fort Riley UI-9

D.6 Development’s Impact on Existing Storm Water Systems UI-10

E. Appendix UI-10

E.1 Resources UI-10

E.2 Utility Provider Interviews UI-11

Section Summary

This section is intended to assist the counties, cities, and developers of the study area in planning and managing infrastructure resources as Fort Riley expands. The major focus of the section is to identify infrastructure limitations related to expected development.

The study area consists of the seven counties surrounding Fort Riley with Geary, Riley and Pottawatomie counties comprising the core area of focus. Clay, Dickinson, Morris and Wabaunsee Counties make up a secondary study area. The analysis examines the Cities of Manhattan and Junction City more closely because of their proximity to Fort Riley and the level of localized impacts anticipated from the installation’s growth.

The primary focus of this analysis is to identify any possible limitations or conflicts that exist or could emerge as a result of the planned increase in troop strength at Fort Riley and the associated increase in support personnel.

The infrastructure analysis summarizes information obtained from county and city officials, as well as the major private utility providers in the region. As used in this section, the term “infrastructure” encompasses those utility systems that typically serve developed areas, including domestic water supply, treatment, and distribution systems; wastewater collection, distribution, and treatment systems; electric services; natural gas services; telecommunication services; and stormwater management.

Existing Conditions

Pottawatomie County

Analysis indicates that the major growth impacts resulting from Fort Riley transformation will occur along the U.S. Highway 24 corridor between Manhattan and Wamego. This corridor lies in unincorporated portions of the county. Its future growth will require a higher level of infrastructure service delivery. The 2004 U.S. Highway 24 Corridor Plan identified future infrastructure needs in the corridor and explored potential funding mechanisms for infrastructure development. Improvements to existing rural water and sewer systems, coupled with strategic partnerships with the City of Manhattan are the primary solutions for meeting increasing infrastructure needs.

Geary County

Junction City supplies and maintains most of the utility services within Geary County. The county has not identified or planned for any infrastructure improvements.

U t i l i t i e s & i n f r a s t r U c t U r e

UIEx-2 Flint Hills Regional Growth Plan, Utilities & Infrastructure

fees and water impact fees for new developments, as well as innovative programs in which developers finance and construct infrastructure for their total project and the city purchases the completed systems.

Veolia Water North America-Central, a private utility management company manages Junction City’s water services. Current water usage in Junction City is approximately one-third of water treatment facility capacity. The system draws water from a series of wells. The city holds rights to approximately one-third more raw water than is being used currently on a daily basis and is studying methods of increasing their water rights from local sources. The city is also currently conducting a Water Master Plan.

Junction City has two wastewater treatment plants that can meet the demands of the current population, but faces challenges in absorbing growth without exceeding the treatment capacity of the northeast facility. Surrounding developed areas and the river plain limit physical expansion opportunities at this plant.

Manhattan

The transformation of Fort Riley’s mission will have a significant impact on the City of Manhattan. As a result of municipal planning mechanisms that are in place, the city is preparing for expansion of water and wastewater treatment systems to manage the increase in population.

A series of wells with a combined capacity of 20.5 million gallons per day (MGD) supply raw water for the system. Current peak usage is approximately 17 MGD with the existing water treatment plant’s capacity rated at 20 MGD. The plant will increase capacity by approximately 50% in the next 12 to 18 months with an accompanying increase in well capacity required.

The wastewater treatment capacity is now at 8.7 MGD with the average load of 5.0 MGD and a peak demand of approximately 6.9 MGD. Officials plan to expand treatment

Riley County

Riley County conducted some previous level of planning in anticipation of 9,000 new residents. In 2005, the Board of County Commissioners developed an estimate of impacts from military growth, highlighting the need for sewer and roadway improvements to support the Gateway Development and other emerging areas adjacent to Manhattan.

Junction City

Junction City will experience substantial impacts from the post’s mission expansion. Most of the new residential development is on the western side of the community. The city has initiated planning and funding measures to help mitigate the cost of needed water and sewer extensions to this growing area. These measures include sewer hookup

Strategic Action Plan and Growth Impact •

Assessment for the Flint Hills Region, RKG Associates, October 2006

Junction City/Geary County Comprehensive Plan, •

Gould Evans, 2006

Junction City Water Master Plan, Burns •

&McDonnell, 2007

City of Manhattan, Kansas Public Works •

Department Water Distribution System and Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master Plan Update, Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. July 2003

Kansas Water Plan (KWP) by the Kansas Water •

Office

Manhattan Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, •

April 2003. (Joint effort of the City of Manhattan and Riley County)

K e y D o c U m e n t s r e l a t e D t o t h i s s e c t i o n :

January 2008 UIEx-3

capacity by 2.0 MGD in 2009 and 2010, bringing the total capacity to 10.7 MGD.

Wamego

The wastewater treatment capacity of .75 MGD is adequate, with an average use of .45 MGD. Additional capacity for transmission lines may be necessary in three to five years. The system will also require more water storage of approximately 500,000 gallons to meet projected water demands.

The city is planning improvements to the wastewater system in part to meet demands from a large multi-family development, Cold Water Creek, on U.S. Highway 24 in unincorporated Pottawatomie County. The city plans to annex this development and supply water service and water treatment service.

Abilene

The city managed water system serves a population of approximately 7,200 persons. Abilene obtains water from a series of wells that have been experiencing a decrease in yield in the past few years due to drought. The city is currently exploring means of increasing water rights and recognizes that enhancement of the raw water supply is essential for supporting growth and development.

The city’s water treatment plant capacity is approximately three times the current demand. The new wastewater facility can treat approximately twice the average daily flows and its ultimate peak capacity is approximately six times average daily flows. Officials have identified the replacement of aging clay tile sewer lines as a needed improvement to the sewer system.

Private Utility Providers - Westar Energy

Westar Energy periodically evaluates the need for system upgrades. As a result of advanced planning, officials at Westar indicate an ability to meet the increased electrical needs of the region.

Private Utility Providers - Kansas Gas Service

Kansas Gas Service began a campaign to assist and inform contractors building within the study area about specific requirements for connecting to local infrastructure. Officials indicate the ability to provide the staffing and materials needed to support expansion of the natural gas infrastructure.

Assessment/Gap Analysis

Based on this analysis, the public infrastructure systems of the region can adequately support projected growth generated by activity at Fort Riley. Private utility carriers have also indicated an ability to expand systems commensurate with population growth in the study area.

The careful monitoring of demands on infrastructure systems is essential for effective planning and resource allocation during periods of high growth. Utility system capacities should not pose a significant barrier to future development, particularly if officials establish a sufficiently long planning horizon for system expansion.

Of the major municipalities in the area, Junction City appears to have the potential for the highest percentage of growth and attendant pressures on its infrastructure systems. The results of the Flint Hills Growth Allocation Model (see Land Use and Planning section) support this conclusion by showing the highest level of regional population growth on the west and northwest sides of the city. The city, through current planning studies, is taking the necessary steps to identify water and wastewater system improvements necessary to support this rapidly growing west side.

The advanced planning conducted by the Cities of Manhattan and Junction City to upgrade and expand facilities is effective in preparing for the upcoming growth. These plans are based on population projections that are consistent with the anticipated growth generated by Fort Riley. Manhattan has an orderly and disciplined approach


to development, which promotes contiguous growth within its defined Urban Service Area Boundary. While Manhattan recognizes challenges in expanding capacity and maintaining quality, staff indicates an ability to deliver services that support future growth. The Growth Allocation Model illustrates major population growth on the west and northwest sides of Manhattan. This finding is consistent with the city’s projected areas of annexation and development activity.

Infrastructure conditions along U.S. Highway 24 pose the most serious challenge for future growth. Service providers of planned developments along the corridor may have to augment their services by connecting to the City of Manhattan or other municipal systems. Improvements to Rural Water District infrastructure and more detailed planning among service providers will be necessary to enable the corridor to realize its growth potential. The Flint Hills Growth Allocation Model (see the Lade Use Section) supports these conclusions by indicating a steady population increase along U.S. Highway 24 from Manhattan to Wamego in the study period from 2007 to 2020.

Recommendations

The most significant growth impacts from the transformation of Fort Riley will occur in Junction City and Manhattan and along the U.S. Highway 24 corridor stretching from Manhattan to Wamego. While county and municipal governments have engaged in various levels of advanced planning, communities will continue to face challenges in accommodating this future growth. The planning team developed the following recommendations to assist in managing infrastructure resources in the study area.

Junction City

Through a utility management company, Junction City provides water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer services. The city confronts significant challenges in maintaining

quality utility services given the recent dramatic increase in residential building permits. Recommendations for Junction City include:

Controlling or Limiting Areas of Development •

– the city should limit areas of development to promote efficient, contiguous expansion of municipal infrastructure services and to discourage “leap-frog” development. These primary growth areas will be on the west and northwest sides of the city.

Reallocation of Wastewater Flows – the city should •

seek a more equitable allocation of sanitary sewer flows to each of its two treatment facilities. The northwest facility is rapidly approaching capacity, while additional capacity exists at the south facility. Reallocation of wastewater flows could lower operational demands on the northwest plant, reducing the need for significant improvements or the possible construction of a new, higher capacity replacement plant.

Augmentation of Water Supply and System •

Improvements – the city should expand its water rights to meet future demands and enact a plan to systematically replace small, non-standard water mains in the system.

Development Fees or Other Mechanisms for •

Financing Infrastructure – the city should continue the use of development fees and “buy-back” plans for developers. These plans help to assign risk to the developer for the construction of new systems, while helping the city defray project costs.

Staffing of City Public Works Services – the city •

should review staffing needs to ensure maintenance of expected levels of service.

Strict Adherence to Growth Guidelines and “Triggers” •

- the city should consider adopting a new set of guidelines to initiate the study of needed infrastructure improvements. The city may want to reduce the “trigger” usage percentages at treatment plants to allow for the adequate planning and implementation of such expansions, especially in a period of rapid growth.

Enforcement of Best Management Practices for •

Stormwater Management – the city should verify that

January 2008 UIEx-5

developers obtain the proper Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) construction permitting and implement the best management practices for stormwater runoff in new developments.

Manhattan/U.S. Highway 24 Corridor

The City of Manhattan supplies services to its residents and has prepared a comprehensive development plan for the Urban Service Area Boundary (USAB) in which development is planned. Areas targeted for growth are known as “Priority Growth Areas.” A well defined USAB helps to promote the orderly, efficient expansion of water and sewer services by stressing contiguous development. While Manhattan has prepared for future growth, the following recommendations can further augment the city’s advanced planning capabilities:


Stormwater Management – the city should verify that developers obtain the proper KDHE construction permitting and implement the best management practices for stormwater runoff.

Strict Adherence to Growth Guidelines and “Triggers” •

- The city should consider reducing the “trigger” usage percentages at treatment plants to allow for the adequate planning and implementation of system improvements during periods of rapid growth.

Of all parts of the study area, U.S. Highway 24 faces the biggest strain on infrastructure systems relative to growth pressures. Utility services are not contiguous and certain areas currently rely on strategic alliances with neighboring municipalities to enhance available services. Development and annexation planning should be a priority in the area to plan future resources and funding for infrastructure services.

Strategic Partnerships - Pottawatomie County should •

maintain strategic relationships with Manhattan, and possibly develop new alliances with other cities such as Wamego, to provide adequate services. Rural Water District No. 1 should conduct detailed planning on future service demands and coordinate with other local government entities on necessary system

upgrades along the western end of the U.S. Highway 24 corridor.

Riley County

Prepare for Future Growth - Riley County should •

continue with plans to extend sewer and water service to the area southeast of the City of Manhattan along K-177 South

The county should also carefully coordinate •

infrastructure extensions to limit the intensity of growth particularly in the Land Use Planning Zone and the Limited Growth Area as defined by Noise Zone II contours (see Land Use and Planning section).

Fort Riley

Fort Riley maintains its own water and wastewater treatment plants. The installation will continue to operate its utility systems autonomously. Fort Riley, however, should continue to examine the feasibility of sharing utility service delivery with surrounding communities to enhance system redundancy and capacity, promote sustainability, and support regional economic development.

Implementation

The following are recommended implementation actions: each step is broken out by timeframe, implementation partner, and funding sources. Additional information on implementation can be found in the Fiscal Impact section of this report. The Supplemental Materials CD contains additional samples, models, or project detail for select action items as indicated in the Additional Information column of the table.

Maps

The following maps shown here are also depicted as 11 by 17 documents in the accompanying Flint Hills Regional Growth Plan Draft Map Book.


Flin

t Hill

s Reg

iona

l Gro

wth

Pla

n Im

plem

enta

tion

Stra

tegy

Mat

rix (2

007)

IN

FRA

STRU

CTU

RE

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pa

rtne

rsIm

plem

enta

tion

Tim

ing

Est

. Pu

blic

C

ost

Fund

ing

Sour

ces

Add

ition

al

Info

Publ

icPr

ivat

eIm

me-

diat

e 20

07-

2009

Mid

-Ra

nge

2010

-20

12

Long

-Ra

nge

2013

-20

30IN

FRA

STRU

CTU

RE

ISSU

E:

Une

ven

grow

th p

atte

rn in

Junc

tion

City

, cau

sing

over

load

on

one

of w

aste

wat

er tr

eatm

ent p

lant

s.G

OA

L:

Mai

ntai

n an

equ

itabl

e al

loca

tion

of sa

nita

ry se

wer

flow

to e

ach

of tw

o ex

istin

g tre

atm

ent p

lant

s; ke

ep th

e ex

istin

g no

rth

plan

t in

oper

atio

n w

ithou

t maj

or im

prov

emen

ts.O

BJE

CTI

VE

:K

eep

both

trea

tmen

t pla

nts i

n op

erat

ion

at c

urre

nt le

vels

for t

he lo

nges

t per

iod

poss

ible

bef

ore

exte

nsiv

e ex

pans

ion

or

impr

ovem

ents

are

nee

ded.

Act

ion

1:D

evel

op a

revi

sed

sani

tary

sew

er p

ipe

syst

em

with

lift

stat

ions

as n

eede

d to

re-a

lloca

te

flow

s in

equi

tabl

e m

anne

r to

the

treat

men

t pl

ants.

CC,

PP

, PC

X

X

F, G

GR,

DF,

U

FS

ISSU

E:

Incr

ease

d w

ater

dem

and

in th

e m

ajor

pop

ulat

ion

cent

ers o

f Ju

nctio

n C

ity a

nd M

anha

ttan.

GO

AL:

M

aint

ain

adeq

uate

wat

er su

pply

thro

ugh

perio

ds o

f su

stai

ned

grow

th.

OBJ

EC

TIV

E:

Incr

ease

cur

rent

wat

er ri

ghts

with

the

Stat

e.A

ctio

n 1:

Subm

it pr

oper

app

licat

ions

with

the

Stat

e to

incr

ease

vol

ume

of w

ater

allo

wed

to b

e pu

mpe

d fr

om e

xist

ing

aqui

fers

.

CC,

PC

, PP

XX

AG

R, D

F,

UFS

ISSU

E:

Fina

ncin

g of

Infr

astr

uctu

re in

Junc

tion

City

; use

of

deve

lopm

ent f

ees o

r oth

er fu

ndin

g m

echa

nism

s.G

OA

L:

Dev

elop

ers t

o be

resp

onsib

le fo

r ins

talla

tion

of in

fras

truc

ture

impr

ovem

ents

in su

ppor

t of

thei

r dev

elop

men

ts.O

BJE

CTI

VE

:E

stab

lish

or m

odify

a sc

hedu

le o

f de

velo

pmen

t fee

s or i

nfra

stru

ctur

e “b

uy-b

ack”

pla

ns th

at p

lace

s bur

den

of c

onst

ruct

ion

on

deve

lope

rs.

Act

ion

1:C

ity to

revi

ew e

xist

ing

syst

em o

f im

posin

g de

velo

pmen

t fee

s and

“bu

y-ba

ck”

plan

of

new

infr

astr

uctu

re a

nd m

ake

revi

sions

as

nece

ssar

y to

est

ablis

h co

nsist

ent,

long

-term

po

licy.

PC,

CC,

PP

X

XA

GR,

DF

UI-

1, U

I-2

ISSU

E:

Intro

duct

ion

of si

lt an

d ot

her m

ater

ials

into

stor

mw

ater

syst

ems.

G

OA

L:

Avoi

d po

llutio

n of

Sta

te w

ater

way

s.

Util

ities

& In

fras

truc

ture

Impl

emen

tatio

n Ta

ble

and

Key

January 2008 UIEx-7

Flin

t Hill

s Reg

iona

l Gro

wth

Pla

n Im

plem

enta

tion

Stra

tegy

Mat

rix (2

007)

IN

FRA

STRU

CTU

RE

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pa

rtne

rsIm

plem

enta

tion

Tim

ing

Est

. Pu

blic

C

ost

Fund

ing

Sour

ces

Add

ition

al

Info

Publ

icPr

ivat

eIm

me-

diat

e 20

07-

2009

Mid

-Ra

nge

2010

-20

12

Long

-Ra

nge

2013

-20

30IN

FRA

STRU

CTU

RE

ISSU

E:

Une

ven

grow

th p

atte

rn in

Junc

tion

City

, cau

sing

over

load

on

one

of w

aste

wat

er tr

eatm

ent p

lant

s.G

OA

L:

Mai

ntai

n an

equ

itabl

e al

loca

tion

of sa

nita

ry se

wer

flow

to e

ach

of tw

o ex

istin

g tre

atm

ent p

lant

s; ke

ep th

e ex

istin

g no

rth

plan

t in

oper

atio

n w

ithou

t maj

or im

prov

emen

ts.O

BJE

CTI

VE

:K

eep

both

trea

tmen

t pla

nts i

n op

erat

ion

at c

urre

nt le

vels

for t

he lo

nges

t per

iod

poss

ible

bef

ore

exte

nsiv

e ex

pans

ion

or

impr

ovem

ents

are

nee

ded.

Act

ion

1:D

evel

op a

revi

sed

sani

tary

sew

er p

ipe

syst

em

with

lift

stat

ions

as n

eede

d to

re-a

lloca

te

flow

s in

equi

tabl

e m

anne

r to

the

treat

men

t pl

ants.

CC,

PP

, PC

X

X

F, G

GR,

DF,

U

FS

ISSU

E:

Incr

ease

d w

ater

dem

and

in th

e m

ajor

pop

ulat

ion

cent

ers o

f Ju

nctio

n C

ity a

nd M

anha

ttan.

GO

AL:

M

aint

ain

adeq

uate

wat

er su

pply

thro

ugh

perio

ds o

f su

stai

ned

grow

th.

OBJ

EC

TIV

E:

Incr

ease

cur

rent

wat

er ri

ghts

with

the

Stat

e.A

ctio

n 1:

Subm

it pr

oper

app

licat

ions

with

the

Stat

e to

incr

ease

vol

ume

of w

ater

allo

wed

to b

e pu

mpe

d fr

om e

xist

ing

aqui

fers

.

CC,

PC

, PP

XX

AG

R, D

F,

UFS

ISSU

E:

Fina

ncin

g of

Infr

astr

uctu

re in

Junc

tion

City

; use

of

deve

lopm

ent f

ees o

r oth

er fu

ndin

g m

echa

nism

s.G

OA

L:

Dev

elop

ers t

o be

resp

onsib

le fo

r ins

talla

tion

of in

fras

truc

ture

impr

ovem

ents

in su

ppor

t of

thei

r dev

elop

men

ts.O

BJE

CTI

VE

:E

stab

lish

or m

odify

a sc

hedu

le o

f de

velo

pmen

t fee

s or i

nfra

stru

ctur

e “b

uy-b

ack”

pla

ns th

at p

lace

s bur

den

of c

onst

ruct

ion

on

deve

lope

rs.

Act

ion

1:C

ity to

revi

ew e

xist

ing

syst

em o

f im

posin

g de

velo

pmen

t fee

s and

“bu

y-ba

ck”

plan

of

new

infr

astr

uctu

re a

nd m

ake

revi

sions

as

nece

ssar

y to

est

ablis

h co

nsist

ent,

long

-term

po

licy.

PC,

CC,

PP

X

XA

GR,

DF

UI-

1, U

I-2

ISSU

E:

Intro

duct

ion

of si

lt an

d ot

her m

ater

ials

into

stor

mw

ater

syst

ems.

G

OA

L:

Avoi

d po

llutio

n of

Sta

te w

ater

way

s.

Flin

t Hill

s Reg

iona

l Gro

wth

Pla

n Im

plem

enta

tion

Stra

tegy

Mat

rix (2

007)

IN

FRA

STRU

CTU

RE

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pa

rtne

rsIm

plem

enta

tion

Tim

ing

Est

. Pu

blic

C

ost

Fund

ing

Sour

ces

Add

ition

al

Info

Publ

icPr

ivat

eIm

me-

diat

e 20

07-

2009

Mid

-Ra

nge

2010

-20

12

Long

-Ra

nge

2013

-20

30O

BJE

CTI

VE

:D

evel

oper

s to

be re

spon

sible

for a

dher

ence

to N

atio

nal a

nd S

tate

man

date

s for

Bes

t Man

agem

ent P

roce

sses

for s

torm

wat

er

man

agem

ent.

Act

ion

1:C

ities

to a

dopt

, ins

pect

and

enf

orce

bes

t m

anag

emen

t pra

ctic

es fo

r sto

rm w

ater

ru

noff.

PC,

CC,

PP

D, P

OX

XX

BG

R, D

F

ISSU

E:

Lack

of

adeq

uate

wat

er su

pply

alo

ng H

ighw

ay 2

4 C

orrid

or in

Pot

taw

atom

ie C

ount

y.G

OA

L:

Prom

ote

orde

rly, u

nifo

rm g

row

th a

long

the

Hig

hway

24

Cor

ridor

. O

BJE

CTI

VE

:Im

prov

e w

ater

supp

ly a

long

Hig

hway

24

corr

idor

so g

row

th c

an b

e su

ppor

ted

betw

een

Man

hatta

n an

d W

ameg

o.A

ctio

n 1:

Rura

l Wat

er D

istric

t to

mai

ntai

n w

orki

ng

rela

tions

hip

with

City

of

Man

hatta

n an

d es

tabl

ish re

latio

nshi

p w

ith th

e C

ity o

f W

ameg

o to

aug

men

t cur

rent

wat

er c

apac

ities

al

ong

the

corr

idor

.

WD

, C

C,

PC

XX

XA

GR

UI-

3

Act

ion

2:W

ater

Dist

rict t

o up

grad

e sy

stem

at w

este

rn

end

of c

orrid

or.

WD

, C

C,

PC

XX

XF

UFS

,

DF

ISSU

E:

Lack

of

adeq

uate

infr

astr

uctu

re in

Gat

eway

Are

a so

uth

of M

anha

ttan

GO

AL:

Prom

ote

orde

rly, u

nifo

rm g

row

th a

long

K-1

77O

BJE

CTI

VE

:Im

prov

e w

aste

wat

er tr

eatm

ent c

apac

ity to

supp

ort f

utur

e re

siden

tial g

row

th.

Act

ion

1:

Proc

eed

with

con

stru

ctio

n of

mai

n tr

unk

line

for K

onza

Sew

er S

yste

m in

the

Gat

eway

are

a al

ong

K-1

77

CC,

PC

XF

GR,

DF

Util

ities

& In

fras

truc

ture

Impl

emen

tatio

n Ta

ble

and

Key

, con

’t.


January 2008 UIEx-9

StM

arys

Loui

svill

e

Emm

ett

Belv

ue

Alm

a

Dw

ight

Cha

pman

Ente

rpris

e

Wak

efie

ld

Milf

ord

Junc

tion

City

Abile

ne

Wam

ego

Man

hatta

n

Cla

yC

ente

r

Fo

rt

R

il

ey

St.G

eorg

e

KansasRiver

Ogd

en

Rile

y

Leon

ardv

ille

Cl

ay

Co

un

ty

Ri

le

yC

ou

nt

y

Mo

rr

is

Co

un

ty

Di

ck

in

so

nC

ou

nt

y

Wa

ba

un

se

eC

ou

nt

y

Ge

ar

yC

ou

nt

y

Po

tt

aw

at

om

ie

Co

un

ty

Milford

Lake

Tuttle

Creek Lake

§̈ ¦70

§̈ ¦70t u77

t u24

t u77

t u77

t u24

UV18

UV4

UV15

UV57

UV99

UV177

UV63UV13

UV244

UV114

UV82

UV43

UV113

UV157

UV197

UV30UV138

UV185

UV221

UV180

UV185UV57

UV15

UV82

UV99UV57

UV244

E

9th

Flush

14th

Rain

Fair

Onaga

Old

30th

1800

th

Jeep

Utah

Ande

rson

1700

th

Cherokee

Har

twic

h

827

Keene

Hum

boldt

Creek

Brou

ghto

n

Frontier

Wolf

Solomon

Wab

au

nse

e

Snokomo

Old

40

1st

142n

d

EdenBa

rton

Mcd

owe

llCreek

Kim

ball

1900

th

Redwood

Barn

177

3400

th

Ona

go

Camp

3rd

4th

Wel

sh

Mar

latt

Sunflower

893

Skyl

ine

Capper

837

829

Thunder

Fulk

Poyn

tz

East

12th

817

MapleHill

Stat

e

Schoeman

3500

th

8 2K

ansa

s

Hudson

Mink

Purc

ell

62nd

Lyon

sCreek

John

s22

00th

Sunflower

Camp

Maple Hill

12th

3rd

Rain

Fair

Eden

E

Old

40

Barn

Re

cen

t/P

lan

ne

d D

eve

lop

me

nt

Act

ivit

y

Kan

sas

Neb

rask

a Okl

ahom

aTe

xas

Iow

a

Mis

sour

i

Col

orad

o

t u24

UV18

UV113

UV177

UV13

Ande

rsonKi

mba

llCollege Poyn

tz

McdowellCreek

Purc

ell

§̈ ¦70§̈ ¦70t u77

t u40t u77

UV57

UV18

UV114UV244 Old

1 4th

Henry

Eisenhower

UV18UV114

Ogden

Flint HillsRegional Growth Plan

JunctionCity

Wamego

Manhattan

[0

24

68

1M

iles

Le

ge

nd

DRAFT

Maj

or H

ighw

ay

Hig

hway

Maj

or R

oad

Rai

lroad

Cou

nty

Boun

dary

Rec

ent/P

lann

ed D

evel

opm

ent

Wat

er

Fort

Rile

y Bo

unda

ry

Cur

rent

Dev

elop

men

t

Park

s/O

pen

Spac

e/R

ecre

atio

n/C

onse

rvat

ion

Agric

ultu

re

Gra

ssla

nd

Woo

dlan

d

Map

UI-

1. R

ecen

t/Pl

anne

d D

evel

opm

ent A

ctiv

ity

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sS

tatu

s: F

inal

Dat

e: J

anua

ry 2

008


Junc

tion

City

§̈ ¦70

§̈ ¦70

t u77

t u40

t u77

UV18

UV244

UV57

UV114

UV207

UV244

UV57

UV114

Old

14th

Henry

EisenhowerSk

ylin

e

East

Elmda

le

Westw

oodSa

intM

a rys

Ruck

er

Holbrook Marshall

Ju

nct

ion

Cit

y W

ate

r L

ine

s

Kan

sas

Neb

rask

a Okl

ahom

aTe

xas

Iow

a

Mis

sour

i

Col

orad

o

Maj

or H

ighw

ay

Hig

hway

Maj

or R

oad

Roa

d

Rai

lroad

Wat

er L

ine

(Util

ity)

Cou

nty

Bou

ndar

y

City

Bou

ndar

ies

Rec

ent/P

lann

ed D

evel

opm

ent

Wat

erbo

dy a

nd R

iver


[0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

0.2

Mile

s

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sD

ATE

: Aug

ust 1

5, 2

007

Stat

us: D

raft

Fort

Rile

y

Le

ge

nd

Map

UI-

2. J

unct

ion

City

Wat

er L

ines

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sS

tatu

s: F

inal

Dat

e: J

anua

ry 2

008

January 2008 UIEx-11

Junc

tion

City

§̈ ¦70

§̈ ¦70

t u77

t u40

t u77

UV18

UV244

UV57

UV114

UV207

UV244

UV57

UV114

Old

14th

Henry

Eisenhower Skyl

ine

East

Elmda

le

Westw

ood

Sain

tMar

ys

Rucke

r

HolbrookMarshall

Ju

nct

ion

Cit

y S

ew

er

Lin

es

Kan

sas

Neb

rask

a Okl

ahom

aTe

xas

Iow

a

Mis

sour

i

Col

orad

o

Maj

or H

ighw

ay

Hig

hway

Maj

or R

oad

Min

or R

oadw

ays

Sew

er L

ine

(Util

ity)

Rai

lroad

City

Bou

ndar

ies

Rec

ent/P

lann

ed D

evel

opm

ent

Wat

erbo

dy a

nd R

iver


[0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

0.2

Mile

s

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sD

ATE

: Aug

ust 1

5, 2

007

Stat

us: D

raft

Fort

Rile

y

Le

ge

nd

Map

UI-

3. J

unct

ion

City

Sew

er L

ines

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sS

tatu

s: F

inal

Dat

e: J

anua

ry 2

008


Man

hatta

n

FortRiley

t u24

t u24

UV18

UV113

UV177

UV13

Ande

rson

Kim

ball

College

Mar

latt

Denison

Poyn

tz

McdowellCreek

Juliette

Manhattan

Hudson

Purc

ell

Blu

emon

t

17th

Sunset

Ehlers

Airport

3rd

Manhattan

Ma

nh

att

an

Se

we

r L

ine

s

Kan

sas

Neb

rask

a Okl

ahom

aTe

xas

Iow

a

Mis

sour

i

Col

orad

o

Maj

or H

ighw

ay

Hig

hway

Maj

or R

oad

Min

or R

oad

Rai

lroad

Sew

er L

ine

(Util

ity)

City

Bou

ndar

ies

Cou

nty

Bou

ndar

y

Rec

ent/P

lann

ed D

evel

opm

ent (

Hot

spot

s)

Wat

erbo

dy a

nd R

iver


[0

0.5

11.

52

0.25

Mile

s

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sD

ATE

: Aug

ust 2

0, 2

007

Stat

us: D

raft

Le

ge

nd

Map

UI-

4. M

anha

ttan

Sew

er L

ines

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sS

tatu

s: F

inal

Dat

e: J

anua

ry 2

008


Man

hatta

n

St.G

eorg

e

Rile

y R

ural

Wat

er D

istri

ct 1

Wab

auns

ee R

ural

Wat

er D

istri

ct 2

Rile

yR

ural

W

ater

Dis

trict

1

Potta

wat

omie

Rur

al W

ater

Dis

trict

1

Rile

y

Potta

wat

omie

£ ¤24

£ ¤24

UV18

UV177

UV113

UV13

Flush

And

erso

n

Kim

ball

Mcd

owell

Cre

ek

College

Wabaunsee

Mar

latt

Denison

Poyn

tz

Juliette

Manhattan

Hudson

Purc

ell

Blu

emon

t

17th

Sunset

Ehlers

Airport

3rd

Manhattan

Ril

ey/

Po

tta

wa

tom

ie C

ou

nty

Wa

ter

Dis

tric

ts a

nd

Wa

ter

Lin

es

Kan

sas

Neb

rask

a Okl

ahom

aTe

xas

Iow

a

Mis

sour

i

Col

orad

o

Maj

or H

ighw

ay

Hig

hway

Maj

or R

oad

Min

or R

oad

Rai

lroad

Potta

wat

omie

Wat

er L

ine

(Util

ity)

Rile

y W

ater

Lin

e (U

tility

)

City

Bou

ndar

ies

Cou

nty

Boun

dary

Rec

ent/P

lann

ed D

evel

opm

ent

Wat

erbo

dy a

nd R

iver

Potta

wat

omie

Rur

al W

ater

Dis

trict

1

Potta

wat

omie

Rur

al W

ater

Dis

trict

2

Rile

y R

ural

Wat

er D

istri

ct 1

Wab

auns

ee R

ural

Wat

er D

istri

ct 2


[0

0.7

1.4

2.1

2.8

0.35

Mile

s

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sD

ATE:

Aug

ust 1

5, 2

007

Stat

us: D

raft

Le

ge

nd

Map

UI-

5. R

iley/

Potta

wat

omie

Cou

nty

Wat

er D

istric

ts a

nd W

ater

Lin

es

Cre

ated

By:

ED

AW F

ort C

ollin

sS

tatu

s: F

inal

Dat

e: J

anua

ry 2

008


Map

UI-

6. N

ew R

esid

entia

l Dev

elop

men

t in

Man

hatta

n


Map

UI-

7. K

onza

Sew

er S

yste

m (R

iley

Cou

nty

Publ

ic W

orks

)

A. Introduction and Methodology

The infrastructure analysis summarizes information obtained from county and municipal officials, as well as representatives of private utility providers in the region. For the purpose of this section, “infrastructure” is defined as those systems of utilities that typically serve developed areas, including:

Domestic Water Supply, Treatment and Distribution •

Systems

Wastewater Collection, Distribution and Treatment •

Systems

Electric Services•

Natural Gas Services•

Telecommunication Services•

Stormwater Management•

The primary focus of this analysis is to identify any possible infrastructure limitations that exist or could emerge as a result of growth at Fort Riley and throughout the region. This section summarizes findings from an evaluation of infrastructure issues in the core counties of Geary, Riley and Pottawatomie and the secondary areas of Clay, Dickinson, Morris and Wabaunsee Counties. The study focuses more closely on the major population and employment centers of Manhattan and Junction City, but also includes analysis of conditions in Wamego and Abilene.

The results are intended to assist county and municipal jurisdictions in managing their infrastructure resources during this period of rapid growth, and to facilitate the planning of residential and commercial projects in the study area.

The planning team gathered data through interviews with the various local utility providers. The interviews focused on the following primary topics:

Identification of primary services provided and what •

entities provide these services;

Identification of the utility coverage areas;•

The operational structure of the utility systems •

(i.e. how is power generated, water treated, services distributed, etc.);

The condition of existing systems and maintenance •

programs in place;

The present demands on the systems;•

Quantifying any current excess capacity in the systems;•

Identification of existing expansion or improvement •

plans for facilities or for areas of coverage;

Definition of the process for developers or individuals •

to request expansion of services.

To verify planning assumptions, the team compared the data gathered from interviews with the results of the Flint Hills Growth Allocation Model (see Land Use and Planning section).

U t i l i t i e s & i n f r a s t r U c t U r e

UI-2 Flint Hills Regional Growth Plan, Utilities & Infrastructure

As a supplement to the interviews, the planning team also researched a variety of county, municipal and state web sites to inventory any previous planning studies that had been conducted in the study area over the previous ten years. While not all of these studies anticipated the higher level of growth at Fort Riley, they do indicate an ongoing strategic approach to infrastructure planning in the region and in Manhattan in particular. Section B summarizes findings from the major studies.

B. Relationship to Previous Plans and Studies

B.1 Strategic Action Plan and Growth Impact Assessment for the Flint Hills Region Fort Riley, Kansas, 2006 prepared by RKG Associates, Inc.

This study recommends exploring a regional entity to address growth impacts resulting from the mission transformation of Fort Riley, including infrastructure issues across jurisdictions. The sections below summarize utility issues, policies, or guidelines developed as part of previous planning efforts for the individual counties or municipalities of the region.

B.2 Junction City | Geary County Comprehensive Plan First Draft –July 2006. Prepared by Gould Evans

Junction City currently has one water treatment facility and two wastewater plants. Development areas surround the wastewater treatment plant in the northwest, limiting its expansion opportunities. The newer southwest plant is designed for future expansion. Land use patterns have changed in Junction City with the presence of natural physical barriers and Fort Riley on the east shifting growth to the western side of the city.

The water supply in the area has the capacity of 10.0 MGD with two storage and distribution systems serving the city. Junction City uses infrastructure as a means to regulate development and to protect natural areas, limiting access in areas zoned for conservation and agriculture. Limited infrastructure is defined as gravel roads, drainage swales/ponds, and septic systems. Junction City uses a basic guideline called “just in time” to deliver services as development progresses, rather than in advance of development. To reduce sprawl and resulting inefficiencies, the city provides infrastructure only to areas that are near an existing development. The city will also evaluate any

January 2008 UI-3

request to expand infrastructure for future or proposed developments based on growth and development patterns.

Junction City is also encouraging infill development or adaptive re-use of buildings in mature neighborhoods to restrict sprawl and to minimize new extensions of infrastructure. The city is currently in the process of evaluating an improved street network to accommodate existing and future populations.

B.3 City of Manhattan, Kansas Public Works Department Water Distribution System and Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master Plan Update, July 2003. Prepared by Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc.

In anticipation of military-induced population growth, the City of Manhattan has prepared a detailed layout for future improvements to the water distribution system and the sanitary sewer collection system.

The city has designated eight areas of water and sewer improvements and has developed a map defining the expansion and improvement of the city sewer system through the year of 2030. The current sewer basins are the following: North Airport, South Airport, Central, North and Wildcat Creek. On the eastern side of the city, plans call for two new potential sewer service areas: the U.S. Highway 24 Basin, and the Gateway Basin, both in the more rural areas of the city or in the unincorporated county. In the Wildcat Creek basin, plans identify three future sewer line extensions to support new development in the western edge of the city: 1. West Anderson Interceptor; 2. West Miller Ranch Interceptor; and 3. East Miller Interceptor. Two existing basins, the North and South Airport basin, may add sewer line extensions if required.

Kansas Water Plan (KWP) by the Kansas Water Office

The objectives of the KWP are the following:

To ensure adequate water supply and storage for the •

public;

To limit the impact of drought on water supplies;•

To ensure that state water suppliers have the necessary •

technical, financial, and managerial resources to meet the standards of the Safe Drinking Water Act.

The purpose of this plan is to coordinate the conservation and development of the state’s water supply through the proper use and control of water resources. The regionalization of public water supply systems is a key strategy for the State of Kansas in conserving and managing water resources. Kansas statute K.S.A. 65 – 163 (g) [2] also promotes the combining of community water services. To date, 23 public wholesale water supply districts have formed in the state. Many communities in the study area are in the process of establishing shared water sources or are currently reviewing the concept.

B.4 Manhattan Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, April 2003. (Joint effort of the City of Manhattan and Riley County)

The Urban Area Plan outlines several infrastructure related goals, including promoting orderly growth, minimizing low-density dispersed development, and designating areas for future growth that can be efficiently serviced by city systems.

Typically, the city seeks to provide utility access to those areas that are within or immediately adjacent to the defined Urban Service Area Boundary (USAB) and that are contiguous with existing service areas. City policy discourages less efficient “leapfrog” development patterns. The study also emphasizes a priority for development in areas that can be served by gravity sewers, thus eliminating or decreasing the need for force mains and sewer lift stations.

Another goal of the study is to “equitably distribute the cost for urban services over the areas that enjoy the benefit of such services and among those responsible for extending such services.” This goal alludes to passing along infrastructure costs to developers or property owners to maintain reasonable rate increases for users as a whole.


Manhattan discourages rural growth to contain development within the USAB. Policies promote low density rural development outside of the urban area with an abundance of open space or agricultural areas.

The City of Manhattan’s new residential development map (see Map UI-6) from December 2007 designates certain new future developments for service by city water and sewer lines. The city plans to annex these developments prior to the installation of water services. Major planned developments are in the following areas: along Scenic Drive, RosenCutter (Woodland Hills development), State Hwy 177, Grand Ridge (west side), and Casement Road. Developments in the northwest area outside of the city limits will receive service from the county rural water district. Sanitary Sewer service in the areas will cover all new and future developments as stated in the previous description of future sewer basins under the 2003 City of Manhattan Study.

C. Needs Assessment

C.1 Pottawatomie County

The primary growth in Pottawatomie County resulting from post expansion is anticipated along the U.S. Highway 24 corridor east of Manhattan and west of Wamego. (see Map UI-1, which defines growth areas along this corridor). Much of this corridor is in unincorporated areas, posing a challenge to the county as it seeks to increase the level of infrastructure services. The U.S. Highway 24 Corridor Plan, adopted in 2004 by the Board of County Commissioners identified future infrastructure needs along the corridor and explored funding mechanisms that could be used for infrastructure growth.

The county recognized that construction along the corridor could outpace infrastructure growth. To help mitigate this shortfall, the county has developed a strategic partnership with the City of Manhattan to supplement the county’s wastewater treatment capacity. Under this arrangement, the county will provide and maintain sewer transmission lines, while the City of Manhattan will provide additional capacity for treatment of the wastewater.

Water services face the same pressures from anticipated development along U.S. Highway 24. Rural Water District No. 1 will require an intensive and collaborative study with other regional partners to determine system expansions needed to support anticipated growth. (See Map UI-5 for a depiction of existing water mains in Water District No. 1 with respect to planned developments.)

C.2 Geary County

Junction City supplies and maintains most of the utility services within Geary County. The county has not identified or planned for any infrastructure improvements. Grandview Plaza, located on I-70 immediately east of Junction City, could experience significant growth.

January 2008 UI-5

C.3 Riley County

In 2005 the Board of County Commissioners developed an estimate of growth impacts in the county. The plan identified needed sewer system improvements in the Gateway Development area and some roadway improvements in areas adjacent to Manhattan. The study did not identify funding for the sewer improvements.

Two water districts supply Riley County. Rural Water District No. 1 delivers water to residents in the southern part of unincorporated Riley County. The district obtains water from the City of Manhattan. Wabaunsee County Rural Water District #2 services the Southeast portion of Riley County. Wabaunsee County is this district’s water source.

C.4 Junction City

Given its proximity to Fort Riley, Junction City will experience substantial impacts from mission expansion. Planned housing developments concentrate primarily on the western borders of the city, with some falling into currently unincorporated areas. The city recognizes the consequences of impending military related growth and has implemented corresponding measures to help mitigate the cost of needed infrastructure expansion. For example, the city requires a sewer hookup fee and a water impact fee for new developments. Additionally, the city has implemented a financing policy for developers called “threshold –buyback,” a process in which developers finance and construct infrastructure for their total project in accordance with adopted municipal standards. After the sale of a certain number of housing units, the city will inspect and then purchase the in-place infrastructure system. Bonds usually fund this process.

Veolia Water North America-Central manages Junction City’s water services. A series of wells supply raw water to the system. The current water treatment and delivery capacity is 10 million gallons per day (MGD). The total usage per

day is averaging 3.1 MGD, but the city only holds rights to 4 MGD. The city currently supplies water to Grandview Plaza and Geary County Rural Water District No. 1. The city is currently in the process of studying the possibility of obtaining additional water rights from other local sources, as well as conducting a Water Master Plan to identify needed improvements.

Junction City has two wastewater treatment plants. The sewage treatment usage is currently (approximately) 0.7 MGD with a capacity of 2.5 MGD at the southwest facility. A local food processing plant contributes approximately 0.5 MGD of volume to this facility. The southwest plant has recently undergone improvements in equipment with no increase in capacity. Average usage is 2.0 MGD with a capacity of about 3.5 MGD at the northeast facility.

C.5 Manhattan

In anticipation of growth at Fort Riley, the city is actively preparing for the expansion of its water and wastewater treatment systems.

A series of wells rated at a combined capacity of 20.5 MGD supply raw water to the system. The water treatment plant’s current capacity is at 20 MGD with current peak usage of approximately 17 MGD. In the next 12 to 18 months, the city will add 10 MGD of treatment capacity, requiring a corresponding increase in well capacity. The water distribution lines and pressures are adequate to meet existing needs.

The wastewater treatment capacity is now at 8.7 MGD with the average load of 5.0 MGD and a peak demand of approximately 6.9 MGD. Officials plan for an expansion of 2.0 MGD in treatment capacity in 2009 and 2010, bringing the total capacity to 10.7 MGD.


C.6 Wamego

The waste water treatment capacity of .75 MGD is adequate, with an average use of .45 MGD. Additional transmission capacity may be required in three to five years. The water system is currently processing 1.8 MGD and will require an additional 500,000 gallons of stored water to meet future demand. Additional transmission lines, two towers for water storage, and pressure will cost $800,000. The construction of the towers is planned for 2007.

The city will enhance wastewater capacity in part to satisfy demand from the planned “island annexation” (i.e. non-contiguous with the city limits) of a 400-unit multi-family development on U.S. Highway 24, west of the city. While the city will supply water service and water treatment service to the development, the developer will install and maintain water lines and establish a wastewater force main link to the existing city system.

C.7 Abilene

The Public Works Department manages a city water system that serves a population of approximately 7,200 persons. Abilene obtains water from 11 wells along the Smoky Hill and Sand Springs aquifers. The wells have an average 12 hour yield of 0.64 million gallons (MG) and a maximum capacity of 4.32 MGD. In general, yield from the wells has been decreasing over the past few years due to drought. Recognizing that an enhanced raw water supply is essential for future growth and development, the city is currently exploring options for increasing water yield, including obtaining additional water rights from the Kansas Division of Water Resources.

The municipal water treatment plant has a capacity of 4.3 MGD, while the current demand is 1.3 MGD. The city also has four water towers. The city began construction of a new wastewater treatment facility in 2006. The plant is designed to handle an average daily flow of 1.50 MGD with a peak

flow of 6.3 MGD. Historical actual flows have been in the range of 0.9 MGD. The city has identified the need to replace aging clay tile sewer lines in some locations.

C.8 Private UtilitiesWestar Energy

Westar Energy will evaluate the need for additional infrastructure upgrades in two to three years. The provider has been planning for the expansion of Fort Riley and indicates an ability to meet the increased electrical distribution needs of the area.

Kansas Gas Service

Kansas Gas Service (KGS) began a campaign to assist contractors building within the study area to comply with specific requirements for local infrastructure connections. KGS indicates an ability to provide the staffing and material resources necessary to expand the natural gas infrastructure.

January 2008 UI-7

D. Recommendations

The most significant military growth impacts will occur in Junction City and Manhattan. The U.S. Highway 24 corridor stretching from Manhattan to Wamego could also absorb considerable future development activity. To differing degrees, Junction City and Manhattan have prepared for the impending growth with planned water and sewer system improvements. The sections below examine the challenges facing each of these areas in more detail.

D.1 Junction City

Junction City provides water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer services to its residents. The city has already experienced an unprecedented increase in building permits resulting from regional growth. In 2006, the city issued 840 permits, far exceeding its typical 12 month total of approximately 30 building permits. Such rapid growth will strain the city’s ability to provide consistent, quality infrastructure services:

Controlling or Limiting Areas for Development •

The geography of Junction City, including major rivers to the south and east and the installation to the northeast limit available development areas to the northwest and west sides of the city. New major housing developments are up to three miles west of the central business district, on the north side of I-70. These trends are consistent with the Growth Allocation Model, which indicates the highest rate of future household growth in the west and northwest portions of the city (see the Land Use and Planning section). Development maps from the city demonstrate that these sites are contiguous, promoting more efficient service delivery. The city should continue to promote such contiguous development patterns and discourage “leapfrog” growth.

Reallocation of Wastewater Flows • The extreme growth could cause an imbalance in the allocation of wastewater treatment services. With continued growth on the northwest side of the city, the northeast plant could reach capacity in the next few years. City officials stated that this plant is “landlocked” and thus

cannot be easily expanded. The city is conducting a sanitary sewer master plan study to assess the most cost effective options, including upgrades, expansion and re-routing of wastewater flows to meet demands. Reallocation of wastewater flows would likely require new lift stations and force mains, but this option could be cost effective if it enables the existing northeast plant to remain operational and eliminates the need for major improvements or replacement plant construction.

Augmentation of Water Supply and System •

Improvements

The city’s current water rights allow 4 MGD of water to be pumped from wells. Current average usage is approximately 3.1 MGD. With the impending growth and projected demands, the city will have to expand its water rights to meet future needs. The State of Kansas administers the application and approval process for expanding water rights. Additionally, city officials stated that a high number of water mains, especially in and around the central business district, are only 4 inches in diameter and are slated for replacement. The city should initiate the application process for additional water rights and continue with the plan to replace the small, non-standard mains.

Development Fees or Other Mechanisms for •

Financing Infrastructure

The city has implemented a threshold –buyback plan for water and sewer infrastructure in new developments. These approaches are highly desirable for assigning the risk of constructing new infrastructure systems to the developer until the city is willing to purchase and maintain the systems. The city should continue its practice of participating in governmental/developer threshold-buyback plans or assigning development fees to assist in defraying the costs of new infrastructure development and maintenance.

Staffing of City Public Works Services •

Increased growth has strained the administrative, maintenance, and inspection functions of city and Veolia Water staff. The city should carefully review staffing needs and enhance resources as necessary to maintain desired levels of utility service.


Strict Adherence to Growth Guidelines and •

“Triggers”

Given the high rate of growth, the city should consider adopting a new set of guidelines to initiate plans for system improvements and expansions. For example, a peak usage of 75% - 80% of plant capacity will generally indicate the need for expansion or improvements. With accelerating growth, however, the allotted planning horizon may not be sufficient to accommodate major upgrades. The city should consider reducing the “trigger” usage percentages at treatment plants to allow adequate time for the proper planning and implementation of needed improvements.


Storm Water Management

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) administers the stormwater management permitting process for new developments. The KDHE requires a “notice of intent” and a permit for any construction site over one ace that discharges stormwater. These requirements would likely affect every new development currently under construction or proposed in the city. The city should require that developers obtain the proper KDHE construction permitting and implement the best management practices for stormwater runoff prior to construction. Additionally, developers should maintain best management practices for stormwater management as outlined by the KDHE or the city in its new stormwater ordinance.

D.2 Manhattan/ U.S. Highway 24 Corridor

The City of Manhattan supplies water and sanitary sewer services to its residents. The city has designated an Urban Service Area Boundary (USAB) to promote cost-effective growth in areas that are contiguous with existing development and have access to adequate infrastructure. These targeted areas are known as “Priority Growth Areas.” The resulting development pattern allows for the most efficient expansion of water and sewer services and the orderly annexation of new areas. In general, the results of the Flint Hills Growth Allocation Model coincide with the

city’s defined Priority Growth Areas (see the Land Use and Planning section).

The city has prepared for impending growth by planning for the expansion of existing water and wastewater treatment capacities over the next few years:

Water treatment plant capacity is rated at 20 MGD •

with a peak demand of 17 MGD. Well capacity is 20.5 MGD. Officials will increase plant capacity by about one-third in the next 12 to 18 months and may also increase well capacity to align with plant capacity.

Manhattan has one wastewater treatment plant with •

a current capacity of 8.7 MGD and a peak demand of 6.9 MGD. Officials plan for a facility expansion by 2010. The city has also recently improved the efficiency of the wastewater treatment plant by decreasing infiltration throughout the system and improving the filtering processes.

While the city has planned for growth at Fort Riley, several recommendations could further enhance their preparations for increased utility demands, including:

The city should verify that developers obtain the •

proper KDHE construction permitting, comply with City ordinance provisions, and implement the best management practices for stormwater runoff.

The city should consider reducing the “trigger” usage •

percentages at treatment plants to allow adequate time for the proper planning and implementation of system improvements.

Projected growth in unincorporated Pottawatomie County along the U.S. Highway 24 corridor raises the challenge of serious infrastructure capacity shortfalls. Utility services are not contiguous and certain areas currently rely on neighboring municipalities to augment existing services. For example, the City of Manhattan supplements the services of some county sanitary sewer providers. Development and annexation planning should be a priority in this area to plan future resources and funding for infrastructure services.

January 2008 UI-9

Pottawatomie County will likely have to maintain these strategic relationships with Manhattan, and possibly develop new alliances with other cities such as Wamego to continue providing adequate services. Rural Water District No. 1 faces the need for a coordinated study of immediate upgrades to its systems to accommodate the full development potential of the western end of the corridor.

D.3 Riley County

Riley County’s intends to install water and wastewater infrastructure southeast of the City of Manhattan along K-177 south. Additional capacity in this area can absorb future growth and support recommended land use policies to direct growth away from areas of operational impact in proximity to the installation. See Map UI.7 for more detailed information on the Konza Sewer System.

It is critical that Riley County coordinate infrastructure extensions to guide future development to those areas posing less of an encroachment risk to Fort Riley’s mission as illustrated in the Planning and Land Use section of this report.

The county should continue with plans to extend •

sewer and water service to the area southeast of the City of Manhattan along K-177 South.

The county should carefully coordinate infrastructure •

extensions to limit the intensity of growth, particularly in the Land Use Planning Zone and the Limited Growth Area as defined by Noise Zone II contours.

D.4 Fort Riley

Fort Riley maintains its own water and wastewater treatment plants and functions as an autonomous utility provider.

Fort Riley has substantial water supply to meet any anticipated growth on the installation. Wastewater treatment facilities will require upgrade and expansion to meet anticipated growth and officials plan to reconfigure the system to increase efficiencies. The Army anticipates

expanding the plant on Custer Hill and constructing a new plant, possibly in the Camp Funston area.

The planning team examined the possibility of cooperation between the post and various county and city utility providers and the feasibility and desirability of joint utility districts or the cross-connection of services. In particular, surrounding municipalities have expressed interest in the joint provision of domestic water supply. Due to both security concerns and water rights issues, Fort Riley indicates no interest in shared utility agreements. The post explored the possibility of privatizing some of their utility services in 2005. Privatization did not generate interest.

Unless there is a fundamental change in philosophy in the post command, Fort Riley will continue to operate autonomously and will not engage in the shared delivery of utility services with the surrounding communities. Surrounding communities should continue to plan for their infrastructure systems to remain separate and distinct from the installation’s systems.

Fort Riley, however, should continue to examine the feasibility of joint infrastructure systems. Connecting to adjacent local water sources would establish system redundancy and provide for increased water flows in the event of an emergency. Similarly, combining wastewater treatment capacities promotes sustainability and could spur regional economic development by more readily accommodating large industrial and business tenants.

D.5 Private Utility Providers

Private utility providers in the study region have the ability to react as required to new development and increase service levels to meet rising demands. It is a regulatory requirement and business decision on the part of the private carriers to provide services to new development. The basic infrastructures of these private providers appear capable of absorbing expected growth. During interviews,


none of the local providers of electricity, natural gas or telecommunications expressed significant concerns or identified constraints in meeting foreseeable demands.

D.6 Development’s Impact on Existing Storm Water Systems

New development with inadequate stormwater handling measures can have a disruptive influence on existing aquifers and drainage patterns within the study area. Municipalities and counties should require developments to implement designs that minimize the detrimental impacts on downstream water volumes. Proper stormwater conveyance design, permitting, and adherence to state guidelines for the handling and conveying stormwater can help to mitigate the negative impacts of development on downstream parties.

Given that Fort Riley is the region’s largest physical land use and lies at the top of the regional watershed, the post should carefully review the impacts of its stormwater flow on adjacent land and waterbodies.

The City of Manhattan maintains that approximately one-third of the stormwater flowing onto the Manhattan Airport property is generated by the post. The City has had discussions with the post to construct a large volume detention basin that would intercept stormwater from the installation and release it slowly to improve drainage conditions at the Airport.

E. Appendix

E.1 Resources

There are a number of internet resources available regarding regional development. City and county government websites, as well as economic development groups provide useful information for developers and planners. Web address links are included in this Appendix along with other links to regional resources. The links include private and public utility information and other regional resource agencies.

GIS websites currently exist for the Manhattan/Riley County area and for Pottawatomie County. Links to these sites are also included in this Appendix. The sites include interactive viewers that can display different ‘layers’ of information which includes the following:

Base Flood Elevation and Floodplains•

Location of River and Lakes•

Water Supply Lines •

Wastewater Sewer Lines•

Rural Water District Areas•

Locations of Existing Buildings•

Agricultural and Soil Information•

Zoning and Voting Districts•

Aerial Photography•

Web Resources

Core Counties:

Geary County, Kansas. http://www.geary.kansasgov.•

com/

Riley County, Kansas. http://www.rileycountyks.gov/•

Pottawatomie County, Kansas. http://www.•

pottcounty.org/

Cities:

City of Junction City, Kansas. http://www.jcks.com/•

index.html

January 2008 UI-11

City of Manhattan, Kansas. http://www.ci.manhattan.•

ks.us/index.asp

Fort Riley, Kansas. http://www.riley.army.mil/•

Fort Riley Connection. http://www.•

fortrileyconnection.com/index.htm\

Wamego, Kansas. http://www.wamego.org/•

Economic Development:

Pottawatomie County Economic Development •

Corporation. http://www.ecodevo.com/

Junction City and Geary County Economic •

Development. http://www.jcgced.com/

Geographical Information Systems (GIS) Maps:

Pottawatomie County GIS. http://www.pottcounty.•

org/Website/PottCoMaps/viewer.htm

Riley County GIS (Including City of Manhattan). •

http://gis.rileycountyks.gov/website/rileyco/default.htm

Utility Information:

Westar Energy. http://www.westarenergy.com/•

Kansas Electric Power Cooperative. http://www.•

kepco.org/

DS&O Rural Electric Cooperative Association, Inc. •

http://dsoelectric.com/

Bluestem Electric Cooperative Association, Inc. •

http://www.bluestemelectric.com/?page=home

Flint Hills Rural Electric Cooperative Association, Inc. •

http://www.flinthillsrec.com/

Kansas Department of Agriculture. http://www.ksda.•

gov/appropriation/

Kansas Water Office. http://www.kwo.org/•

Kansas Rural Water Association. http://www.krwa.•

net/homepage/default.asp

Kansas Gas Energy. http://www.oneok.com/kgs_•

default.jsp

WTC, Inc. (Wamego Telecommunications) . http://•

www.wamtelco.com/

Miscellaneous:

Kansas State 2002 Situations and Trends for counties. •

http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/direct/sit&trends.htm

Answers.com. http://www.answers.com/topic/•

morris-county-kansas

Secondary Study Area:

Dickinson County, Kansas. http://www.dkcoks.com/•

directory.htm

E.2 Utility Provider Interviews

Wamego, Kansas

General:

Wamego is located at the intersection of U.S. Highway 24 and Kansas Highway 99 in central Pottawatomie County and has a current population of approximately 4,500.

City of Wamego provides electric, water and sewer utilities to residents.

Natural Gas service is provided by Kansas Gas Service Company.

Telecommunications are provided by Wamego Telecommunications Company, Inc.

Electric Power:

The City purchases power wholesale from KPL/Westar through an interconnection. The city also owns and operates an electric generation and distribution system serving approximately 1,900 customers in and immediately adjacent to Wamego. The Municipal Power Plant has the maximum generation capacity of 12,495 kv of electricity. During peak usage times, typically 10:00 am to 10:00 pm, June 15 through September 15 the plant supplements power purchased from Westar.

Chuck Asbury, ph. 785-456-9697 is contact for Wamego electric power generation and distribution.


Water Service:

The City owns and operates a water distribution system serving approximately 1,800 customers in and immediately adjacent to Wamego. The City pumps groundwater at 5 wells. Four tap into the Kansas River aquifer, the 4th taps into glacial deposits. Chlorine is introduced at each well head to protect against microbial contaminants. Pumping capacity ranges from 400-500 gallons per minute. Annual pumping average is about 200 million gallons. The city currently has one 500,000 gallon elevated storage tower. Distribution to customers is through a system of 4” to 12” water lines. Fire Hydrants are located throughout the city limits. A second 500,000 gallon water tower is planned. The City currently does not sell water to any rural water districts.

Problem:

The current wells do not provide enough volume for future use and growth. The city needs to apply for additional water rights from the Kansas Department of Agriculture, Division of Water Resources. Perhaps the city needs to look into purchasing water wholesale from another source.

Wastewater Treatment:

The City owns and maintains its own wastewater treatment facility. The plant was constructed in 1996-1997. It is a mechanical plant and treats ___MGD. The city has done Infiltration and inflow testing as well as smoke testing to eliminate illegal connections to the sanitary sewer system. Bob Elder, ph 785-456-7522 is Wamego water and wastewater supervisor.

Problem:

Is the existing wastewater treatment capacity enough to accommodate the growth that additional development is bringing to the area? What is the impact of development along the U. S. Highway 24 corridor West of Wamego?

Development:

Wamego is currently experiencing consistent growth. Much of this is due to development along the U.S. Highway 24 corridor West of Wamego. City and County currently require infrastructure to be approved prior to issuing building permits.

Junction City, Kansas

General:

Junction City is located along Interstate 70 in Geary County, Kansas. It has a current population of approximately 16,900.

Junction City provides water and sewer utilities to its residents. The City has contracted with Veolia Water North America-Central, LLC to manage city services related to water, sanitary sewer and storm water.


Telecommunications:

Local telephone and internet access are provided by Sprint. Electric Power Service in the Junction City, Geary County area is provided by two companies.

Location of a development dictates weather Westar Energy of Manhattan, Kansas or DS&O of Solomon, Kansas provide service.

Note:

Natural gas, telecommunication and electric power expansion into newly developed areas is accomplished when the developer requests extension of service from the private companies.

Water Service:

Junction City water is supplied by a series of wells located along the Republican River. The wells pump directly to the

January 2008 UI-13

Water Treatment plant. The Water treatment plant went into service in 1980 with a maximum capacity is 10.0 million gallons per day (MGD). It was designed to easily expand treatment operations. Water use last year averaged 3.1 MGD. Peak water usage last summer was 6.5 MGD.

Junction City supplies (sells) treated water to Grandview Plaza, Kansas and to Rural Water District No. 1. (RWD #1 is West of Junction City and has approximately 20 customers.)

Burns and McDonnell Engineers are producing a Water Master Plan for the city with recommendations for improvements. This report has not been submitted at this time.

Problem:

Water rights from the state need to be expanded. Current water rights limit the city to 4 million gallons per day from their current wells. The expected growth of the city will soon exceed the limitation of the current Division of Water Resources approved water right for Junction City.

There are two storage and distribution systems for the water. The Lower Level System (LLS) serves the part of the City below the USGS elevation 1,160 feet. This area includes most of the older parts of the city and development prior to 1970. The Upper Level System (ULS) serves areas above the USGS elevation 1,160 feet. This area contains most of the newer subdivisions and the likely future growth to the west. Distribution pipe sizes are 4, 6 and 8 inches. Water mains are 12 to 16 inches. The 4 inch lines are adequate for normal water supply but are marginal to supply a fire hydrant.

Problem:

Four inch water lines, located in the LLS, older parts of town are marginal to supply fire hydrants. Some hydrants do not have enough pressure or flow for fire department use. The age and condition of the LLS serving the older parts of town are a concern and on going maintenance issue.

There are two ground storage reservoirs with a combined capacity of 1.3 million gallons serving the Lower Level System. The Upper Level System has two elevated water storage towers with a combined capacity of 1.5 million gallons.


Junction City has 2 sewerage treatment facilities. One is located in the northeastern part of the city and was constructed in the 1950’s. It has been periodically upgraded and expanded to meet requirements. Normal capacity for this plant is 2.0 MGD. Maximum capacity is about 3.5 MGD. This treatment facility and its collection system, including lift stations serves eastern parts of the city. This plant discharges into the Republican River. The capacity of this facility should be evaluated and probably expanded to accommodate future development east of U.S. Highway 77.

The second treatment plant is located in southwest Junction City. This facility and interceptor sewers was constructed in 1996 and designed to be easily expandable. The current normal capacity of this facility is 1.0 MGD. Maximum capacity is approximately 2.5 MGD. This treatment facility serves western parts of the city including the Jack Lacy Industrial Park. This plant discharges into the Smokey Hill River. This facility has had recent equipment upgrades, but no increase in capacity. The capacity of this facility appears to be adequate for some future growth to the western part of the city.

Burns and McDonnell Engineers are producing a Sanitary Sewer Master Plan for the city with recommendations for improvements. The report has not been submitted at this time.

Development:

Junction City is currently experiencing a significant increase in construction around the city primarily due to the projected expansion of nearby Fort Riley. The dominant development


is occurring on the west and northwest sides of the city. In a normal year the city would approve approximately 30 permits. There were 840 permits pulled in 2006 for construction to be completed in 2007.

Problem:

Junction City currently allows annexation and building permits to be issued before infrastructure is in place for new developments. The City needs to investigate additional planning regulations requiring developers to have public improvement plans (water distribution lines, sanitary sewer, storm sewer collection lines and roads) for new development approved for construction and funded prior to issuing building permits.

Manhattan, Kansas

General:

Manhattan is located approximately 8 miles north of Interstate 70, on Kansas Highway 177 in Riley and Western Pottawatomie Counties, Kansas. It is the county seat of Riley County and has a current population of approximately 48,000.

Manhattan provides water and sewer utilities to its residents.


Telecommunications:

Local telephone and internet access are provided by several companies, including AT&T, Sprint, Sage Telecom and Birch Telecom.

Electric Power Service in Manhattan is provided by Westar Energy.

Note:

Natural gas, telecommunication and electric power expansion into newly developed areas is accomplished when

the developer requests extension of service from the private companies.

Water Service:

Manhattan’s raw water is supplied by 16 wells located in close proximity to the Big Blue and Kansas Rivers. Raw water is pumped to the Water Treatment Plant (WTP). Current combined capacity of the wells is 20.5 MGD. In 1990 the Water Treatment Plant was expanded from a capacity of 10.0 MGD to 20.0 MGD. Additional modifications and improvements have taken place through the years to provide quality water. 2006 improvements to the WTP increased the efficiency of the treatment process and overall water quality. Current peak water usage is 17.0 MGD. City operates 3 pump stations to maintain pressure and elevated storage tanks.

Manhattan supplies treated water to Rural Water District # 1.

“The Water Treatment Plant Improvements Preliminary Design Report” in 2006” produced by Carollo Engineers, is a comprehensive report detailing current and future water supply and demand, treatment requirements and recommendations for improvements.


The wastewater treatment plant has a current capacity of 8.7 MGD. Current demand is approximately 5.0 MGD with a peak demand of 6.9 MGD. The city has improved the infiltration situation recently. An expansion to the plant to 10.7 MGD is planned by 2010.

Note:

Manhattan uses “Enterprise Funds” for public improvements. They also increase utility User Fees to fund future expansion.

January 2008 UI-15

Fort Riley, Kansas

General:

Fort Riley is a U.S. Army post located between Junction City and Manhattan. The Fort encompasses over 100,000 across Geary and Riley Counties. The Fort provides water, sanitary and storm management services for its residents. Services are managed by the Fort’s public works department.

Due to current BRAC planning, the post is scheduled to receive an additional 10,000 to 18,000 troops (or “units” for the purpose of this discussion) in the next two to three years. Of these numbers, it is anticipated that off-post units will range from 4,000 to 8,000. Using a general rule of 3.2 additional persons associated with each unit, the areas surrounding the post will have to support 16,000 to 35,000 new residents. It is estimated that the installation will absorb from 6,500 to 10,000 new units and their dependents.

Natural Gas service to Fort Riley is provided by Kansas Gas Service Company. The installation ties into a 6” high-pressure line but maintain their own gas service lines.

Telecommunications:

Local telephone and internet access are provided by several companies, including AT&T, Sprint, Sage Telecom and Birch Telecom.

Electric Power Service is provided by Westar Energy and the Fort has substations for voltage step-down. The post expressed an interest in establishing an electrical link with off-site lines for redundancy.

Water Service:

Fort Riley has historical water rights that were established before Kansas achieved statehood. The post has resisted combining water services with adjacent municipalities because of the complications that could result from the nature of the post’s water rights versus the water rights held by the adjacent communities. Public Works officials stated that the post could conceivably be subject to an

adjacent community’s more restrictive water rights if they were to combine services. As a result, the post has not been motivated to create joint-use water services with Manhattan or Junction City.

All water is obtained from wells adjacent to the Kansas and Republican Rivers. Well water is pumped to a central water treatment facility on Custer Hill. The plant has a capacity of 10.0 MGD and current use is between 2.8 and 3.2 MGD. The Fort could sustain substantial growth with no significant impact on water supply.


The post has two wastewater treatment plants. Wastewater is currently piped to a centralized waste water treatment plant on Custer Hill and to an older plant at Camp Forsythe through a series of lift stations distributed around the base. Public Works anticipates that the Custer Hill plant will exceed capacity “soon” and will need to be expanded. Some officials in Public Works would like to develop a plan that effectively divides the base in half with respect to wastewater treatment. The Fort is planning an internal design charette to study expansion of the wastewater treatment system. One possible location for a new plant could be the Camp Funston area.

Stormwater:

The post is currently conducting a stormwater study near the base golf course on Custer Hill. Additional storm water studies center on Camp Forsythe.

Problem:

The City of Manhattan maintains that approximately one-third of the stormwater flowing onto the Manhattan Airport property is generated by the post. The City has had discussions to have the post construct a large volume detention basin that would intercept stormwater from the Fort and release it slowly to improve drainage conditions at the Airport.


Abilene, KS

General:

Abilene is located approximately 25 miles west of Junction City on I-70. The current population is approximately 7,200 persons.

The City provides water and wastewater services to the residents.

Westar Energy supplies electrical service to the City.

Kansas Gas Service provides natural gas service.

Eagle Communications supplies telecommunication services.

Water Service:

The water system for the City is managed by the Public Works Department. Abilene obtains water from 11 wells located along the Smoky Hill and Sand Springs aquifers. The wells have an average 12 hour yield of 0.64 million gallons (MG) and a maximum capacity of 4.32 MGD. In general, yield from the wells has been decreasing over the past few years due to drought. The City is currently exploring options for increasing water yield including obtaining enhanced water rights from the Kansas Division of Water Resources. The City lists enhancement of the raw water supply as a requirement for future population growth and development.


The City’s water treatment plant capacity is currently 4.3 MGD while the current demand is 1.3 MGD. The City has four water towers. The City began construction of a new wastewater treatment facility in 2006. The plant is designed to handle an average daily flow of 1.50 MGD with a peak flow of 6.3 MGD. Historical actual flows have been in the range of 0.9 MGD. Replacement of aging clay tile sewer lines is warranted in some locations in the City.

Documents

Utilities & Infra- structure - City of Manhattan