Beyond

Tomorrow
Downtown
Plan
The Manhattan Community’s vision for the future of our downtown
The Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan is a forward-looking,
historically reflec�ve, data-based, and collec�ve development and
policy plan for downtown Manhatan, Kansas. The plan and its
appendices were adopted by the City Commission via
Ordinance No. ____ on May __, 2024.
Table of Contents
Execu�ve Summary ---------------------------------------------------------- 1
Introduc�on ------------------------------------------------------------------- 2

Part 1: Development Goals and Principles --------------------------- 13

Sub-Areas of Change/Improvement
Northwest Downtown---------------------------------------------------- 30
West Poyntz----------------------------------------------------------------- 35
Third Street Corridor------------------------------------------------------ 40
East Mall --------------------------------------------------------------------- 50
West of Fourth Street----------------------------------------------------- 56
Riverfront--------------------------------------------------------------------- 60
Sub-Areas of Stability/Maintenance
Historic Core----------------------------------------------------------------- 65
Manhatan Marketplace-------------------------------------------------- 70
Blue Earth-------------------------------------------------------------------- 73
Makers------------------------------------------------------------------------ 76

Part 2: Policy Goals and Principles ------------------------------------- 80

Chapter 1: Planning Context ---------------------------------------------- 81
Chapter 2: Land Use Redevelopment and Recrea�on -------------- 85
Chapter 3: Economy and Tourism --------------------------------------- 90
Chapter 4: Demographics -------------------------------------------------- 94
Chapter 5: Housing ---------------------------------------------------------- 97
Chapter 6: Community Services ------------------------------------------ 101
Chapter 7: Art, Entertainment, and Culture --------------------------- 104
Chapter 8: Building Design, Streetscape and Environment -------- 108
Chapter 9: Historic Preserva�on ----------------------------------------- 112
Chapter 10: Parking --------------------------------------------------------- 115
Chapter 11: Transporta�on ----------------------------------------------- 119
Chapter 12: U�li�es and Safety ------------------------------------------ 125

Part 3: Implementa�on Plan --------------------------------------------- 130

Acknowledgements --------------------------------------------------------- 142

Execu�ve Summary Parking, Transporta�on, U�li�es, and Safety. These were presented as
The Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan (BTDP) is the latest declara�on of chapters with established sub-visions, derived from the overall vision
the Manhatan community’s con�nued choice to build upon and invest in statement and with suppor�ng goals and principles.
the success of our downtown as the historic, cultural, and economic core
of the city and region. Adopted into the Manhatan Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan in 2024, it succeeds the successfully implemented
Downtown Tomorrow Plan (2000). The BTDP established goals,
principles, and steps to realize a bold, but achievable, vision filled with
exci�ng concepts and opportuni�es for future growth and enhancements
in one of the most cherished areas of our community.

Downtown Manhattan is envisioned as a

vibrant, historic, pedestrian-orientated
cultural and economic focal point of the city
and region, offering diverse and high-quality
shopping, dining, art, entertainment, service,
event, housing, civic experiences, and spaces
all reflective of who we are as a community.

Development Goals and Principles

The plan area was broken down into ten sub-areas with each receiving
one of two types of development focus– “Area of Stability and
Maintenance” or “Area of Change and Improvement” –with growth
scenarios for each. The BTDP concentrates on the “Areas of Change and
Improvement” to direct efforts, resources, and aten�on where they
were needed most and held the most poten�al to achieve the vision.
Also shown are conceptual projects on iden�fied catalyst sites in
response to community feedback, providing inspira�on for the future.

Policy Goals and Principles Implementa�on Plan

Next, the plan looked at broader, less tangible aspect of downtown,
matching the topics covered in the Background Report: Planning Context,
Land Use, Redevelopment, Recrea�on, Economy and Tourism,
Demographics, Housing, Community Services, Art, Entertainment,
Building Design, Streetscape, Environment, Historic Preserva�on,
Finally, all the informa�on was translated into ac�onable steps with
guidance on the �ming, execu�on, priority, and lead agencies.
For questions about the Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan, or to explore
development and incentive opportunities, contact the Community Development
Department of the City of Manhattan, Kansas at 785-587-2412 or cityofmhk.com

1
Introduction

2
Introduc�on
As described in the background report accompanying this document,
this plan is part of Manhatan’s con�nued dedica�on to reinvest in
and support the cultural and economic core of our city that is
downtown.
Vision Statement
Downtown Manhattan is envisioned as a vibrant,
historic, pedestrian-orientated cultural and
economic focal point of the city and region, offering
diverse and high-quality shopping, dining, art,
entertainment, service, event, housing, civic
experiences, and spaces all reflective of who we are
as a community.
Figure 0.0: Vision Rendering.
3
Planning Process Summary
This plan is the product of over 21 months of research, public
engagement, and strategizing to compile a comprehensive vision for
Downtown Manhatan, Kansas.
Once the need for an updated plan was iden�fied, a project �meline
was created to communicate key deliverables and an approval date.
Commitee Forma�on. In addi�on to the City Commission and the
Manhatan Urban Area Planning Board, the process was led by a
Steering Commitee of appointed volunteers represen�ng downtown-
related organiza�ons and interests. A Technical Commitee was also
assembled for this planning process, comprised of subject mater
experts from the City and other agencies. See the Acknowledgements
sec�on of this document for a full list of these members and
contributors. These Commitees met four �mes throughout the
process to provide their exper�se, direc�on and feedback, and
collaborate with the city on reaching and engaging key stakeholder
groups.
 Figure 0.1: Plan process conceptual timeline.

Research. Secondary research from industry sources and na�onal

Figure 0.2: Community Foundation outreach.
data were compiled along with primary research using historical
documents, community feedback, consumer habit so�ware, map
data, surveys, and observa�onal exercises to inform the Beyond
Tomorrow Downtown plan.
Community Outreach. Engagement drove both the Background
Report and this plan, star�ng with two surveys providing quan�ta�ve
data to ground upcoming input. A downtown business survey was
completed by 53 respondents and a broader community survey
received around 1,800 responses. City resources were also commited
to project-specific no�fica�ons, a webpage, and various social media
channels. Key stakeholder groups and individuals represen�ng sectors
of downtown were iden�fied and engaged with over the 21-month
planning period. See the Acknowledgements sec�on of this document
for a full list of these members and contributors.

4

Figure 0.3: Foot Traffic and City-owned Lots heat map, Placer, 2023
The interac�on with over 30
of these stakeholders took
the form of individual
interviews, small group
presenta�ons, focus groups,
and mapping and modeling
exercises. All of these groups
par�cipated in public
mee�ngs and/or commented
on materials.
Figure 0.4: Public Input Flyer and Survey.
5
Figure 0.5: Farmers Market outreach activity, March 2023.
Finally, it was important to hear from as many community members
as possible, so in addi�on to the survey, presenta�ons were provided,
and City staff atended Downtown Manhatan Inc. mee�ngs and
events. In October, an open house was held in conjunc�on with the
final Third Thursday event in downtown. At the event, there was an
opportunity for residents to work with Lego models, draw or note
their feedback through a design charrete, visit an informa�on and
mapping sta�on, or explore development concepts with volunteer
students from the Kansas State University Regional and Community
Planning program at one of six poten�al redevelopment sites.

Figure 0.6: Third Thursday visioning exercise on Poyntz Avenue, courtesy of WIBW.
Figure 0.7: Third Thursday Open House at Flight Crew Coffee
The general feedback and ideas received through these ac�vi�es, the
sen�ment of the community, along with the data, research and
analysis are compiled into the background report document, which
aims to summarize, serve as the founda�on to, and give direc�on to
the community vision which amassed and developed through the
planning process.
6
Development Strategies and Pre-Planning. At this point, a first dra�
of the plan document could be created, which would host the goals
and principles ascertained and summarized throughout the
community outreach phase. Concurrently, the model showing physical
change to downtown responding to and reflec�ve of community and
stakeholder input could begin to take shape. Early versions of this
model were created using LEGO bricks on a to-scale map of different
areas of downtown as to be easy to work with and develop concepts
on the fly during events and mee�ngs.
Figure 0.8: Steering Committee LEGO modeling exercise.
As common themes of development massing and use began to take
shape, the LEGO model was translated into a virtual 3D model of
downtown with three build-out scenarios. Conceptual projects,
devised throughout the public outreach phase, were also star�ng to
take shape as sketches and renders at specific loca�ons throughout
downtown. Vision imagery was also developed to help represent
different, more abstract ideas and themes of the plan. This imagery
mainly consisted of sketches and watercolor pain�ngs.
 Final Planning and Community Outreach. A first dra� of the plan with
its language and imagery was then published and presented to the
public. Key stakeholder groups met with throughout the ini�al
community outreach phase were reengaged and presented with the
plan update. This took the form of both formal presenta�ons and
focus groups. City Boards were also engaged and updated during this
phase.
Three open houses were held where the public could view the
proposed plan, review the development scenarios, and look over the
vision imagery and conceptual project renderings. Staff took feedback
and answered ques�ons.
Staff then incorporated
edits in response to
feedback gained during
Figure 0.9: Anna Greene, Intern Sketching and Painting Vision Imagery Downtown.
final outreach efforts to
create a final dra�,
which was prepared for
presenta�on to the
Manhatan Urban Area
Planning Board and City
Commission for
adop�on into the
Manhatan Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan.
Figure 0.11: BTDP Open House Flyer

Figure 0.10: Colton Thompson, Intern Designing and Rendering Conceptual Projects.

7
Figure 0.12: Open House Showcasing Conceptual Project and Vision Imagery.
Purpose and Use of this Plan
This document and its background report serve to record the process
by which the community came together to create a comprehensive
vision for the future of downtown, and to ar�culate that vision so we
may have confidence to step into the future. This plan responds to the
background report and downtown’s advantages, disadvantages,
vulnerabili�es, and opportuni�es related to the topics
within the report. Its recommenda�ons are informed
by much of the data gathered in the background
report, while being contextualized by community
25-Year
and stakeholder input, and affirmed by the
project’s steering commitee, technical
Plan
commitee, and ul�mately the governing body of
the City of Manhatan.
Horizon
This plan has a horizon of roughly 25 years. While
a lot can change in that amount of �me, this plan
should provide a level of flexibility to withstand
some changes in condi�ons contextualizing
it. This document is not a rigid,
prescrip�ve plan dicta�ng exactly
8
what should be built or invested in, where, or when. Nor does it bind
the City or any other agency to any financial obliga�ons, ac�ons, or
rela�onships. These details will be worked out in the coming years,
most likely in conjunc�on with a par�cular project.
This plan does, however, provide some basic goals, principles, and
steps by which a larger, comprehensive vision for downtown can be
beter achieved. It provides a conceptual framework by
which the community can expect the decision-makers to
methodically and systema�cally approach, react to,
and facilitate change in downtown. In that regard,
this plan creates predictability that can be relied
upon by the community, businesses, local and
state agencies, property owners, and future
residents of Manhatan.
This plan ideally provides addi�onal (and
hopefully exci�ng) opportuni�es for private
interests, knowing that there is a larger,
comprehensive plan backed by the community
that private interests can execute if
and when condi�ons are right, and
in some cases, with public support. The City of Manhatan can deploy garage on a city-owned property. The parking structure being
tools to expedite or incen�vize these opportuni�es, but it does have proposed is in close proximity to the one iden�fied in the plan, but
its limita�ons. The City cannot single-handedly accomplish the goals not on the exact site. However, the construc�on of a public parking
of this plan, as this is a community plan that will require the buy-in, garage is supported by the plan, given certain triggers or criteria being
support, and execu�on of many en��es to accomplish. The City took met. And since the development plan is conceptual, a parking garage
the first step in preparing this plan that outlines the vision and goals in the general area or one that makes more sense given changes in
for downtown. It is recognized that the private market and non- condi�ons over �me, may s�ll be in conformance with the plan and its
government en��es will con�nue to be a significant driving force in guiding principles.
the future of downtown. And not all market forces and private
Scenario 3: A local non-profit art coali�on is interested in installing
development interests can be predicted, accounted for, controlled, or
public art downtown. A large na�onal endowment is offering grants
changed by this plan.
for communi�es looking to expand public art in business districts. In
Each new opportunity for downtown will take place in the context of a the applica�on for the grant, the nonprofit references the Beyond
unique �me in history with its own economic condi�ons, market Tomorrow Downtown Plan and its goals for seeing a more vibrant art
trends, and perceived value to the community. This can and should be scene downtown and the benefits to the public realm. The plan in this
taken into considera�on when it is placed in front of the backdrop of case can be referenced by the coali�on to show general community
this plan. However, the conceptual framework and general principles support for public art, which may enhance the chances of being
this plan provides should be able to be relied on by the community awarded the grant.
over �me if it is to remain useful.
Plan Area Boundary Determina�on
Scenarios
The “Plan Area” is the primary area for the goals, principles, and
The following are three example scenarios of how this plan might be recommenda�ons in this plan. While the boundary can be considered
used: somewhat fluid, the primary purpose of this document is to outline
ac�onable steps to apply the principles, achieve the goals, and carry
Scenario 1: A developer approaches the City about construc�ng an
out the recommenda�ons for the plan area (Figure 0.13). This plan
apartment building downtown, but the current zoning of the property
does contain some recommenda�ons for areas outside of the plan
does not permit apartment buildings. However, the Beyond Tomorrow
area, for example in the realm of housing and transporta�on, as these
Downtown Plan generally supports the development of housing
elements can certainly have an effect on downtown. However, these
downtown and has iden�fied that the general area of the proposed
recommenda�ons should be considered secondary to those of the
development would be an appropriate area for high-density housing.
plan area.
The plan recommenda�on of higher-density housing should be
considered as a factor during the rezoning process.
Scenario 2: Construc�on of a public parking garage is being
considered as surface parking lots are highly u�lized and parking
supply remains a limi�ng factor for addi�onal foot traffic downtown.
The Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan recognizes parking as a
constraint and the development strategy model shows a parking
9
Areas Included in Plan Area
• The Study Area (see Figure A.0.6 in Appendix A: Background
Report) – The study area was defined using the criteria
described in the Background Report.
• The South Downtown Brownfield Study area – This area and
the recommendations concerning it in the South Downtown
Brownfield Study is considered part and parcel with this plan.
See Appendix B: South Downtown Brownfield Study for more
information.

Areas Not Included in Plan Area

• Auxiliary Planning Areas (Figure 0.7 in Background Report)
• Low/Medium density residential areas west of downtown
where no significant land use change or development is
expected.

Figure 0.13: Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan Area Boundary with South
Downtown Brownfield Study Area noted.

10
How to Read this Document
This document is divided into three main parts: Part 1: Development
Goals and Principles, Part 2: Policy Goals and Principles, and Part 3: Vision
Implementation Plan. There are also three appendices: Appendix A:
Background Report, Appendix B: South Downtown Brownfield Study,
Statement
and Appendix C: Glossary of Terms.
Part 1: Development Goals and Principles
This sec�on looks at the vision for the physical development of
downtown. Ten dis�nc�ve sub-areas are iden�fied within the Plan
Area, and the vision for each is described using text and images from Sub-Vision
the development model. This vision is broken down into three aspects
of development (uses, form, and streetscape) and goals and principles
are established for each. Conceptual projects in each sub-area are
also showcased.
Part 2: Policy Goals and Principles
Though there is some overlap with Part 1, this sec�on looks at
broader, less tangible topics and concepts that may not necessarily
Goals Principles
result in or be reflected in physical change to downtown. This sec�on
uses the framework of the twelve topics covered in the Background
Report. It establishes sub-visions for each of the topics, derived from
the overall vision statement for downtown, and then establishes
suppor�ng goals and principles in each (see Figure 0.14). This sec�on
tends to use more general language that applies to the whole of Proactive
downtown rather than specific sub-areas. Reactive Guidance
Steps
Vision statements generally start with similar phrasing like
“Downtown is” and are describing a future state or characteris�c of
downtown. Goals tend to start with some kind of overt verb like Figure 0.14: Visualizing relationship of vision, goals, and principles.
“create, maintain, incorporate, improve, increase, or expand”. Goals
Principles have a less tangible or ongoing nature and may have no
range from specific and objec�ve with measurable outcomes to more
clear measurable outcome. These may have few if any ac�ons
general and subjec�ve with less measurable outcomes. The ac�ons in
suppor�ng them in the Implementa�on Plan and may not require any
the Implementa�on Plan suppor�ng these goals are o�en more
party to ini�ate. However, they are useful for providing broad
proac�ve, relying on one or more par�es to ini�ate. Principles tend to
guidance when reac�ng to the unforeseen future or for applying
start with a more passive verb like “support, encourage, or priori�ze”.

11
when proposals come forward, opportuni�es arise, or ac�ons in the highlights feedback from the community, provides development
implementa�on are being carried out. This makes the plan more concepts for two catalyst sites, and presents next steps. Shortly a�er
sustainable and enduring. Since these goals and principles tend to the Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan (BTDP) process was approved
exist on a spectrum, they are not iden�fied as being one or the other. by the City Commission, the Flint Hills Regional Council awarded the
Rather, they are listed indiscriminately under the sub-vision they city with a por�on of an Environmental Protec�on Agency Brownfield
support. Grant to be applied toward consul�ng services for a study. EPA
Brownfield Grants focus on historically or current heavy commercial
Planning topics don’t exist in a vacuum but are rather o�en intricately
or industrial areas prime for environmental review and poten�al
interconnected. And success in one topic will o�en lead to or
remedia�on at property owner’s volunteer involvement in a mul�-
contribute to success in another. Accordingly, some goals and
phased approach. The BTDP had already iden�fied the “Riverfront”
principles under different topics may share similar and overlapping
and “Makers Space” as sub-areas, home to mul�ple commercial and
language but are achieving different visions. This should emphasize
industrial opera�ons, and so when two landowners volunteered their
the impact of these goals or principles and elevate their importance.
proper�es as catalyst sites, it made for effec�ve and efficient
Part 3: Implementa�on Plan coordina�on of the SDBS with the more overarching and
comprehensive BTDP.
This sec�on takes the goals and principles of the two sec�ons above
and translates them into ac�onable steps. These ac�ons are matched Appendix C: Glossary of Terms
up with applicable goals or principles throughout the rest of the
This appendix contains various terms used throughout the document
planning document to demonstrate how the ac�on would contribute
that may warrant more explana�on, either because they are industry-
to mee�ng the various goals and principles. Also established are some
specific terms or mean something more unique to the context of this
basic guidance on the �ming of execu�on, a priority ranking, and
plan.
iden�fica�on of lead agencies to carry out the ac�on.
Appendix A: Background Report
This appendix contains a summary of all the all the research and
informa�on gathered prior to development of the first three parts of
this plan. This Background Report considers the history of the district,
takes stock of exis�ng condi�ons, assesses recent trends, and creates
a baseline for measurable success in the future. It also creates a
star�ng point for dialogue about the challenges and opportuni�es
facing downtown, which will lead to decisions about its future,
informed by data and guided by community input.
Appendix B: South Downtown Brownfield Study
This appendix contains the South Downtown Brownfield Study (SDBS)
Final Report. The Final Report summarizes the brownfield study
process, references the Exis�ng Condi�ons Review for context,
12
 Part 1
Development
Goals & Principles
13
Development Principles and Goals
As described in the background report accompanying this document, this
plan is part of Manhatan’s con�nued dedica�on to reinvest in and
support the cultural and economic core of our city that is downtown.
This part of the plan document establishes the overall vision, principles,
and goals for the physical development of downtown’s built
environment—what it may look and feel like as it grows under different
market condi�ons and degrees of change.
limited on the whole. While sub-areas exist on a spectrum between
needing various degrees of change, improvement, stability, and
maintenance, redevelopment, and incremental improvement, this
iden�fier serves as a shorthand to spa�ally focus and direct efforts,
resources, and aten�on where they are needed most in order to achieve
the overall vision. It should be noted, that despite an area’s designa�on
into one of these two types, all areas must be open to some degree of
change or improvement and be able to contribute to the goals of
crea�ng a quality downtown environment.

How to Read this Chapter

This chapter looks at ten sub-areas within the Beyond Tomorrow
Downtown Plan boundary (Figure 1.1) and describes the vision for the
physical development of each area. The images within the chapter were
generated from a development model with different buildout scenarios
and resul�ng poten�al space capacity. This vision is broken down into
three aspects of development: uses, form, and streetscape with
respec�ve descrip�ons beneath. Conceptual projects in the area are also
showcased. These aspects of development, the descrip�ons therein, and
the conceptual projects, are tagged with a unique code for easy
reference throughout the plan document.
Sub-Areas
Sub-areas in the downtown plan area represent dis�nct areas with
unique characteris�cs that can share similar goals and principles under a
unified vision. Figure 1.0: East MTC Entrance in East Mall Sub-area, 2023.

Generally, sub-areas can be divided into two types: “Areas of Change and Though sub-areas are mapped and given boundaries, those boundaries
Improvement” and “Areas of Stability and Maintenance” (See Figure 1.1). should not necessarily be seen as hard lines. Unless otherwise stated,
Areas of Change and Improvement are primary growth and
redevelopment candidates, which will likely need suppor�ve streetscape
and environment improvements. Areas of Stability and Maintenance are
not expected to experience significant change in terms of growth and
redevelopment. They are mostly areas that have recently undergone
major improvements and/or redevelopment and mainly need to focus on
maintaining exis�ng assets through the horizon of this plan. They can
certainly be candidates for targeted growth opportunity and incremental
improvements, but such change should be contextualized and generally

14
sub-area developments can take cues from and absorb quali�es
envisioned for adjacent sub-areas, especially when immediately adjacent
to another sub-area and not separated by a street or alley. This creates a
more cohesive patern of development, creates beter transi�ons
between areas, and increases flexibility for applica�on in the future.
Areas of Change and Improvement include:
• Northwest Downtown
• West Poyntz
• 3rd Street
• East Mall
• West 4th Street
• Riverfront

Areas of Stability and Maintenance include:

• Manhattan Marketplace
• Historic Core
• Blue Earth
• Makers

Below, three aspects of development described for each sub-area in this

sec�on: use, form, and streetscape. Note that the vision, goals, and
principles for these development aspects in the sub-areas may not be
exhaus�ve. Only the most per�nent to that area are described, as many
goals and principles are common to all downtown. This plan is structured
so that Part 2: Policy Goals and Principles sec�on may fill in those gaps
and create a baseline for these common aspects. Par�cularly relevant to
this part is Chapter 2: Land Use, Redevelopment, and Recreation; Chapter
5: Housing; Chapter 8: Building Design and Environment; Chapter 10:
Parking; and Chapter 11: Transportation. Please refer to these sec�ons
for a broader perspec�ve on development principles and goals for
downtown.
Figure 1.1: Sub-Area Map

15
 Uses
Uses describe which general land uses
and ac�vity would be appropriate or
inappropriate in the sub-area and
where. Loca�on of these uses is o�en
rela�ve to other sub-areas, the plan
boundary, or streets. It may also be
rela�ve to other uses. These uses may
include various densi�es and forms of
residen�al, office, retail, restaurant,
civic, parking, or other non-residen�al
uses.
Form
Form describes the general
characteris�cs of buildings and their
sites that would be appropriate or
inappropriate in the sub-area and
where. Loca�on of different forms is
o�en rela�ve to other sub-areas, the
plan boundary, or streets. They may
also be rela�ve to other uses,
par�cularly those sensi�ve to change,
and sensi�ve development such as
historic buildings. These characteris�cs
may include building height, building
coverage, parking loca�on, building
setbacks, and some architectural quali�es of the buildings themselves.
16
Streetscape
Streetscape describes
general quali�es of the right-
of-way or travelway needed
to adequately serve
adjacent uses, achieve
certain transporta�on
infrastructure goals, and/or
create an environment
complimentary to adjacent
development envisioned.
These quali�es may include sidewalks, street trees, street widths, on-
street parking, crosswalks, ligh�ng, intersec�on improvements, and
street furnishings such as benches, trash bins, bike racks, and
landscaping.
Conceptual Projects
Conceptual projects are
hypothe�cal developments
which were conceptualized
throughout the public input
opportuni�es and stakeholder
mee�ngs and gained
popularity as they were veted
with the Steering and Technical
Commitees. They are not a
commitment or obliga�on by
the City, any private
landowner/party, or any other
en�ty/organiza�on. However, they could certainly be explored in concept
a�er this plan is adopted. In some cases, they represent poten�al
catalyst projects, or projects anchoring an area, which could in turn spark
addi�onal development interests in line with this plan. In other cases,
these are projects epitomizing overall themes of the vision for the area
they are in, and simply provide inspira�on for that future. In most cases,
they exist in the context of a medium to high growth scenario for sub-
areas iden�fied as Areas of Change and Improvement.
Establishing Expecta�ons
As described more generally in the Purpose and Use of this Plan (see
Introduc�on, pg. #), it is important to understand the role of any plan
and the Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan’s role in materializing the
vision and any degree of preciseness it provides.
Specifically, although the Plan comments on land use and development
forms as described above, it is largely up to the private market to bring
the community’s shared vision for downtown into reality. However, it is
the city’s responsibility to intelligently direct ac�vi�es through applicable
community plans, zoning regula�ons, building codes, historic
protec�ons, and incen�ves. Today, these things may apply uniformly
across large areas, including sub-areas described in the Plan. There may
appear a conflict between the restric�ons in place to direct ac�vi�es and
the grander vision where this Plan calls for less restric�on and more
development, and vice versa.
In these cases, the planning process and the BTDP are fulfilling one of its
core responsibili�es, which is to provide a reason to review and modify
such restric�ons, or lack thereof. In other cases, they may simply need to
be lived with. For example, a sub-area may stress the importance of new
development being “sensi�ve” to adjacent lower-density residen�al
neighborhoods and envision tapering new building heights and
intensi�es towards those areas. However, current zoning may not require
such tapering. This illustrates a difference between the ideal and the
reality. This Plan’s vision will tend toward the ideal, but it, nor the city,
can necessarily prescribe it into reality. At the will of the governing body,
certain tools, policies, and changes in regula�ons can always be
implemented to be more prescrip�ve, but that comes with its own
drawbacks—mainly inflexibility and inefficiency. A balance will need to
be struck, but these decisions will be made in years to come.

Figure 1.2: MCM in the Riverfront Sub-Area, 2023.

17
Growth Scenarios
Each sub-area’s development poten�al is presented as different growth Base: Current environment. Serves as the
scenarios modeled at varying levels of intensity, which are dependent on baseline for growth scenarios.
both current and future condi�ons. What growth scenarios generally
represent are described to the right.

Low Growth: Generally, the smallest amount of

change envisioned and/or supportable, driven by
below-average development demand and below-
average market forces. Likely no public support
or coordina�on involved.

Medium Growth: Generally, a moderate amount

of change envisioned, driven by average
development demand and average market
forces. May require public support or
coordina�on.

High Growth: Generally, the largest amount of

change envisioned and/or supportable, driven by
high development demand and strong market
forces. Highly likely involving public support and
coordina�on.

Figure
1.3: Strasser Village Apartments in the Manhattan Marketplace Sub-area, 2023.

18
These scenarios are intended to create conceptual benchmarks for what
growth could look like in each area, rela�ve and relevant to the specific
development goals, context, and overall vision for uses, form, and
streetscape for those areas—with the strongest visual emphasis on form.

Change
The amount of change conceptualized compared to what exists today is
intended to visually project change in each area over the course of the
plan horizon—25 years. This is based on data gathered, and summa�on
of input from the community, businesses, stakeholders, and the
commitees involved in the planning process. High Growth Scenario
Distribu�on of Growth
Some sub-areas will show a significant amount of growth even in the

Change
low-growth scenario. This could indicate several factors working together
or individually: high poten�al for change, lack of barriers to change,
strong market forces, and/or a strong desire to see change. On the other
hand, some sub-areas will show litle change in even the high-growth
scenario due to low poten�al for change, high barriers to change, weak Medium Growth Scenario
market forces, and/or a litle desire to see change.

Change
Change envisioned may also not be evenly or propor�onally distributed
at the sub-area level. This may be reflec�ve of appropriateness for
specific areas within a sub-area to absorb/accommodate growth based
on things like sensi�ve land uses, sensi�ve structures, or other Low Growth Scenario
development factors described in Chapter 2 of the Background Report:
Land Use, Redevelopment, Recreation. This concept is illustrated in Figure
X.X. And the same can be said for the whole plan area.
Mee�ng development goals will require some amount of change within Current Condi�ons
the downtown plan area, but that change may not be universal or evenly Distance
distributed. For example, it may require a high-growth scenario in just
one or two sub-areas, or several low to medium growth scenarios in Figure 1.4: Conceptualizing disproportionate change in a sub-area.
several sub-areas. However, every sub-area plays a part in contribu�ng to
the overall vision.
Establishing Expecta�ons
The inten�on for presen�ng different growth scenarios is not for an
“ideal” growth scenario to be chosen, but rather to present a conceptual
patern and progression of growth and development that would be
accepted and supported by the community. This gives the plan flexibility

19
over �me to meet its goals in meaningful ways regardless of whether a
certain scenario is realized.
Figure 1.5: Parking Garage in Blue Earth Sub-area, 2023.
Roles of Public and Private
While not always the case, higher growth scenarios are more likely to
involve public support and coordina�on. A major reason for that being
higher growth scenarios may require economic development incen�ves,
certain land-use ac�ons (i.e. zoning, pla�ng, permi�ng), and/or
suppor�ve transporta�on investments such as transit stops and public
parking structures in order to realize them. A more minor reason being
that modifica�ons to streetscapes and crea�on/improvement of public
spaces are more likely needed to reciprocate and respond to adjacent
development, bring out its full poten�al, beter serve it, or act as an
incen�ve for it in the first place.
As described throughout this plan, it is recognized that the private
market and non-government en��es will con�nue to be a significant
driving force for development in the future of downtown. And, not all
market forces and private development interests can be predicted,
accounted for, controlled, or changed by this plan. In the same way, tools
for direc�ng development to result in the vision of this plan are only as
strong as the community and the elected body desires over �me.

Growth scenarios can also establish guidance on thresholds for

addi�onal ac�ons to be taken or for certain investments to be made. This
provides both developers and the community at large the confidence
that new development will be supported in the future. For example, a
parking garage in a sub-area may not be an appropriate or worthwhile
investment in a low growth scenario due to lack of demand. However, in
a high growth scenario, a parking garage may become a high-priority in
order to support growth and development and reduce impact to exis�ng
businesses. While the exact triggers for such improvements will need to
be determined in the future, this plan establishes the conceptual need
for them given certain condi�ons.
Buildings in the model are inten�onally generic and unremarkable in
order to emphasize bulk, massing, si�ng, and loca�on. In lieu of such
detail, specific principles for architectural details of buildings are
described under the “form” sec�ons and are in some cases embodied in
the more detailed conceptual projects for each sub-area and vision
imagery in Part 2: Policy Goals and Principles.

20
Overall Development Goals
This is the overall vision for downtown:

Downtown Manhattan is envisioned as a vibrant,

historic, pedestrian-orientated cultural and
economic focal point of the city and region,
offering diverse and high-quality shopping, dining,
art, entertainment, service, event, housing, civic
experiences and spaces all reflective of who we are
as a community.

Part 1: Policy Goals and Principles establishes goals and principles for
various planning topics to achieve this overall vision. This Part of the plan
establishes the goals and principles for physical development of
downtown to achieve this overall vision.
Growth Scenario Models
Below are the models for each growth scenario downtown. These
represent the respec�ve low, medium, and high growth scenarios for
each sub-area combined into one for the whole plan area. While again, it
would be unrealis�c to expect such uniform, ubiquitous, and in some
cases dras�c amount of change throughout downtown, especially for the
high-growth model, it is helpful to s�tched together to see how sub-
areas interact between scenarios, as the growth in one may depend on
or result in growth in another. The narra�ves for the progression of
different growth scenarios for the full models below can generally apply
the progression of different sub-area models.

21
Growth Scenario Model: Base Condi�ons

Mall

Hy-Vee

Figure 1.6: Base Condition Model of Downtown.

This model reflects current development condi�ons and massing in the

downtown. Growth scenarios presented below build from this model.

22
Growth Scenario Model: Low Growth

Hy-Vee

Mall

Figure 1.7: Low Growth Scenario Model of Downtown.

This scenario largely sees the opportuni�es for low-hanging infill come to
frui�on at a rela�vely small scale and o�en with litle to no assembly of
property. This mostly includes development of vacant privately-owned
land and underu�lized parking lots. Few to no city-owned proper�es are
considered for redevelopment or repurposing.

23
Growth Scenario Model: Medium Growth

Mall

Hy-Vee

Figure 1.8: Medium Growth Scenario Model of Downtown.

This scenario sees the opportuni�es for the low-hanging infill come to
frui�on, but at a medium scale. Here we also start to see underu�lized
developed lots considered for redevelopment at a medium scale,
involving the assembly of mul�ple proper�es. City-owned proper�es
begin to be considered for redevelopment or repurposing. Parking supply
becomes strained and structured parking begins appearing to improve
land use efficiency and support growth.

24
Growth Scenario Model: High Growth

Mall

Hy-Vee

Figure 1.9: High Growth Scenario Model of Downtown.

This scenario sees the surpassing of market thresholds that would

ordinarily create significant barriers to redevelopment and infill. Here we
may see even established proper�es considered for redevelopment at a
large scale, involving the assembly of mul�ple lots or even whole blocks.
Redevelopment and repurposing of city-owned property becomes
essen�al to support new development. Public parking garages provide a
significant amount of parking supply, responding to, catalyzing, and
fueling growth.

25
Overall Development Goals (con�nued)
Throughout the planning process it became clear that the community
and downtown’s various stakeholders generally see significant growth
and economic development poten�al they would like to see realized. As
described earlier, while growth scenarios provide and plan for various
levels of acceptable buildout, but none are not intended to be
prescribed.
Capacity Crea�on
The table below depicts resul�ng capaci�es for different space types
based on the respec�ve sum of sub-area low, medium, and high growth
scenarios. These spaces are grouped based on space types, not specific
uses, and are expressed in terms of gross square footage, dwelling units,
and parking spaces. All uses fall into a use type category, determined by
their opera�onal nature and space needs. For example, the “retail” space
type includes consumer retail, restaurant, and personal services since
they have similar demands on parking, hours of opera�on, and tend to
need highly visible ground floor spaces. Space types and typical uses that
fall into them are described below.
Each sub-area contains a version of Figure 1.10 to communicate how that
These capaci�es are based on a rough calcula�on of gross square footage
of individual buildings and spaces within the respec�ve growth scenario
model. The appropriateness of space types or spaces noted in each sub-
area determines the propor�on of square footage, units or spaces
dedicated to that space type in a sub-area. This appropriateness was
determined by the steering and technical commitees and validated with
public input. Appropriateness is classified as low, medium, high, and NA
(not appropriate).
An area envisioned as having a low net amount of space created for a
specific space type in a sub-area might communicate it is inappropriate
or is simply a low priority for that area. Having a high net amount of
space for a specific space type in a sub area might communicate it is very
appropriate or is a high priority for that area.
It should be emphasized that this analysis is not scien�fic, and the
resul�ng numbers are not prescrip�ve, nor intended to put limita�ons on
square footage for any specific use. However, they do help conceptualize
how the community’s level of comfort with certain amounts of growth
and development at the specific build out scenarios could translate into
square footage for new space types when matched up with the
community’s level of desire for specific uses.

Current Low Med High

Space Type
Capacity Net Total Net Total Net Total
Residen�al 999 units* +140 1,139 +482 1,481 +1,228 2,227
Retail 831,000 SF +139,000 970,000 +364,000 1,195,000 +840,500 1,671,500
Office 481,000 SF +91,500 572,500 +277,500 758,500 +799,000 1,280,000
Industrial/Cra� 86,000 SF +14,500 100,500 +52,500 138,500 +160,000 246,000
Civic 406,000 SF +56,500 462,500 +15,3000 559,000 +377,000 783,000
Open Space 122,000 SF +1,500 123,500 +8,000 130,000 +117,500 239,500
Parking 7,707 spaces -1,191 6,516 +615 8,322 +4,780 12,487
*Includes 394 hotel rooms
Figure 1.10: Overall Space Type Capacity Table

sub-area might contribute to crea�ng capacity for different space types.

26
Obviously Figure 1.10 shows a significant ramp up in space capacity Residen�al
crea�on, usually doubling or tripling the amount of capacity exis�ng
today under a high-growth scenario. Again, these capaci�es are based on Residen�al includes various forms
the sum of the space type crea�on for every sub-area model of the same of housing, with a focus on medium
scenario. So like the high-growth model depicted in Figure 1.9, it is to high density housing types:
unrealis�c to expect so much growth to occur downtown within the mixed-use, large mul�-family,
horizon of this plan. But in the same way s�tching the sub-area models medium mul�-family, small mul�-
together is helpful to understand how sub areas interact with and affect family, and townhomes, as well as
each other, it is helpful to see the sum of all the scenario capaci�es. ins�tu�onal housing for special
popula�ons like seniors and the
For example, it is worth no�ng that in many scenarios, parking capacity disabled. Given the housing goals
does not become an issue un�l a medium-growth scenario is reached. for downtown, smaller scale
When looking at downtown as a whole, a similar phenomenon is housing types such as single-family
occurring, as a uniform low-growth scenario would in concept, not and duplexes in nearly all
require addi�onal parking. This is demonstrated by the nega�ve net gain applica�on are not suitable within the plan area outside of low-growth
in parking under the low-growth scenario. That is not to say there aren’t scenarios in certain sub-areas. Higher density housing opportuni�es
localized shortages and high demand in specific loca�ons. This was allow more to reside in and around downtown to take advantage of the
clearly demonstrated in the Figures A.10.5 and A.10.6 in the background proximity to employment, goods, and services it offers. For sake of space
report. But in theory and on average, there is enough parking within the type analysis, hotels are considered residen�al, but are called out when
plan area for a low-growth scenario to occur uniformly across downtown included as part of the analysis.
and parking doesn’t become a broadly significant issue un�l a medium
growth scenario is reached. This is in line with broad progression of
development issues when going from a low-growth to high-growth as Retail
described under Figures 1.7, 1.8, and 1.9; demand on parking increases
as development intensifies and the func�on of parking switches more Retail could include consumer
from demand-based to supply-based fuel for growth in the form of public retail, bars, restaurants, retail
garages. entertainment, grocery stores, and
mul�ple types of personal services.

27
Office Civic Space
Office could include professional Civic space includes large
offices, professional services or entertainment and cultural spaces,
uses like medical offices and clinics, assembly spaces, places of worship,
government offices, banks, or museums, galleries, and educa�onal
shared/co-working spaces, and facili�es.
social services.

Industrial/Cra�
Industrial includes light
manufacturing and fabrica�on, Open Space
produc�on, materials processing, Open space includes outdoor
research, design, tes�ng, sales and recrea�onal spaces and venues like
services. Cra� produc�on, a sub-set parks, plazas, and public green
of industrial, includes small-scale spaces/natural areas.
on-site produc�on and sale of arts,
cra�s, food, beverages, or other
type of products involving the use
of small-scale equipment and/or
hand tools instead of mass-
produc�on techniques. Cra�
produc�on may be more appropriate in areas near sensi�ve uses Parking
compared to more intense forms of industrial uses. Parking includes surface and
structure parking. Though to
improve land-use efficiency and
pedestrian orienta�on, any net gain
in parking should priori�ze coming
in the form of structured parking
such as a parking garage or tuck-
under parking. Growth scenarios
and space type appropriateness
levels assigned to parking in sub-
areas operate under this principle.
Parking need for future development is calculated based on industry
standards, adjusted for land use and redevelopment/parking principles

28
and goals established in this plan. Parking capacity totals and need
include on-street parking in the area.
Since parking is a use and a resource that can serve uses outside of a
par�cular sub-area, it should be noted that not all parking can or
necessarily should be supplied en�rely within a sub-area in all scenarios.
Addi�onally, since sub-area lines are drawn with the chief goal of
unifying development goals and principles for an area, there are cases
where mee�ng certain parking needs under certain scenarios won’t be
logical. As an example of an extreme case, the Third Street Corridor
today is nearly all surface parking suppor�ve of the Historic Core and
East Mall sub-areas. So it may seem over-supplied with parking under
even a medium-growth scenario. However, this sub area’s suppor�ve
parking func�on should be taken into considera�on, especially since it
hosts two conceptual projects that involve parking garages. That is to say,
the construc�on of a parking garage in this sub-area should not be
denied simply because it would result in a parking supply above the total
need projected in the sub-area’s high-growth scenario, because an
adjacent sub-area (the Historic Core) projects a fairly high need for
parking, even under a low-growth scenario, and a parking garage in the
Third Street Corridor sub-area should be expected to serve the needs of
the Historic Core.
In all cases, capacity numbers and parking should be considered
wholis�cally and within context, knowing that sub-areas may lend or
borrow parking supply from adjacent areas where addi�onal capacity
exists or is planned.
Promo�ng Flexibility
In prac�cally, all space types, especially retail, office, and industrial/cra�,
spaces should vary in size and layout to promote long-term economic
viability for different market sectors in the future. This will also facilitate
the establishment of local businesses and startup businesses that may
need to start small and grow over �me. Likewise, large office buildings
and spaces would do well to be designed in a way to accommodate
different adap�ve reuse in the future, especially for housing, or changes
in on-site workforce needs. Parking structures should also be designed
for adap�ve reuse to respond to new technology or shi� in
transporta�on trends and behaviors in the future.
29
Sub-Areas of Change/Improvement
ND. Northwest Downtown
This area, northwest of the Historic Core, is envisioned Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High
as an area largely suppor�ve of the Historic Core and Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
West Poyntz. Its biggest poten�al is in its capacity to
supply housing and addi�onal professional/office uses, Residen�al 198 High +17 215 +70 268 +291 489
Retail 3,000 Med +4,000 7,000 +17,500 20,500 + 72,500 75,000
with poten�al for retail/commercial uses as an extension Office 118,000 High +16,500 134,500 +69,500 187,500 +291,000 409,000
of the Historic Core. This area is envisioned to be Ind/Cra� 0 NA +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
anchored by the Riley County complex and poten�al Civic 69,000 Med +4,000 73,000 +17,500 86,500 +72,500 141,500
conceptual projects in the south and east por�ons with a Open Space 0 Low +0 0 +0 0 +15,000 15,000
Total Non-Res 190,000 - +24,500 214,500 +104,500 294,500 +436,000 626,000
revived pedestrian-oriented streetscape and more urban Parking 1,130 Low -328 802 -65 1,065 +1,030 2,160
feel reflec�ve of the Historic Core.
Figure 1.12: Northwest Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.

Figure 1.11: Northwest Sub-area Map.

30
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.13 (Upper Left): Northwest Downtown Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.14 (Upper Right): Northwest Downtown Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.15 (Lower Left): Northwest Downtown
Sub-area Medium Growth Model; Figure 1.16 (Lower Right); Northwest Downtown Sub-area High Growth Model.

31
Uses • ND-F7: Parking located to the back of buildings, mainly accessible via
alleys.
• ND-U1: Greater emphasis on office east, south,
• ND-F8: De-emphasis of drive-through uses, detracting from urban
and central and transitional uses between
form.
retail-commercial and residential.
• ND-U2: Greater emphasis on neighborhood- Streetscape
oriented retail east, south, and central.
• ND-U3: Extension of Historic Core uses • ND-S.1: Increased emphasis on
appropriate for areas immediately adjacent to the Historic Core. pedestrian experience.
• ND-U4: Upper-story residential appropriate throughout. • ND-S.2: Update street furnishings
• ND-U5: Mixed-use encouraged. (streetlamps, trash bins, benches, etc.)
• ND-U6: Greater emphasis on residential development westward and to match Historic Core and Manhattan
northward. Marketplace.
• ND-U7: Medium to high-density residential appropriate throughout. • ND-S.3: Increased shade trees and
• ND-U8: Stand-alone residential most appropriate at planning greenspace in tree lawn to improve pedestrian environment and
boundary edge. bikability.
• ND-U9: Government offices, operations, and services remaining as • ND-S.4: Lower design speeds of streets, especially Humboldt and
an anchor. Leavenworth.
• ND-S.5: Improved intersection crossings for pedestrians.
Form • ND-S.6: Minor formal gateway
opportunities on west end.
• ND-F1: Up to 5-story building height, though
higher may be appropriate near Historic Core Conceptual Projects
with at least 2 stories.
• ND-F2: Development sensitive to lower- • ND-CP1: Infill row housing on
density residential neighborhoods to the vacant lot on 600 Laramie.
north and west, tapering in height and • ND-CP2: Enhanced senior center
intensity toward those areas. complex with ground-floor
• ND-F3: Building coverage lower in areas community facilities and upper-
bordering the plan boundary to encourage more greenspace, story senior housing.
building coverage maximized in other areas.
• ND-F4: Structures built mostly up to the sidewalk and more visually
permeable, ground-level facades for non-residential uses along
street-facing facades.
• ND-F5: Upper stories incorporate windows to improve visibility and
natural surveillance of street.
• ND-F6: Development in historic district compatible with adjacent
historic development.

32
ND-CP1: Courtyard on Laramie

This project represents poten�al infill opportuni�es within the

Northwest Downtown sub-area, especially where there is underu�lized
land. While infill can happen at different scales, this project represents
an increase in denser residen�al development that is compa�ble with
surrounding development style, while mee�ng the goals of increasing
housing opportuni�es in and around downtown. This par�cular example
may come to frui�on under a low to medium growth scenario.

Figure 1.18: ND-CP1 townhome courtyard courtesy of Justin A. Jennings, while working for
Bruce McMillan Architects.

Figure 1.17: ND-CP1 townhome courtyard courtesy of Justin A. Jennings, while working for
Bruce McMillan Architects.
Figure 1.19: ND-CP1 townhome courtyard courtesy of Justin A. Jennings, while working for
Bruce McMillan Architects.

33
ND-CP2: Senior Village
This project represents reinvestment in infrastructure and residen�al
uses in the Northwest Downtown sub-area suppor�ve of the goal to
increase housing opportuni�es especially for seniors and their unique
housing needs. An enhanced senior center could be incorporated into a
larger residen�al structure, which could also incorporate other ac�ve
ground floor uses for accessory retail and offices suppor�ve of the larger
development and its residents and clients. This par�cular example would
come to frui�on under a medium to high growth scenario.

Figure 1.21: ND-CP2

Figure 1.20: ND-CP2

Figure 1.22: ND-CP2

34
WP. West Poyntz
This area on the west end of downtown is envisioned to Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High
func�on and feel more like a main street and an Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
extension of the 300 and 400 blocks of Poyntz Avenue in
Residen�al 14 Med +16 30 +54 68 +117 131
terms of form, use, and streetscape. This would primarily
Retail 0 Low +4,000 4,000 +13,500 13,500 +29,000 29,000
be achieved by infill development along the corridor, and Office 106,000 High +14,000 120,000 +47,000 153,000 +102,500 208,500
secondarily by adap�ve reuse of key buildings to create Ind/Cra� 0 NA +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
addi�onal ac�vity. Maintaining and preserving the Civic 36,000 Med +6,000 42,000 +20,000 56,000 +44,000 80,000
Open Space 1,000 Low +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
historic fabric along the corridor is also a key component Total Non-Res 142,000 - 24,000 166,000 +81,000 223,000 +176,000 318,000
to the vision of West Poyntz. Parking 731 Low -130 600 +125 855 +546 1,277
Figure 1.24: West Poyntz Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.

Figure 1.23: West Poyntz Sub-area Map.

35
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.25 (Upper Left): West Poyntz Downtown Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.26 (Upper Right): West Poyntz Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.27 (Lower Left): West Poyntz Sub-area Medium
Growth Model; Figure 1.28 (Lower Right); West Poyntz Sub-area High Growth Model.

36
Uses • WP-S4: Transitioning pedestrian realm to be more consistent with
300 and 400 blocks of Poyntz in conjunction with redevelopment
• WP-U1: Mixed-uses and upper-story residential more consistent with those blocks.
along Poyntz Avenue.
• WP-U2: Civic uses appropriate. Conceptual Projects
• WP-U3: Single-use, medium-density residential
appropriate along Houston Street if parking lots • WP-CP1: Houston Street
are redeveloped. Townhomes
• WP-U4: Office and Civic uses appropriate along Poyntz and as • WP-CP2: Mixed-Use Poyntz Infill
transitional uses to the west and north.
• WP-U5: Retail most appropriate along east edge to encourage
extension of Historic Core uses and activity.
• WP-U6: Adaptive reuse of large office buildings encouraged.

Form
• WP-F1: 2–5 story building height tapering
down along the southern edge of the sub-
area, sensitive to residential neighborhoods.
• WP-F2: Projects adjacent to historic districts
should be sensitive in design, including
materials and style.
• WP-F3: Infill development in underutilized
parking areas.
• WP-F4: Infill constructed near the sidewalk with a high degree of
ground floor permeability/visibility along street-facing facades.
• WP-F5: Preservation and rehabilitation of historic buildings.
• WP-F6: Accessory structured parking consolidating parking areas and
creating development opportunity.

Streetscape
• WP-S1: Maintaining and expanding
emphasis on pedestrian experience.
• WP-S2: Maintaining existing high-
quality streetscape.
• WP-S3: Maintaining and enhancing
gateway qualities.

37
WP-CP1: Houston Street Townhomes
This project represents poten�al infill opportuni�es within the West
Poyntz sub-area, especially where there is underu�lized land and parking
lots. This project represents an increase in denser residen�al
development downtown that is compa�ble with surrounding
development style and scale. A project like this would meet the goals of
increasing housing opportuni�es in and around downtown, while in this
case, being sensi�ve to historic neighborhoods south of this sub-area.
This par�cular example may come to frui�on under a medium-to-high-
growth scenario.

Figure 1.30: WP-CP1

Townhomes

Figure 1.29: WP-CP1

38
WP-CP2: Mixed-Use Poyntz Infill
This project represents poten�al infill opportuni�es within the West
Poyntz sub-area, especially where there is underu�lized land and parking
lots. A project like this would meet the goals of extending the main street
look, feel, and func�on on the 300 and 400 blocks of Poyntz further west
with a con�nued patern of pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use development
built up to the sidewalk with ac�ve ground-floor uses. This par�cular
example may come to frui�on under a medium- to high-growth scenario.
It is located between the former Mason’s Temple and the former Carnegie
Library.

Figure 1.33: WP-CP2

Figure 1.31: WP-CP2

Figure 1.34: WP-CP2

Figure 1.32: WP-CP2

39
TS. Third Street Corridor
This corridor, mainly including property along 3rd Street between the
Manhatan Marketplace and Blue Earth, is envisioned as the key to
linking these two sub-areas and the Historic Core. Aside from the sec�on
of this corridor between the alleys north and south of Poyntz Avenue,
this corridor is largely a harsh pedestrian environment, devoid of place,
being flanked by extensive parking lots on either side. As envisioned, this
corridor would create pedestrian-oriented in-fill development along the
majority of 3rd Street, improving pedestrian circula�on throughout
downtown and crea�ng a lively, con�guous experience between sub-
areas.

Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High

Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
Residen�al 2 Med +20 22 +77 79 +182 184
Retail 21,000 High +15,000 36,000 +57,500 78,500 +136,500 157,500
Office 8,000 Med +10,000 18,000 +38,500 46,500 +91,000 99,000
Ind/Cra� 0 NA +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
Civic 0 Med +5,000 5,000 +19,000 19,000 +45,500 45,500
Open Space 18,000 Low +0 18,000 +0 18,000 +30,000 48,000
Total Non-Res 29,000 - +30,000 59,000 +115,000 144,000 303,000 332,000
Parking Need 813 Med -632 181 -339 474 +205 1,018
*
Figure 1.36: Third Street Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.

Figure 1.35: Third Street Corridor Sub-area Map.

40
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.37 (Upper Left): Third Street Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.38 (Upper Right): Third Street Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.39 (Lower Left): Third Street Sub-area Medium Growth
Model; Figure 1.40 (Lower Right); Third Street Sub-area High Growth Model.

41
Uses Streetscape
• TS-U1: Mixed-use throughout. • TS-S1: Increased emphasis on
• TS-U2: Ground-floor retail/commercial especially pedestrian experience, comfort, and
in areas near Historic Core, Manhattan safety.
Marketplace, and Blue Earth sub-areas. • TS-S2: Maintaining existing high-
• TS-U3: Principal parking garages supportive of quality streetscape.
surrounding sub-areas. • TS-S3: Activating 3rd Street with
• TS-U4: Civic open spaces, green spaces, plazas, etc. adjacent development.
• TS-U5: Upper-story residential appropriate throughout. • TS-S4: Reduced curb-cuts along 3rd Street to improve pedestrian flow
and safety.
Form • TS-S5: Increased shade trees to improve pedestrian environment and
aesthetics.
• TS-F1: Up to 5-story building height, or as
• TS-S6: Enhanced gateway features at/near 3rd and Pierre Street
may be appropriate in and adjacent to
intersection and/or on K-177
historic district. A minimum of 2-story
approach.
buildings fronting 3rd Street would be
appropriate.
Conceptual Projects
• TS-F2: Building design sensitive to adjacent
historic buildings. • TS-CP1: West Mall Parking Garage
• TS-F3: High building coverage appropriate. • TS- CP2: Entertainment Core Park
• TS-F4: Buildings built up to the sidewalk along 3rd Street and more • TS- CP3: Farmers Market
permeable, ground-level facades for non-residential uses along permanent structure
street-facing facades, especially along 3rd Street. • TS-CP4: 3rd and Humboldt Parking
• TS-F5: Buildings prioritizing pedestrian orientation along 3rd Street. Garage
• TS-F6: Upper stories incorporate windows to improve visibility and
natural surveillance of street.
• TS-F7: Parking located to the back of buildings, mainly accessible via
alleys and side streets.
• TS-F8: Opportunity for architectural gateway around 3rd & Pierre
Street intersection.
• TS-F9: Architectural emphasis on portions of a building located
on/near intersections.

42
TS-CP1: West Mall Parking Garage
This project represents the need for suppor�ve parking infrastructure
required under a medium-to-high-growth scenario of the 3rd Street
Corridor sub-area. Since this sub-area contains significant parking supply
suppor�ve of adjacent sub-areas, this kind of project may also need to
materialize under a medium-to-high-growth scenario experienced in
adjacent sub-areas. This parking garage, which integrates ac�ve ground
floor uses along 3rd street, meets the goals of crea�ng a con�guous,
pedestrian-oriented street wall along 3rd Street while supplying
addi�onal parking for the Historic Core and East Mall sub-areas as they
develop. This garage could absorb a significant amount of surface parking
in the area, giving those areas opportunity to redevelop.

Figure 1.42: TS-CP1

Mall

Figure 1.43: TS-CP1

Figure 1.41: TS-CP1

43
Figure 1.44: TS-CP1 Figure 1.46: TS-CP1

Figure 1.45: TS-CP1

44
TS-CP2: Entertainment Core Park
This project represents the possibility of repurposing parking lots for
more ac�ve and pedestrian-friendly uses along the 3rd Street Corridor
sub-area. This project creates more con�guous open space near the
Historic Core for events and recrea�on and presents opportunity for
integra�ng more public art, as the space could also serve as a centralized
space between several nearby major art and entertainment anchors. This
project would only be possible in a high-growth scenario or if parking at
this loca�on were significantly supplied offsite. The project could also
include par�al development of the site to create more con�nuity along
Houston Street and create a unique structure, the design of which could
be integral to the park.

Figure 1.47: TS-CP2

Figure 1.48: TS-CP2

45
Figure 1.49: TS-CP2

46
TS-CP4: 3rd and Humboldt Parking Garage
This project represents the need for suppor�ve parking infrastructure
required under a medium-to-high-growth scenario of the 3rd Street
Corridor. Since this sub-area contains significant parking supply
suppor�ve of adjacent sub-areas, this kind of project may also need to
materialize under a medium-to-high-growth scenario experienced in
adjacent sub-areas. This parking garage, which integrates ac�ve ground
floor uses along 3rd street and Humboldt Street, meets the goals of
crea�ng a con�guous, pedestrian-oriented street wall along 3rd Street
while supplying addi�onal parking for the Historic Core sub-areas as they
develop. It would consolidate surface parking in the area, giving
opportunity for such areas to be redeveloped. This project would also
create addi�onal pedestrian ac�vity along a barren sec�on of Humboldt
Street with ground floor shops and enhanced streetscaping. Figure 1.51: TS-CP4

Figure 1.50: TS-CP4 Figure 1.52: TS-CP4

47
TS-CP3: Permanent Farmers Market
This project represents an eleva�on of an exis�ng community asset and
the establishing a more resilient and expanded farmers market. This
structure could be designed to func�on as a food hall throughout the
week, or as incubator space for new food-based businesses. Such
structure would allow a more year-round availability of the farmers
market and increase visibility, while crea�ng a unique des�na�on in the
region. Given the lack of demand for parking in the project’s area, it
could come to frui�on under any growth scenario.

Figure 1.54: TS-CP3

Figure 1.53: TS-CP3

Figure 1.55: TS-CP3

48
Figure 1.56: TS-CP3

49
EM. East Mall
This area, the majority of which includes the Manhatan Town Center
Mall property, is envisioned as a con�guous component of the
downtown, but with more meaningful physical integra�on. Underu�lized
parking areas surrounding the mall present opportunity to create new
unique commercial prospects should condi�ons align in a high-growth
scenario. Otherwise, con�nued adapta�on and viability is envisioned
with incremental improvements and major changes being limited to
wings of the main structure. These changes can include more progressive
concepts seen across the country for adap�ve reuse of malls beyond
tradi�onal retail, including residen�al integra�on or community and civic
uses.

Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High

Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
Residen�al 0 Med +18 18 +32 32 +59 59
Retail 200,000 High +72,500 272,500 +127,000 327,000 +237,000 437,000
Office 2,000 Med +12,000 14,000 +21,000 23,000 +39,500 41,500
Ind/Cra� 0 NA +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
Civic 0 Med +18,000 18,000 +31,500 32,000 +59,500 59,500
Open Space 0 Low +0 0 +5,000 5,000 +7,500 7,500
Total Non-Res 202,000 - +102,500 306,000 +180000 383,000 +366,082 596,500
Parking Need 1,433 Low -608 825 -392 1,041 +46 1,479
Figure 1.58: East Mall Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.

Figure 1.57: East Mall Sub-area Map.

50
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.59 (Upper Left): East Mall Sub-Area Base Model; Figure 1.60 (Upper Right): East Mall Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.61 (Lower Left): East Mall Sub-area Medium Growth Model;
Figure 1.62 (Lower Right); East Mall Sub-area High Growth Model.

51
Uses Conceptual Projects
• EM-U1: Continued adaptability to host a range of • EM-CP1: The Mall Loop
uses.
• EM-U2: Greater emphasis on opportunities for
new commercial, residential, and community
spaces within the mall.
• EM-U3: Principal parking structures to support
new growth.
• EM-U4: Civic open spaces, green spaces, plazas, etc. in and
surrounding the mall.
• EM-U5: New commercial and residential developments surrounding
the mall.

Form
• EM-F1: No building height limit.
• EM-F2: Development of underutilized parking
areas.
• EM-F3: Creation of more enclosed space
along mall exterior.
• EM-F4: Architectural emphasis on portions of
a building located on/near intersections.
• EM-F5: Improved permeability and activity around mall exterior.

Streetscape
• EM-S1: Creation of more traditional
street thoroughfare and pedestrian
experience around mall in infill
development context.
• EM-S2: Enhanced gateway at US-
24/Tuttle Creek Boulevard Entrance.

52
EM-CP1: The Mall Loop
This project represents an evolu�on of the Manhatan Town Center Mall
under a medium-to-high-growth scenario in which outlots surrounding
the mall are redeveloped to create a new commercial opportunity
unique to the region. In this concept, the exterior or the mall would be
reconfigured to be more external facing, transforming the space into a
more tradi�onal downtown experience with shop-lined streets. This
presents opportuni�es to create en�rely new streetscapes and
storefronts in the downtown.

Figure 1.63: EM-CP1

Figure 1.64: EM-CP1

53
Figure 1.65: EM-CP1 Figure 1.67: EM-CP1

Figure 1.66: EM-CP1 Figure 1.68: EM-CP1

54
Figure 1.69: EM-CP1

55
WF. West of Fourth Street
This area generally west of 4th Street between Fort Riley Boulevard and
Houston Street is envisioned as an area suppor�ve of Blue Earth and its
func�on as an outside draw to Manhatan. 4th Street is envisioned to
develop as a stronger commercial corridor to beter link the Historic Core
with the West Fourth, Blue Earth, and Riverfront sub-areas. While a mix
of uses appear opportune in this area, there is a significant poten�al for
residen�al, especially along the west side of this sub-area, transi�oning
to lower-density neighborhoods to the west. As well, addi�onal poten�al
for more cra� and makers space and entrepreneurial space would be
appropriate on the south end of the sub- area.

Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High

Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
Residen�al 107 High +49 156 +171 278 +251 358
Retail 13,000 Med +12,000 25,000 +43,000 56,000 +63,000 76,000
Office 71,000 Med +12,000 83,000 +43,000 114,000 +63,000 134,000
Ind/Cra� 25,000 Low +4,000 29,000 +14,500 39,000 +21,000 46,000
Civic 34,000 Low +4,000 38,000 +14,500 48,000 +21,000 55,000
Open Space 0 Low +0 0 + 0 +0 0
Total Non-Res 143,000 - +32,500 175,500 +114,000 257,000 +168,000 311,000
Parking Need 529 Low +65 594 +430 959 +669 1,198
Figure 1.71: West Fourth Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.

Figure 1.70: West Fourth Sub-area Map.

56
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.72 (Upper Left): West Fourth Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.73 (Upper Right): West Fourth Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.74 (Lower Left): West Fourth Sub-area Medium Growth
Model; Figure 1.75 (Lower Right); West Fourth Sub-area High Growth Model.

57
Uses • WF-F9: Parking located to the back of buildings, mainly accessible via
alleys.
• WF-U1: Greater emphasis on commercial,
• WF-F10: Phase out auto-oriented
office, retail along 4th Street and Fort Riley
development pattern.
Boulevard.
• WF-U2: Single-use medium to high-density Streetscape
residential most appropriate on west side of
sub-area. • WF-S1: Increasing emphasis on
• WF-U3: Upper-story residential appropriate throughout. pedestrian experience.
• WF-U4: Small-scale craft and makers space appropriate in south end • WF-S2: Upgrade streetscape and
of sub-area. furnishings (streetlamps, trash bins,
• WF-U5: Accessory parking garages and structured parking on east benches, etc.) in conjunction with
side of sub-area. redevelopment to match Blue Earth.
• WF-U5: De-emphasis on auto-oriented uses. • WF-S3: Maintain and re-establish mature street tree canopy,
especially along west side.
Form • WF-S4: Improve intersection
crossings for pedestrians.
• WF-F1: Development sensitive to lower- • WF-S5: Fill in sidewalk gaps
density residential neighborhoods to the throughout.
west, tapering in height and intensity
• WF-S6: Rehabilitate brick
toward those areas.
sidewalks as appropriate.
• WF-F2: 2 to 5-story building heights along
• WF-S7: Minor formal gateway
4th Street, tapering down to 2–3 stories
opportunities on west end.
along 5th Street.
• WF-S8: Beautification of Fort Riley
• WF-F3: Greater building coverage on east
Boulevard Corridor.
transitioning to lower building coverage and more greenspace on
west. Conceptual Projects
• WF-F4: Efficient use of building coverage and development density
on south end to take advantage of existing parking garage capacity. • WF-CP1: Be Able Catalyst Site
• WF-F5: Buildings built mostly up to the sidewalk and more visually
permeable ground-level facades along street-facing facades on east
side.
• WF-F6: Buildings set back more with emphasis on front yard
greenspace on west side.
• WF-F7: Upper stories incorporate windows to improve visibility and
natural surveillance of street.
• WF-F8: Development adjacent to historic district sensitive to
adjacent historic development.

58
WF-CP1: Be Able Center
This project represents an investment and enhancement to an exis�ng
social service ins�tu�on, to con�nue serving the community in the
context of surrounding redevelopment. Features on-site include
administra�ve offices, mee�ng spaces, skill-building/work rooms, a co-
op sale storefront, and a small dormitory.

Figure 1.77: WF-CP1

Figure 1.76: WF-CP1

59
R. Riverfront
This area on the south end of downtown is envisioned Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High
to be significantly transformed at the highest buildout Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
scenario. Anchored by a mixed-use, urban village
development, and branded by its loca�on and Residen�al 0 Med +0 0 +20 20 +177 177
Retail 23,000 Med +0 23,000 +9,000 32,000 +79,500 102,500
connec�on to the Kansas River, it is more evoca�ve of Office 21,000 Med +0 31,000 +12,000 33,000 +106,000 127,000
the Blue Earth sub-area. It is envisioned to contribute Ind/Cra� 36,000 High +0 36,000 +15,000 51,000 +132,500 100,500
greatly to the gateway into Manhatan, downtown, and Civic 0 Low +0 0 +4,000 4,000 +37,000 37,000
Open Space 0 Med +0 0 +0 0 +60,000 60,000
Linear Trail. Future development will set the stage to
Total Non-Res 80,000 - +0 80,000 +40,000 120,000 +287,000 367,000
link to a programmed riverfront along the Kansas River. Parking Need 155 Low +37 192 +128 283 +803 958

Figure 1.79: Riverfront Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.

Figure 1.78: Riverfront Sub-area Map.

60
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.79 (Upper Left): Riverfront Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.80 (Upper Right): Riverfront Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.81 (Lower Left): Riverfront Sub-area Medium Growth Model;
Figure 1.82 (Lower Right); Riverfront Sub-area High Growth Model.

61
Uses • R-S6: Filling sidewalk gaps and improving pedestrian crossings of Fort
Riley Boulevard and railroad.
• R-U1: Mixed-use commercial/residential east of
4th Street. Conceptual Projects
• R-U2: Infill commercial uses along 4th Street to
establish commercial corridor connecting with • R-CP1: MCM Catalyst Site
other sub-areas.
• R-U3: Industrial and craft spaces west of 4th
Street.
• R-U4: De-emphasis on auto-oriented uses.

Form
• R-F1: No limit on building height.
• R-F2: Accessory and principal parking
garages.
• R-F3: Efficient use of building coverage and
development density on north end to take
advantage of existing parking garage
capacity.
• R-F4: New pedestrian-oriented development.
• R-F5: Architectural gateway opportunities with vantage from K-177
entry.
• R-F6: Cohesive architectural style, creating a distinct district.
• R-F7: Buildings fronting on sidewalks along major pedestrian routes
to draw interest across Fort Riley Boulevard.

Streetscape
• R-S1: Creation of pedestrian
experience.
• R-S2: Introduction of cohesive, high-
quality streetscape and internal travel
ways.
• R-S3: Beautification of Fort Riley
Boulevard Corridor.
• R-S4: New railroad crossing at 4th
Street.
• R-S5: Introduction of new connections to Linear Trail and Riverfront.
62
R-CP1: MCM Catalyst Site
This project represents an expansion of the downtown urban fabric
south of Fort Riley Boulevard, taking advantage of a significant amount of
area currently controlled by a single industrial use property. This project
would provide the elusive opportunity to connect downtown with the
riverfront both physically and psychologically. This would be a cohesive
district featuring a mix of retail, office, and residen�al uses, situated
around a central open space. This scenario would require an enhanced
railroad crossing at 4th Street and envisioned to materialize under a high-
growth scenario.

Figure 1.84: R-CP1

Figure 1.83: R-CP1

63
Figure 1.84: R-CP1

Figure 1.86: R-CP1

Figure 1.85: R-CP1

64
Areas of Stability/Maintenance
HC. Historic Core
The heart of downtown is envisioned to largely stay Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High
unchanged, maintaining the charming, pedestrian- Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
oriented, historic area, with the main-street feel the
Residen�al 78 Med +6 84 +15 93 +19 97
community cherishes today. It will con�nue to focus Retail 260,000 High +16,000 275,000 +40,500 300,500 +51,500 311,500
largely on retail, restaurant, and entertainment. With Office 128,000 Med +8,000 136,000 +20,500 148,500 +26,000 154,000
rela�vely recent streetscape improvements and Ind/Cra� 0 Low +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
widespread revitaliza�on occurring over the past ten Civic 139,000 Med +10,000 149,000 +25,000 164,500 +32,500 171,500
Open Space 14,000 Low +0 14,000 +0 14,000 +0 10,000
years, there is litle in the way of new development that Total Non-Res 527,000 - +34,000 561,000 +86,500 613,500 +110,000 637,000
is envisioned in this area. However, infill development of Parking Need 326 NA +786 1,112 +890 1,216 +937 1,263
parking lots and non-historic buildings in this area would Figure 1.88: Historic Core Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.
be appropriate. Maintenance and incremental
improvements to streetscape priori�zing the pedestrian experience is
encouraged. Future parking supply for this area can be supported by the
development of parking structures in adjacent sub-areas under a
medium to high growth scenario.

Figure 1.87: Historic Core Sub-area Map

65
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.89 (Upper Left): Historic Core Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.90 (Upper Right): Historic Core Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.91 (Lower Left): Historic Core Sub-area Medium Growth
Model; Figure 1.92 (Lower Right); Historic Core Sub-area High Growth Model.

66
Uses Conceptual Projects
• HC-U1: Mix of retail, restaurant, entertainment, • HC-CP2: Wareham Hall
office, upper-floor residential, and civic spaces. Rehabilitation
• HC-U2: Auto-oriented uses prohibited.
• HC-U3: Adaptive reuse of existing historic
buildings as historically compatible.

Form
• HC-F1: Building height as historically
appropriate/compatible.
• HC-F2: Buildings constructed right up to the
sidewalk with a high degree of ground floor
permeability/visibility along street-facing
facades.
• HC-F3: Maximization of building coverage is
appropriate.
• HC-F4: High-level of architectural detail/ornamentation compatible
with historic district.
• HC-F5: Rehabilitation of existing historic buildings.
• HC-F6: Parking (if provided) located to the backs of buildings,
accessible via alleys.
• HC-F7: Parking mainly supplied by lots or structures on edge of or
outside of sub-area.

Streetscape
• HC-S1: Maintain pedestrian experience
as top priority.
• HC-S2: Maintain existing high-quality
streetscape.
• HC-S3: Incremental improvement of
pedestrian amenities.
• HC-S4: Explore opportunities for
temporary or permanent pedestrianization of streets.

67
HC-CP2: Wareham Hall Rehabilita�on
This project represents poten�al rehabilita�on opportuni�es within the
Historic Core sub-area that can elevate historic resources and take
advantage of historic preserva�on incen�ves, while mee�ng the goals of
adap�vely reusing buildings and conver�ng them to more viable uses,
especially in the realm of art and entertainment-based civic spaces. This
par�cular example may come to frui�on under any growth scenario,
though with increased foot traffic, increased parking supply off-site may
be needed, which may require a more medium-to-high growth scenario
in an adjacent sub-area.

Figure 1.94: HC-CP3: Revitalized Wareham Opera House interior, Courtesy of Wareham Hall,
Inc. and Middle.

Figure 1.93: HC-CP3: Revitalized Wareham Opera House, Courtesy of Wareham Hall, Inc. and
Middle.

Figure 1.95: HC-CP3: Revitalized Wareham Opera House interior, Courtesy of Wareham Hall,
Inc. and Middle.

68
Figure 1.97: HC-CP3: Revitalized Wareham Opera House interior, Courtesy of Wareham Hall, Figure 1.98: HC-CP3: Revitalized Wareham Opera House interior, Courtesy of Wareham Hall,
Inc. and Middle. Inc. and Middle.

Figure 1.96: HC-CP3: Revitalized Wareham Opera House interior, Courtesy of Wareham Hall,
Inc. and Middle.

69
MM. Manhatan Marketplace
This area on the north end of downtown is envisioned Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High
to largely remain unchanged as a major retail hub and Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
residen�al pocket of downtown. Given the recent
redevelopment efforts in this area, there are s�ll Residen�al 167 High +2 169 +16 183 +48 215
Retail 244,000 High +4,500 248,500 +29,000 273,000 +88000 332,000
relevant uses, forms, and streetscapes throughout that Office 3,000 Low +1,000 4,000 +8,000 11,000 +24000 27,000
need only to be maintained at this �me. Incremental Ind/Cra� 5,000 NA +0 5,000 +0 5,000 +0 5,000
improvements related to improved u�liza�on of land Civic 0 Low +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
Open Space 3,000 Low +0 3,000 +0 3,000 +0 3,000
and underu�lized parking areas consistent and Total Non-Res 252,000 - +5,500 257,500 +37,000 288,000 +112,000 364,000
compa�ble with uses found in the sub-area are seen as Parking Need 969 Med -39 930 +61 1,030 +302 1,271
posi�ve. Figure 1.100: Manhattan Marketplace Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.

Figure 1.99: Manhattan Marketplace Sub-area Map.

70
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.101 (Upper Left): Manhattan Marketplace Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.102 (Upper Right): Manhattan Marketplace Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.103 (Lower Left): Manhattan
Marketplace Sub-area Medium Growth Model; Figure 1.104 (Lower Right); Manhattan Marketplace Sub-area High Growth Model.

71
Uses
• MM-U1: Continue emphasis on mixed-scale
retail and commercial uses throughout.
• MM-U2: Continue emphasis on medium to high-
density housing as a transition to low/medium-
density residential neighborhoods to the west.

Form
• MM-F1: Up to 5-story building height,
with taller buildings in the sub-district
reserved for residential.
• MM-F2: Maintaining transitional height to
residential neighborhoods to the west.
• MM-F3: Infill development in
underutilized parking areas.
• MM-F4: Better enclosure of internal street network encouraged.
• MM-F5: Maintain pedestrian-oriented scale and design west of
North 3rd Place.

Streetscape
• MM-S1: Maintain emphasis and
prioritization on pedestrian experience.
• MM-S2: Maintain existing high-quality
streetscape and landscaping.

72
BE. Blue Earth
This area on the south of the Historic Core is envisioned Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High
to largely stay the same as a civic focal point of Cap.
Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.
downtown with hotels, the conference, center, and Flint
Hills Discovery Center. Given the recent redevelopment Residen�al 433* Med +8 441 +18 451 +56 489
Retail 33,000 Low +4,000 37,000 +9,000 42,000 +28,000 61,000
efforts in this area, there are s�ll relevant uses, forms, Office 12,000 Med +4,000 16,000 +9,000 21,000 +28,000 40,000
and streetscapes throughout that only need to be Ind/Cra� 0 NA +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
maintained at this �me. Incremental improvements Civic 128,000 High +9,500 137,500 +21,000 149,000 +65,000 193,000
related to improved u�liza�on of land and underu�lized Open Space 87,000 Med +1,500 88,500 +3,000 90,000 +0 96,000
Total Non-Res 173,000 - +19,000 191,500 +42,000 212,000 +131,000 303,000
parking infrastructure consistent with uses found in the Parking Need 1,243 Med -142 1,101 -78 1,165 +171 1,414
sub-area are encouraged. As would be a stronger urban
Figure 1.106: Blue Earth Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table. *Includes 394 hotel rooms
corridor along 4th Street to connect the Historic Core
with the Riverfront.

Figure 1.105: Blue Earth Sub-area Map.

73
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.107 (Upper Left): Blue Earth Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.108 (Upper Right): Blue Earth Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.109 (Lower Left): Blue Earth Sub-area Medium Growth
Model; Figure 1.110 (Lower Right); Blue Earth Sub-area High Growth Model.

74
Uses
• BE-U1: Continued emphasis on visitor-oriented
uses, entertainment uses, civic uses, mixed-use,
and commercial retail, office, restaurants, and
services.
• BE-U2: Infill commercial uses along 4th Street to
establish commercial corridor.
• BE-U3: Development of uses to take advantage of parking garage
capacity.

Form
• BE-F1: No limit on building height, or as
may be appropriate in and adjacent to
historic district.
• BE-F2: Infill development in underutilized
parking areas to take advantage of parking
garage capacity.
• BE-F3: Maintain pedestrian-oriented
design.
• BE-F4: Maintain standard of building quality and style.
• BE-F5: Continued integration of Union Pacific Train Depot function.

Streetscape
• BE-S1: Maintain emphasis on
pedestrian experience.
• BE-S2: Maintain existing high-quality
streetscape and amenities.
• BE-S3: Maintain existing recreational
and open-spaces.
• BE-S4: Beautification of Fort Riley
Boulevard Corridor.

75
M. Makers
This area, in the southwest corner of the plan area, is
Space Type Current Approp. Low Med High
envisioned to largely stay the same. While improvements Cap.
and addi�onal development in the area are welcomed, it Net Tot. Net Tot. Net Tot.

is important that this area remain suppor�ve of light Residen�al 0 Low +4 4 +9 9 +28 28
industrial and service commercial uses in the core of Retail 34,000 Med +8,000 42,000 +18,000 52,000 +56,000 90,000
Office 12,000 Low +4,000 16,000 +9,000 21,000 +28,000 40,000
Manhatan. If redevelopment in adjacent sub-areas Ind/Cra� 20,000 High +10,500 30,500 +23,500 43,500 +74,500 94,500
materialize, this area could provide support with Civic 0 Low +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
addi�onal industrial, cra� and makers spaces, Open Space 0 Low +0 0 +0 0 +0 0
Total Non-Res 66,000 - +22,500 88,500 +50,500 116,500 +158,500 224,500
entrepreneurial, and research/development uses.
Parking Need 378 Low -199 179 -144 234 +71 449
Figure 1.112: Makers Sub-area Space Type Capacity Table.

Figure 1.111: Makers Sub-area Map.

76
Growth Scenarios

BASE LOW

MED HIGH

Figure 1.113 (Upper Left): Makers Sub-area Base Model; Figure 1.114 (Upper Right): Makers Sub-area Low Growth Model; Figure 1.115 (Lower Left): Makers Sub-area Medium Growth Model;
Figure 1.116 (Lower Right); Makers Sub-area High Growth Model.

77
Uses
• M-U1: Industrial and craft spaces south of Fort
Riley Boulevard.
• M-U2: Retail and service commercial along Fort
Riley Boulevard appropriate.
• M-U3: Uses north of Fort Riley Boulevard
sensitive to residential uses to the north.

Form
• M-F1: Up to 3 stories north of Fort Riley
Boulevard.
• M-F2: Utilitarian and practical for industrial
uses.
• M-F3: Pedestrian orientation and quality
construction along Fort Riley Boulevard.

Streetscape
• M-S1: Sidewalks installed in coordination
with redevelopment.
• M-S2: Beautification of Fort Riley
Boulevard Corridor.

78
79
 Part 2
Policy
Goals & Principals
80
 Chapter 1

Planning
Context
81
Chapter 1: Planning Context
As the background report in this document
summarizes in Chapter 1: Planning Context,
downtown has a long and rich development
history. This plan is just one of many that have
come and those yet to come. As the 2000
Downtown Tomorrow Plan’s success lends to the
credibility and confidence to establish and carry
out this plan, the 2024 Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan will lend
credence to the next if it is carried out well. Its results and means to
achieve those results, if posi�vely perceived, will pay dividends in the
form of confidence to be built upon for decades to come. In this way,
the plan must be sustainable in process and outcome, not achieving
quick and cheap wins if they are at the expense of community trust
and the long-term benefit of Manhatan.
This chapter aims to look at this plan through the lens of broader
history, envisioning how this plan and its results might be looked back
on by the Manhatan community in the future.
Sub-Vision 1.2: Downtown redevelopment and
improvement efforts are collabora�ve, open, and consider
the interests and needs of individuals and the community
as a whole, contribu�ng to the well-being and prosperity
of all Manhatan.
Goals and Principles
1.2.1: Propor�onally support projects with an outsized posi�ve
impact for the greater community.
1.2.2: Meaningfully involve, engage, and inform the community as
well as individual stakeholders during implementa�on and crea�on of
future development plans.
1.2.3: Promote a coordinated approach to planning and
implementa�on, involving and leveraging relevant community
organiza�ons and partnerships to maximize efforts.

Sub-Vision 1.1: Downtown respects the posi�ve

contribu�ons of past while looking to the future needs of
the community.
Goals and Principles
1.1.1: Preserve, maintain, and build up what is good and working
about downtown.
1.1.2: Adapt when things are not working downtown.
1.1.3: Support changes to downtown that are reflec�ve of who we are
Figure 2.1.0: Steering Committee Mapping Exercise.
and what we value as a community.

82
Figure 2.1.1: Riverfront sub-area conceptual project, R-CP1, Stantec, 2024
Sub-Vision 1.3: There are mul�ple posi�ve changes
downtown clearly atributable to the Beyond Tomorrow
Downtown Plan.
Goals and Principles
1.3.1: Complete district-scale redevelopment projects with cohesive
and dis�nguishable func�on and feel.
1.3.2: Complete mul�ple conceptual projects or projects that anchor
and spark addi�onal development interests.
83
Sub-Vision 1.4: The success of the Beyond Tomorrow
Downtown Plan spawns and contributes to other
successful plans and ini�a�ves.
Goals and Principles
1.4.1: Support the crea�on of auxiliary plans adjacent to the
downtown area as well as their visions, recommenda�ons, and
efforts.
1.4.2: Create a plan for the area east of Tutle Creek Boulevard that is
complimentary to and considers the needs of downtown.
1.4.3: Create a plan for the Poyntz Avenue corridor that considers the
appropriate land uses and transporta�on/streetscape improvements
west of downtown and seeks gateway opportuni�es.
1.4.4: Create a plan for the Goodnow Park neighborhood area as a
residen�al and neighborhood commercial component of the greater
downtown.
1.4.5: Create a plan for the Kansas riverfront adjacent to downtown,
considering the connec�on to recrea�onal opportuni�es from
downtown, natural resource conserva�on, and place-making.

Figure 2.1.2: Auxiliary Downtown Planning Areas Map.

84
 Chapter 2

Land Use,
Redevelopment,
& Recreation
85
Chapter 2: Land Use, Redevelopment, and Recrea�on 2.1.4: Develop and foster more mixed-use developments, especially
ver�cal mixed-use.
Among downtown’s greatest assets is its compact
urban environment and mix of uses. This
contributes greatly to its pedestrian friendliness.
However, downtown is not uniformly compact and
urban; there are pockets of underu�lized areas ripe
for redevelopment supported by the community.
While there will need to be considera�ons for sensi�ve land uses and
historic structures, there is an overall agreement on downtown’s high
development poten�al. Green space and recrea�on are also an
important component to land use, se�ng the stage for community
events and gatherings. Green space makes the downtown
environment more pleasant and ac�ve with recrea�onal
opportuni�es and is regarded as an important quality of life
component to downtown and the community.
While there are more specifics on the vision for individual sub-areas
established in the Part 1: Development Goals and Principles sec�on of Figure 2.2.0: Example of high-density housing.
this plan, this chapter establishes more general vision for physical
development downtown with corresponding goals and principles. This
is intended to establish more basic and universal goals and principles
that can give broader guidance to sub-areas, elimina�ng the need
restate them again and again. When in clear conflict however, the
sub-area principles and goals should generally take precedence.

Sub-Vision 2.1: Land is well u�lized, has a diversity of uses,

and is performing at its highest and best use.
Goals and Principles
2.1.1: Develop denser, taller, mul�-story buildings with higher building
coverage and minimal surface parking.
2.1.2: Design buildings flexibly, to be easily repurposed.
2.1.3: Construct high-quality buildings out of durable materials.

86

Figure 2.2.1: Example of vertical mixed-use building.
Figure 2.2.2: Example of vertical mixed-use building.
87
Sub-Vision 2.2: Development and redevelopment of
downtown is built to cater to the pedestrian in scale, use,
and design.
Goals and Principles
2.2.1: De-emphasize and phase out drive-through, auto-oriented, and
auto-scaled uses and development paterns where inappropriate.
2.2.2: Reduce the amount of surface parking area and limit sidewalk–
driveway conflicts by minimizing curb cuts.
2.2.3: Emphasize ground floor and primary building façade
pedestrian-scale architectural details: permeability, window area,
variable façade planes, ornamenta�on, rhythm, materials, ligh�ng,
and signage.
2.2.4: Build new buildings largely up to the sidewalk with primary
entrances fron�ng onto sidewalks.
2.2.5: Emphasize upper-story design elements that reinforce
pedestrian-scale interest: delinea�on of stories, windows, roof lines,
variable façade planes, signage, ornamenta�on, materials, and
projec�ons.
2.2.6: Locate parking to the back of buildings as to minimize visibility
from the primary façade and adjacent public right-of-way, primarily
u�lizing alley access.
2.2.7: Encourage buildings to relate to and interact with the public
realm with enhanced streetscapes, and spill-out zone elements, such
as outdoor dining, sea�ng, sidewalk sales.

Figure 2.2.4: Pedestrian use and scale, E-CP1.
Vision 2.3: Zoning creates ever-present opportuni�es for
redevelopment and growth of downtown.
Goals and Principles
2.3.1: Amend zoning regula�ons for the CD district to achieve the
vision, goals, and principles of the plan.
2.3.2: Rezone areas of downtown to align with the land use and
redevelopment vision, goals, and principles of the plan and unlock
development poten�al.
2.3.3: Maintain a healthy amount of capacity for growth.
Vision 2.4: Redevelopment is considerate to sensi�ve land
uses and structures.
Goals and Principles
2.4.1: Consider impact of redevelopment to exis�ng sensi�ve land
uses and structures, including low-density residen�al uses and
historically significant structures.
88
2.4.2: U�lize tools such as buffering, landscaping, step-back
architecture, compa�ble materials, height limita�ons, massing, and
site design techniques when minimizing impact to sensi�ve land uses
and structures is determined to be a high priority.
Sub-Vision 2.5: A significant amount of redevelopment in
designated areas of change and improvement have
materialized and mul�ple community-level interest
projects have come to frui�on.
Goals and Principles
2.5.1: Create and u�lize economic development incen�ves to spur
redevelopment.
2.5.2: Explore and pursue high-priority conceptual projects.
2.5.3: Con�nuously review and update regula�ons, communica�on
systems, policies, and workflow processes to increase effec�veness,
efficiency, and accuracy in city review and approval of projects
mee�ng the vision, goals, and principles of the BTDP.
2.5.4: Regularly engage with the development community to
understand market condi�ons, coordinate on projects, and capitalize
on mutually beneficial opportuni�es.
2.5.5: Consider public-private partnerships as ways to leverage
resources and maximize efforts, efficiency, and opportuni�es.
Figure 2.2.4: R-CP1: Riverfront Redevelopment Conceptual Project

Sub-Vision 2.6: Downtown has high-quality, well-

Figure 2.2.5: Improved pedestrian and bicycle access to Linear Trail
connected civic spaces, public spaces, and recrea�onal
ameni�es.
Goals and Principles
2.6.1: Seek opportuni�es for addi�onal parks and recrea�onal
facili�es downtown.
2.6.2: Create direct, safe, comfortable bicycle and pedestrian access
to Linear Trail and the riverfront from downtown.
2.6.3: Maintain and upgrade exis�ng public spaces, parks, and
recrea�onal ameni�es to meet future needs.
2.6.4: Con�nue to invest in and support civic uses contribu�ng to the
culture and branding of Manhatan.
2.6.5: Improve sidewalks, intersec�ons, and crossings to priori�ze
pedestrian safety, comfort, and convenience.

89
 Chapter 3

Economy
& Tourism
90
Chapter 3: Economy & Tourism
Economic vitality is the founda�on of long-term
viability and func�onality of downtown. Downtown
has historically been the economic focal point of the
community, especially for local businesses. In recent
years, downtown has been doing very well,
especially at drawing visitors and dollars from
outside the local trade area with a wide range of goods, services, and
experiences (see Figure 3.13 in Appendix A). Commercial space
occupancy is high and there are several highly an�cipated commercial
prospects on the horizon.
Downtown must con�nue to build off this success and create new
opportuni�es for economic growth. There are also many sectors that
could be built in downtown that would support exis�ng businesses
and spur addi�onal interests, namely art and entertainment, essen�al
retail, and restaurants, all of which are highly desired by the
community. As well, developing new housing in and around
downtown mul�plies these efforts.
3.1.4: Increase the number of businesses and employment
opportuni�es (currently 345 and 2,895 respec�vely).
3.1.5: Increase the number of commercial spaces and commercial
square footage while maintaining a healthy level of commercial space
occupancy.
3.1.6: Expand hours of ac�vity downtown to create a more 24-hour,
week-round district with diversity of businesses and increased
residen�al units in a mixed-use se�ng.
3.1.7: Expand essen�al uses to meet local needs of
community/surrounding neighborhoods and contribute to economic
resiliency, such as food stores, healthcare, government services, and
retail.
3.1.8: Create a variety of commercial spaces to increase market
resilience and evolve with trends in retail, office, and other
commerce.

Sub-Vision 3.1: Downtown is the premier commercial

ac�vity center of Manhatan with a resilient economy and
diverse business/employment opportunity.
Goals and Principles
3.1.1: Maintain and expand the diversity of businesses, ac�vi�es, and
events downtown to grow complementary economic ac�vity.
3.1.2: Foster an environment friendly to local business, start-up
businesses, and entrepreneurial endeavors.
3.1.3: Support Downtown Manhatan, Inc. and other downtown
business associa�ons that unify, market, serve, beau�fy, and recruit
downtown businesses and provide economic development services.
Figure 2.3.0: CivicPlus building.

91
3.1.9: Create and u�lize economic development incen�ves to atract 3.2.8: Create a permanent structure for the Farmers Market,
industries, business, and development interests downtown. increasing visibility, year-round market viability, and number of
vendors.
3.1.10: Increase housing in and around downtown to support
downtown businesses patronage and provide workforce housing. 3.2.9: Create and u�lize economic development incen�ves to improve
downtown as a des�na�on for visitors.
Sub-Vision 3.2: Downtown is a local, regional, and na�onal
3.2.10: Increase “third place” businesses, establishments, and spaces
des�na�on for visitors with diverse atrac�ons, a strong
for people to meet, socialize, and relax. Third places include cafes,
sense of place, and businesses/ameni�es suppor�ve of bars, clubs, community centers, public libraries, gyms, bookstores,
tourism. maker spaces, churches, and parks.
Goals and Principles 3.2.11: Recognize the economic impact of quality-of-life projects and
3.2.1: Maintain and create an authen�c, high-quality, atrac�ve, and support and incen�vize them when appropriate.
unique environment that draws locals and visitors.
3.2.2: Leverage historic assets as a draw to downtown and a major
character-defining feature.
3.2.3: Invest in streetscape and public space improvements that
enhance the pedestrian experience and contribute to quality of place.
3.2.4: Further develop downtown as a des�na�on, celebra�ng and
priori�zing the pedestrian experience.
3.2.5: Con�nue to support the development of key visitor-drawing
assets and infrastructure: hotels, mee�ng and conference spaces,
unique shops and restaurants, art, museums, entertainment venues,
events, recrea�on, trails, Flint Hills gravel road network, and public
transit.
3.2.6: Maintain a high pull factor to draw and capture outside dollars
to the community.
3.2.7: Encourage more uses suppor�ve of the Manhatan Conference
Center, Discovery Center, Museum of Art and Light, and Blue Earth
area.
Figure 2.3.1: Nightlife on Poyntz, HC-CP3.

92
Sub-Vision 3.3: Downtown is a showcase of Manhatan’s 3.3.5: Keep downtown thriving, vibrant, and ac�ve.
quality of life and local culture, a community asset for 3.3.6: Increase the number of high-quality, unique local restaurants
business and employment recruitment, atrac�ng and drinking establishments.
prospec�ve students, and talent reten�on. 3.3.7: Maintain and invest in high-quality streetscape.
Goals and Principles
3.3.8: Con�nue to promote and market downtown at a regional, state,
3.3.1: Increase housing opportuni�es for young professionals and and na�onal level.
entrepreneurs in downtown’s more urban environment.
3.3.2: Maintain the clean and welcoming environment of downtown.
3.3.3: Promote and showcase local fare and cra�, and local businesses
and events.
3.3.4: Promote local culture and connec�on to KSU, the Flint Hills,
Fort Riley, etc.

Figure 2.3.3: Example of local fare and craft.

Figure 2.3.2: Downtown art sale. Photo courtesy of Downtown Manhattan, Inc.

93
 Chapter 4

Demographics

94
Chapter 4: Demographics
While Manhatan’s popula�on has remained
stagnant over the past 10 years, it is an�cipated that
growth will resume just as it has regionally.
Downtown can and will play a significant role in both
absorbing and accommoda�ng this growth, as well
as sparking it—the former through the development
of housing in and around downtown and the later through economic
development, job crea�on, and quality of life atrac�ng prospec�ve
residents.

Sub-Vision 4.1: Downtown is an ever-growing part of

town, contribu�ng to the growth and stability of the
community.
Goals and Principles Figure 2.4.0: Compact Housing Development.

4.1.1: Increase downtown’s resident popula�on, absorbing current
housing demand and future popula�on increase.
4.1.2: Increase residen�al op�ons downtown—especially for seniors
and young professionals—with employment and daily needs nearby.
4.1.3: Invest in, showcase, and leverage downtown as a major quality-
of-life component of Manhatan that is both atrac�ve to prospec�ve
residents and aids in the reten�on of exis�ng residents.
Sub-Vision 4.2: Downtown is accessible and welcoming to
all ages, abili�es, and socio-economic backgrounds.
Goals and Principles
4.2.1: Repair, maintain, and improve sidewalks and crossings
throughout the downtown area to improve accessibility and safety,
bringing the pedestrian network up to standard.
4.2.2: Maintain downtown’s func�on as a hub for community services.
4.2.3: Support development and maintenance of housing for special
popula�ons in and around downtown, including the disabled,
vulnerable, housing-insecure, income-qualified, seniors, etc.
4.2.5: Maintain/improve access to services for the homeless
community and other vulnerable popula�ons.
4.2.6: Improve bikability, walkability, and transit access in and around
downtown.

95
4.2.7: Encourage and enforce accessibility standards for buildings and 4.3.4: Minimize displacement of current residents in and around
parking both on and off-street. downtown that may occur from redevelopment and improvements or
rising housing costs.

Figure 2.4.1: Accessibility.

Figure 2.4.2: Minimizing Displacement.
Sub-Vision 4.3: Downtown is surrounded by choice
neighborhoods with thriving households. Current property
owners and residents are contribu�ng to, involved with,
have a stake in, and share in the success of downtown.
Goals and Principles
4.3.1: Support the rehabilita�on and revitaliza�on of residen�al
structures and neighborhoods around downtown.
4.3.2: Support the development of affordable housing and workforce
housing in and around downtown.
4.3.3: Protect the character of established/tradi�onal neighborhoods
around downtown.

96
 Chapter 5

Housing

97
Chapter 5: Housing 5.1.1: Increase the number and density of housing units in the
downtown plan area, absorbing current housing demand and future
According to the 2022 Housing Market Analysis popula�on increase.
conducted for Manhatan, there is a shortage of
housing in the community. More housing downtown 5.1.2: Increase underdeveloped types of housing units in the
would sa�sfy a market demand for more urban living downtown plan area, where appropriate, with townhomes,
op�ons in Manhatan, appealing to young small/medium mul�-family, mixed-use, condominiums, and large
professionals, seniors, and young families, while mul�-family.
contribu�ng to allevia�ng this shortage. Addi�onal housing 5.1.3: Prevent the loss of housing unit stock around downtown by
downtown puts more people in proximity to goods and services, encouraging rehabilita�on and reinvestment in neglected proper�es.
allowing residents mul�ple transporta�on op�ons outside of personal
vehicles, including walking, biking, and public transit, while reducing 5.1.4: Support subtle and appropriate densifica�on strategies for
strain on parking demands. Housing downtown, especially in a mixed- neighborhoods surrounding downtown, such as accessory dwelling
use se�ng, creates more around-the-clock ac�vity. This would units, small lot development, vacant lot development, and “missing
increase economic ac�vity and district vibrancy by crea�ng more middle” housing types.
resident patrons, while also increasing safety and security with more
5.1.5: Aim for downtown to absorb 10–15% of all housing built in the
“eyes on the street” throughout the day and evening. Developing
city in the next 20 years.
more housing downtown seems to support nearly every other goal in
this plan.
About 225 residen�al units were gained downtown since the
adop�on of the 2000 Downtown Tomorrow Plan. It is reasonable to
expect growth of housing to con�nue downtown over the next couple
of decades. One of the biggest priori�es of this plan is to see
downtown absorb a significant propor�on of the community’s
housing demand in the community over the next couple of decades.

Sub-Vision 5.1: Downtown has many new housing op�ons

that support downtown business with a lively, ac�ve
atmosphere and support the housing needs of people at
mul�ple stages of life and levels of incomes.
Goals and Principles
Figure 2.5.0: Quality High-Density Housing.

98
 5.1.12: Encourage upper-story residen�al in new and exis�ng
development.

Figure 2.5.1: Quality Medium-Density Housing.

5.1.6: Create and u�lize economic development and housing

development incen�ves to spur the development of addi�onal
housing downtown.
5.1.7: Widen peak periods of ac�vity and increase safety downtown Figure 2.5.2: Medium-Density Housing with Compatible Characteristics.
by increasing the number of downtown residents.
Sub-Vision 5.2: Neighborhoods surrounding downtown are
5.1.8: Create more resident-patrons of downtown businesses by highly desirable and revived due to proximity to a lively,
increasing the number of dwelling units downtown.
walkable downtown with a myriad of ameni�es.
5.1.9: Support the development and maintenance of all housing in the
Goals and Principles
downtown area, especially housing geared toward young
professionals, young families, seniors, and income-qualified. 5.2.1: Consider an investment in downtown as an investment in
downtown neighborhoods.
5.1.10: Support the development and maintenance of all housing in
the downtown area, especially affordable and workforce housing. 5.2.2: Create more housing in highly loca�on-efficient areas in and
around downtown to take advantage of exis�ng infrastructure,
5.1.11: Encourage adap�ve reuse of buildings into residen�al when
walkability, and proximity to goods as services.
appropriate.

99
5.2.3: Create and u�lize economic development and housing
development incen�ves to encourage rehabilita�on and reinvestment
in housing and neighborhoods around downtown.
5.2.4: Improve walkability, bikability, and public transit in and around
downtown.

Figure 2.5.4: Attached Accessory Dwelling Unit.

Figure 2.5.3: Mixed Use Building with Upper-story Residential.

100
 Chapter 6

Community
Services
101
Chapter 6: Community Services
The services and organiza�ons downtown are cri�cal
to the health and well-being of Manhatan ci�zens
and the region. Their physical loca�on in downtown
and in rela�on to each other is key to access and
u�liza�on for the most vulnerable. Maintaining and
diversifying these services in proximity to downtown
is a high priority, especially in the wake of poten�al improvements.
Increasing their accessibility through addi�onal housing opportuni�es
and improved transporta�on infrastructure is also priority.

Sub-Vision 6.1: Downtown hosts a diverse network of

community/social services backed by the community.
Goals and Principles
Figure 2.6.0: Access to Health and Wellness Services.
6.1.1: Support social services in the downtown area.
6.1.2: Expand social service-adjacent services in the downtown area,
especially health, wellness, food access, and medical care.
6.1.3: Minimize displacement of social services that could result from
redevelopment and improvements or rising rents.
6.1.4: Encourage collabora�on between social services, health
services, advocacy groups, agencies/organiza�ons, and faith-based
organiza�ons for more comprehensive and holis�c service.

Figure 2.6.1: Access to Healthy Food.

102
Sub-Vision 6.2: Community/social services downtown are
accessible and well-connected.
Goals and Principles
6.2.1: Support and increase public transit opera�ons in downtown
and route infrastructure to improve access to services.
6.2.2: Create affordable and workforce housing in and around
downtown to provide housing for community service clients and
employees.
6.2.3: Improve and maintain sidewalk network to improve
accessibility.
6.2.4: Improve and maintain bicycle network to improve accessibility.
6.2.5: Integrate accessible parking spaces into street redesigns to
improve access to social services. Figure 2.6.2: Access to Public Transportation.

103
 Chapter 7

Art,
Entertainment,
& Culture
104
Chapter 7: Art, Entertainment, and Culture 7.1.6: Con�nue to support the Flint Hills Discovery Center (FHDC) and
its Founda�on’s projects tying together the natural, ar�s�c, and
Downtown is emerging as an art, entertainment, educa�onal elements of the community and region.
and cultural hub of the community and region.
Mul�ple projects in the works would put Manhatan
on the map as a premier des�na�on for such
experiences. Suppor�ng these efforts and
con�nuing to foster these opportuni�es will have
major benefits to Manhatan’s economic outlook, improving tourism,
visita�on, recruitment, marke�ng, and quality of life. This will also
further define and promote the iden�ty and culture of the
community.

Sub-Vision 7.1: Downtown is the premier art,

entertainment, and cultural hub of the region, draw for
visitors and tourists, and a pillar of economic ac�vity.
Goals and Principles
Figure 2.7.0: HC-CP2: Wareham Hall Renovation.
7.1.1: Increase art in the public realm: murals, sculptures, street art,
art trails, and other exhibi�ons. Sub-Vision 7.2: Downtown is the cultural zenith of
7.1.2: Expand private and public facili�es for hos�ng events, Manhatan and the Flint Hills Region.
programming, exhibi�ons, and performances.
Goals and Principles
7.1.3: Create high-caliber art and entertainment venues as well as a
7.2.1: Con�nue to leverage physical loca�on as the gateway to the
range of smaller venues, contribu�ng to the development of an
Flint Hills and strengthen our �es to the Tallgrass and Flint Hills
entertainment corridor.
brands.
7.1.4: Create more opportuni�es for outdoor performances,
7.2.2: Create beter access to recrea�onal opportuni�es and natural
edutainment opportuni�es, and community building, on all scales.
resources of the Flint Hills and Kansas River
7.1.5: Create a permanent structure for the Farmers Market,
7.2.3: Integrate more na�ve plants and materials into landscaping and
increasing visibility and showcasing Manhatan culture and the local
na�ve materials into new buildings and structures.
economy.
7.2.4: Con�nue to maintain, support, and invest in the FHDC and the
Blue Earth Plaza.

105
7.2.5: Improve K-177 entryway into town, crea�ng more gateway
features and cues into and out of town.
7.2.6: Protect, preserve, and integrate the natural state of the Flint
Hills along K-177 into Downtown Manhatan.
7.2.7: Con�nue collabora�on with Kansas State University to
contribute to downtown’s brand and iden�ty.
7.2.8: Con�nue to celebrate downtown as the epicenter of
Manhatan’s history by preserving the unique, iconic buildings and
areas that create culture-defining places.
7.2.9: Con�nue to forge an iden�ty for Manhatan, manifested in
downtown.
7.2.7: Organize a collabora�ve and coordinated effort among
downtown arts, entertainment, and cultural en��es from the private,
public, and non-profit sectors.
Figure 2.7.2: Mock-up of proposed “Vigilance” statue in front of the FHDC.

Sub-Vision 7.3: Downtown hosts a wide variety of high-

Figure 2.7.1: Flint Hills South of Downtown.
quality events and ac�vi�es.
Goals and Principles
7.3.1: Maintain and create public spaces with the facili�es and
ameni�es to host events and ac�vi�es of broad varie�es and scales,
including those that would contribute to the development of an
entertainment corridor.
7.3.2: Create beter ways to u�lize streets for arts, entertainment, and
special events.
7.3.3: Maintain and encourage opportuni�es for all audiences,
including school-age youth, families, young adults, tradi�onally
underserved popula�ons, special popula�ons, and others to engage
with Manhatan’s arts, entertainment, and culture scene.

106
7.4.4: Con�nue to support Downtown Manhatan, Inc., FHDC, and
other en��es in producing and managing events.

Figure 2.7.3: Vision of nightlife along 3rd Street.

107
 Chapter 8

Building Design
& Environment
108
Chapter 8: Building Design & Environment 8.1.7: Con�nue to create unique outdoor gathering and dining spaces.

Significant progress has been made in the downtown
environment over the past twenty years, which
needs to be maintained and built upon for the next
several decades. However, there are por�ons of
downtown that are inconsistent with the high-
quality, safe, comfortable, walkable, unique
environment that characterizes the most beloved parts of downtown.
These areas are crucial for tying together the whole of downtown,
while providing opportuni�es for the crea�on of addi�onal places and
spaces to be cherished by the community.
8.1.9: Design stand-alone parking garages sensi�ve to their
architectural context and integra�ng ground floor uses on primary
frontages.
8.1.10: Design parking garages sharing a site with a building to be
placed behind or beneath the building, largely shielding the garage
from primary public views and/or pedestrian areas.

Sub-Vision 8.1: Downtown has a high-quality, cohesive

built environment priori�zing pedestrian safety and u�lity.
Walking around downtown is a joy and feels effortless.
Goals and Principles
8.1.1: Encourage new development to exhibit quality design and take
cues from surrounding high-quality development.
8.1.2: Construct buildings that are oriented toward the street with
their primary facades built up to the property line/sidewalk.
8.1.3: Design the ground floors of buildings to be fron�ng onto a
sidewalk and designed with pedestrian-scale elements: a high degree
Figure 2.8.0: Vision image of repurposing parking lots.
of permeability, windows, and entrances.
8.1.4: Reduce expansiveness of large parking lots and redevelop
underu�lized parking lots.
8.1.5: Strategically place parks and open spaces to provide gathering
and recrea�onal space and beter link different areas of downtown.
8.1.6: Encourage pedestrian-oriented infill development and high-
quality streetscapes between areas of downtown to increase ac�vity,
visual connec�vity, interest, and walkability between them.

109
 for motorists to slow down and elevate the consciousness of
pedestrian ac�vity.
8.2.6: Pepper downtown with formal and informal art as points of
interest contribu�ng to the experience of walking.
8.2.7: Explore and pursue temporary and permanent
pedestrianiza�on of streets where appropriate.
8.2.8: Create streetscapes that double as “third places”, mee�ng and
gathering spaces for the public (see Appendix C).

Figure 2.8.1: Pedestrian utility in building design, E-CP1.

Sub-Vision 8.2: Downtown has a high-quality, cohesive

streetscape priori�zing pedestrian comfort and
experience. Different areas of downtown do not feel
disjointed or too far away when walking between them.
Goals and Principles
8.2.1: Install and maintain pedestrian ameni�es where appropriate:
trees, benches, waste bins, ligh�ng, bike racks, landscaping, etc.
8.2.2: Priori�ze pedestrian safety, convenience, and comfort at
intersec�ons.
8.2.3: Design, install, and maintain ligh�ng systems to improve safety Figure 2.8.2: High-quality pedestrian streetscape vision at 5th and Leavenworth.
and security at night where appropriate downtown.
8.2.4: Update streetscape elements in areas of downtown that are not
in areas improved over the last 20 years.
8.2.5: Create unique gateway features that contribute posi�vely to the
look and feel of downtown and signal a transi�on in the environment

110
Figure 2.8.3: Conceptual gateway feature approaching 3rd and Pierre from K-177.

111
 Chapter 9

Historic
Preservation
112
Chapter 9: Historic Preserva�on 9.1.6: Con�nue to nominate proper�es to the State and Na�onal
Register of Historic Places, with a special emphasis on post-war/mid-
While many historic resources have been lost to century resources and resources that have recently turned 50 years
�me, downtown and its many preserved buildings is old.
treasured as the crown jewel of Manhatan’s history,
reflected in the built environment. The prolifera�on 9.1.7: Balance need for progress and new development with need for
of rehabilita�on projects in the past two decades preserva�on and rehabilita�on.
has proved the feasibility of preserva�on. Moreover, 9.1.8: Minimize the loss of historic character throughout downtown.
the preserva�on and reuse of Manhatan’s unique historic buildings
maintain its iden�ty, celebrates its local heritage, contributes to the
sense of place, and creates tourism opportuni�es. Con�nuing to
protect these buildings, and the proac�ve and con�nuing
iden�fica�on and protec�on of future historic buildings, will be key to
maintaining this role of downtown.

Sub-Vision 9.1: Downtown’s historic resources are well-

preserved, well-used, occupied, and cherished.
Goals and Principles
9.1.1: Con�nue inves�ng in, maintaining, preserving, rehabilita�ng,
and re-using historic buildings.
9.1.2: Con�nue u�lizing historic tax credits, grants, and other historic
preserva�on incen�ves and economic development incen�ves to
maintain, preserve, rehabilitate, and re-use historic buildings. Figure 2.9.0: Wareham Hotel Building
9.1.3: Promote preserva�on incen�ves and educate property and
business owners of their u�liza�on.
Sub-Vision 9.2: Downtown has a historic feel and is known
for its historic significance and historic character.
9.1.4: Con�nue reviewing projects affec�ng the historic district and
historic proper�es to promote historic compa�bility and Goals and Principles
appropriateness, u�lizing the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. 9.2.1: Create basic design standards to improve the compa�bility of
9.1.5: Prevent demoli�on of historic proper�es and prevent new construc�on around historic areas.
disqualifica�on of historic status through degrada�on of historic 9.2.2: Encourage tradi�onal, pedestrian-oriented design around
integrity. historic areas, as appropriate.

113
9.2.3: Install and maintain interpre�ve signage showcasing the history
of downtown and Manhatan as a whole.
9.2.4: Maintain well-compiled informa�on on the history of
downtown and make it easily available to the public.
9.2.5: Encourage events celebra�ng the history of downtown and
Manhatan.
9.2.6: Acknowledge Manhatan’s historic connec�on with the Kansas
River with a physical connec�on to it.
9.2.7: Capture and represent typically under-represented history,
including indigenous history and history of minority popula�ons as it
relates to downtown’s history.
9.2.8: Showcase the natural history of Manhatan and the region.
9.2.9: Retain the character of neighborhoods surrounding downtown Figure 2.9.1: Riley County Courthouse Lawn
as the residen�al counterpart to downtown’s historic character.
9.2.10: Periodically review appropriateness of development
regula�ons and design standards for buildings and signage to ensure
historic compa�bility.

114
 Chapter 10

Parking

115
Chapter 10: Parking 10.1.4: Provide well-landscaped, buffered, and/or screened parking
lots to so�en their visual impact.
The func�on of parking and its effect on the
downtown environment is complex. To a certain 10.1.5: Improve land u�liza�on by priori�zing buildings over surface
extent, parking availability improves economic parking.
condi�ons and accessibility for the community. 10.1.6: Encourage new development to employ structured parking to
Exceeding that threshold makes parking become a improve land-use efficiency.
dominant feature, detrac�ng from the pedestrian
experience. There are areas of downtown where the former is the 10.1.7: Encourage downtown employees to use less customer-
case, presen�ng the need for solu�ons to improve supply and oriented parking to encourage parking turnover.
management. There are also areas downtown where the later is the
case, presen�ng opportuni�es for development. It appears as if
downtown is afforded some amount of grace and pa�ence with the
community when it comes to parking—as people generally do not
expect to park a few feet away from their des�na�on every �me they
visit. This is truer when the des�na�on is worth such inconvenience.
Increasing the amount of parking will not be the catalyst for achieving
the vision for downtown under low-growth scenarios. Rather,
increasing parking will be an intermediate or advanced stage catalyst
in medium- or high-growth scenarios. Holis�c solu�ons to parking
problems are more desired, taking into considera�on other
transporta�on modes, land use mix, opera�onal hours, and
pedestrian environment.

Sub-Vision 10.1: The downtown landscape is not Figure 2.10.0: WP-CP1: Mixed-use infill on the 500 block of Poyntz.

dominated by parking lots. Sub-Vision 10.2: Businesses are supported with an

Goals and Principles
10.1.1: Redevelop or put to beter use underu�lized parking lots.
10.1.2: Place parking lots behind buildings, out of the primary view of
public right-of-way and/or pedestrian areas.
10.1.3: Consolidate parking lots into parking garages when and where
appropriate to improve land use efficiency.
appropriate amount of parking within a reasonable
distance.
Goals and Principles
10.2.1: Construct parking garages when demand supports it.
10.2.2: Maintain flexibility on any parking requirements placed on
development to take into account the goals of this plan and the
context of the development.

116
10.2.3: Allow new development to depend somewhat on public
parking infrastructure.
10.2.4: Locate new parking structures strategically to maximize their
u�liza�on and/or catalyze redevelopment.
Figure 2.10.1: Parking Garage Example
Vision 10.3: Parking is well managed and the use of
facili�es is simple and intui�ve.
Goals and Principles
10.3.1: Employ parking management strategies that maximize
u�liza�on of parking infrastructure.
10.3.2: Ensure parking restric�ons are well known and signage and
other user interfaces are clear and intui�ve.
10.3.3: Integrate sensible technological tools and solu�ons to parking
management.
117
Sub-Vision 10.4: Parking facili�es are well u�lized, not
empty for long periods of �me.
Goals and Principles
10.4.1: Increase u�liza�on of exis�ng parking garage by encouraging
surrounding development to use it.
10.4.2: Increase diversity of land uses that smooth out parking
demand peaks throughout the day and night.
10.4.3: Explore and encourage unique solu�ons for managing parking
demand: shared parking, unbundled parking, rideshare, etc.
Sub-Vision 10.5: Downtown is worth going to because of
what it has to offer, even if parking is not the most
plen�ful and as convenient as possible.
Goals and Principles
10.5.1: Priori�ze place-making over parking.
Sub-Vision 10.6: Viable and convenient alterna�ves exist
to reduce parking demand or improve u�liza�on of out-
lots and underu�lized spaces.
Goals and Principles
10.6.1: Improve streetscape and environment throughout downtown
to improve walking experiences, reduce the cost of walking, and
increase willingness to walk to and from farther parking spaces.
10.6.2: Improve walkability and bikeability to and through downtown,
as well as transit, shutle services, and micro-mobility op�ons.
 3rd Street

Figure 2.10.2: Improving pedestrian experience along 3rd Street.

118
 Chapter 11

Transportation

119
Chapter 11: Transporta�on 11.1.2: Remove barriers for pedestrians and bicyclists in and around
the downtown by adding beter crossings and improving
While downtown is one of the safest, most stress- intersec�ons.
free walkable and bikeable areas of town, being
well-connected with a grid of small-scale blocks, and
endowed with an elevated level of infrastructure
and ameni�es, there are s�ll barriers to downtown
achieving its full poten�al. Given that 94% of
community survey respondents value a walkable downtown, priority
should always be given to the pedestrian experience and pedestrian-
oriented design over automobile convenience and auto-oriented
design. Shi�ing the approach to downtown as pedestrian-first allows
development and environmental poten�al that further sets
downtown apart as a unique and desirable des�na�on. Likewise,
making downtown easy to walk to and improving public transit and
bicycle infrastructure would provide more equitable access to jobs,
shopping, and services while reducing strain on automobile parking
supply.
While there are no major barriers irreparably isola�ng areas of
downtown, there are s�ll ways to improve cohesion at the pedestrian
level, by improving the built environment. Likewise, if expansion of
urban fabric is to move south of Fort Riley Boulevard, overcoming the
barriers created by the five-lane roadway and the railroad and
connec�ng to Linear Trail will be cri�cal to the success of
redevelopment in those areas.

Sub-Vision 11.1: All areas of downtown are well

interconnected and areas and ameni�es adjacent to it are
well interconnected with it.
Goals and Principles
11.1.1: Maintain the basic, small-scale street grid.

Figure 2.11.0: (Top and bottom) conceptual bicycle/pedestrian connections to Linear Trail.

120
11.1.3: Improve bicycle and pedestrian access to Linear Trail, the
Kansas River, and Flint Hills.
11.1.4: Improve connec�vity across Tutle Creek Boulevard and Fort
Riley Boulevard/K-18 and improve connec�vity to East Poyntz
Avenue/US-24.

Sub-Vision 11.2: Downtown is easily accessible by walking.

Walking to and around downtown is easy, comfortable,
convenient, and safe for all.
Goals and Principles
11.2.1: Priori�ze pedestrian safety, comfort, convenience, u�lity, and
experience in street design and building design.
11.2.2: Improve pedestrian level of service for intersec�ons and street
segments in and around downtown.
11.2.3: Fill in sidewalk gaps in and around downtown.
11.2.4: Repair and maintain sidewalks and curb ramps to be in good,
accessible condi�on in compliance with the Americans with
Disabili�es Act.
11.2.5: Improve street and intersec�on design for pedestrians, in line
with best prac�ces recommended by the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Systems Plan.
11.2.6: Increase ameni�es for pedestrians and maximize pedestrian
space where appropriate.
11.2.7: Increase traffic calming measures where appropriate.
11.2.8: Increase housing in and adjacent to downtown.
Figure 2.11.1: Improved pedestrian infrastructure at 5th and Leavenworth.
Sub-Vision 11.3: Downtown is easily accessible by bike and
other micro-mobility modes. Using these modes to get to
and around downtown is easy, comfortable, convenient,
and safe for all.
Goals and Principles
11.3.1: Improve street design for bicyclists in line with best prac�ces
recommended by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Systems Plan.
11.3.2: Decrease bicycle level of stress on street segments in and
around downtown.
11.3.3: Complete bicycle network in and around downtown as
recommended by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Systems Plan.
11.3.4: Improve street and intersec�on design for bicyclists in line
with best prac�ces recommended by the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Systems Plan.

121
11.3.5: Increase traffic-calming measures where appropriate.
11.3.6: Install and maintain bicycle racks throughout downtown that
meet the standards of the Manhatan Development Code.
11.3.7: Encourage residen�al developments to incorporate weather-
protected or indoor bicycle parking.
11.3.8: Con�nue to allow and regulate micro-mobility and programs
like bikeshares and e-scooters downtown.
11.3.9: Improve the share of people biking and using micro-mobility
to get downtown compared to driving.
11.3.10: Increase housing in and adjacent to downtown.
Figure 2.11.2: Improved bike and pedestrian infrastructure at Juliette and Humboldt.
122
Sub-Vision 11.4: Downtown is easily accessible by transit.
Taking transit to and around downtown is easy,
convenient, comfortable, and safe for all.
Goals and Principles
11.4.1: Support ATA Bus and other public transit opportuni�es to
improve service to downtown.
11.4.2: Increase headways/frequency to downtown bus stops.
11.4.3: Increase bus stop density to improve accessibility.
11.4.4: Improve bus stops with shelters, sea�ng, and other ameni�es.
11.4.5: Co-locate bike parking, bus stops, micro-mobility staging, and
parking structures.
11.4.6: Explore and establish downtown transit loops, park-and-rides,
and other similar dedicated transit systems to improve traffic flow and
relieve parking demand.
11.4.7: Improve the share of people u�lizing public transit to get
downtown compared to driving.
 11.5.4: Incorporate pedestrian drop-offs in lieu of parking for high-
demand des�na�ons.
11.5.5: Explore temporary and permanent pedestrianiza�on of street
segments where appropriate.
11.5.6: Increase the number of electric vehicle charging sta�ons
throughout downtown.
11.5.7: Decrease footprint of parking infrastructure to increase
development opportunity contribu�ng to pedestrian experience, and
commercial and residen�al development.
11.5.8: Remove any unnecessary right-turn lanes in the downtown to
shorten crossing distances.
11.5.9: Extend Poyntz Avenue look, feel, and geometry (road diet)
west of Juliete Avenue.
Figure 2.11.3: Manhattan Public Library Bus Stop.

Sub-Vision 11.5: While largely accessible to cars,

downtown is a des�na�on, where car speeds are slowed
down, car access is limited, and awareness of non-
motorists is elevated.
Goals and Principles
11.5.1: Reduce sidewalk interrup�on by reducing and consolida�ng Figure 2.11.4: Pedestrianization of Poyntz.
curb cuts and encouraging alley access. Carefully locate and design
new curb cuts. Sub-Vision 11.6: Alleys are func�onal but capitalize on
being niche and comfortable spaces for ac�vity as
11.5.2: Install traffic calming measures where appropriate and design extensions of businesses.
streets with low design speeds and lower street widths to maximize
pedestrian realm. Goals and Principles
11.5.3: Create and maintain formal and informal gateways around the 11.6.1: Improve cleanliness and maintenance of alleys.
edge of downtown signaling motorists to slow down and elevate
11.6.2: Consolidate waste, grease, and recycling receptacles.
awareness.
11.6.3: Coordinate deliveries and truck services.

123
11.6.4: Consolidate and relocate u�li�es when feasible.
11.6.5: Capitalize on opportuni�es for the establishment of outdoor
space along alleys.
11.6.6: Con�nue regula�ng traffic orienta�on in alleys.
11.6.7: Establish pedestrian ameni�es in alleys such as ligh�ng, art,
and back entrances to businesses where appropriate.

Figure 2.11.5: Improved alleyway south of 300 block of Poyntz.

124
 Chapter 12

Utilities
& Safety
125
Chapter 12: U�li�es and Safety
Downtown is well served by public services and
u�li�es. With the excep�on of ongoing storm water
improvements, major infrastructure improvements
and warranted upgrades need only be done with
though�ul considera�on and in coordina�on with
redevelopment opportuni�es or street construc�on.
Most in the community have a posi�ve image of downtown and feel
safe and comfortable in the district. Maintaining this status is cri�cal
to the image and atrac�veness of downtown and, in terms of
proac�veness, public rela�ons, though�ul design, and enforcement
go a long way from an enforcement standpoint.

Sub-Vision 12.1: Downtown is well served with public

services and u�li�es. Figure 2.12.0: Drainage Infrastructure.

12.1.1: Improve data infrastructure for businesses and their patrons.

12.1.2: Create a well-coordinated system of waste management,
minimizing interference with deliveries and conduc�ng business.
12.1.3: Coordinate with u�lity service providers to upgrade u�li�es
with development and street construc�on projects.
12.2.4: Complete iden�fied stormwater and flood management
projects.
12.1.5: Maintain downtown as a clean environment, free of liter.
Sub-Vision 12.2: Downtown has service, u�lity, and
infrastructure capacity to accommodate growth and
development.
12.2.1: Make upgrades to infrastructure in coordina�on with
development and street construc�on.
12.2.2: Encourage energy-efficient and renewable energy systems,
such as photovoltaic and geothermal systems, incorpora�on into
development.

12.1.6: Maintain alleys as the default service loca�on while
modernizing and consolida�ng u�li�es to beter ac�vate them.
12.1.7: Maintain an adequate level of water, sewer, stormwater,
natural gas, electricity, data, fire protec�on, waste, and emergency
services.
12.2.3: Incorporate green infrastructure/water quality features such
as rain gardens, bioswales, permeable pavement, water reclama�on
systems, and green roofs into development and streetscapes when
appropriate.
12.2.4: Upgrade building systems and infrastructure to increase
longevity and efficiency in energy use, cost, and resources.

126
12.2.5: Increase the number of EV charging sta�ons throughout
downtown and recognizing the grid upgrades required to support
them.

Figure 2.12.1: EV Charging Station Downtown.

Figure 2.12.2: Bioswale for Stormwater Runoff Example

127
Sub-Vision 12.3: Criminal ac�vity is low and downtown
feels safe and secure for everyone at all �mes of day.
12.3.1: Upgrade ligh�ng throughout downtown to be illuminated
appropriately at night.
12.3.2: Maintain and improve effec�veness of RCPD presence and
public rela�ons downtown on reducing crime and quality-of-life
offenses as well as dealing with mental health issues and welfare calls.
12.3.3: Incorporate building and street design elements and
techniques that improve natural/passive surveillance, and deter
crime, especially crimes of opportunity.
12.3.4: Increase housing throughout downtown to increase ac�vity,
improve natural/passive surveillance, and deter crime.
12.3.5: Improve access to social services and community services. Figure 2.12.3: Safe and Comfortable Lighting

12.3.6: Explore opportuni�es for RCPD sub-sta�on integra�on with

redevelopment opportuni�es.

128
129
 Part 3
Implementation
Plan
130
Introduction
Part 3 focuses on the next steps the City can take to con�nue and
prepare conversa�ons with other agencies, implement the principles,
achieve the goals, and see that the vision for downtown comes to
frui�on. Note that not all principles and goals laid out in the plan have a
corresponding ac�on, as not all have an obvious or direct path toward
comple�on. However, all of the plan’s principles and goals should be
reviewed—and opportuni�es taken to make use of them—prior to any
ac�on.
How to Read this Section
The Ac�on Items Table in this sec�on is organized in the following
manner:
Groups
There are two groups of ac�on items.
Group A. This grouping is of ac�on items directly related to the
Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan. They are ac�ons that would
occur in or directly affect areas within geographic planning boundary.
Group B. These Ac�on Items are connected to Auxiliary Areas
iden�fied in the Background Report (pages 11-13). They are ac�ons
that would occur adjacent to the geographic planning boundary, with
indirect effects on downtown.
Priority and Impact
Within each Group, the ac�on items are organized into three categories
(High, Medium, and Low) indica�ng the ac�on’s effect, �ming, and
efficiency on achieving a goal for downtown, rela�ve to the other
ac�ons.
High: Significant and immediate impact on downtown requiring
urgent aten�on and/or with few barriers to ini�a�on and
comple�on of a goal.
131
Medium: Some impact on downtown in the near-term requiring
�mely aten�on and/or with limited barriers to ini�a�on and
comple�on of a goal.
Low: Litle immediate impact on downtown not requiring par�cularly
urgent aten�on and/or with high barriers to ini�a�on or comple�on
of a goal.
Ac�on Item and Form
Ac�on item name: Name of the ac�on to be taken.
Ac�on item form: The form an ac�on item would take. There are two
categories of forms – government and community.
Government forms represent procedures and mechanisms taken by City
Hall with some requiring approval from the Governing Body.
Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map (FLUM), or Manhatan
Development Code (MDC) regula�on: Official instruments of the
Governing Body managed and enforced by the City.
Plan: A project that reviews a defined geographic area and includes
an exhaus�ve community outreach effort, grounded in data, and
consolidated into a single document containing strategies, study
findings, models, recommended next steps, etc. that is then adopted
into the Comprehensive Plan by the Governing Body.
Strategy: An outline addressing a community challenge or taking
advantage of a community opportunity that may have some
elements of a plan, depending on �me, scope, funding, etc., but not
all aspects of that form.
 Policy: Informa�on gathered from a study or survey will inform
policy, which is, “a course or principle of ac�on adopted or proposed
by a government, party, business, or individual.” s,
Program: In addi�on to a policy, a form of ac�on that could be taken
is the crea�on of a program, defined as a formal administra�ve
structure or system with strict, objec�ve criteria for distribu�ng
resources, but with less judicial or legisla�ve interven�on and
oversight.es with a par�cular long-term aim.”
Study: A research effort into a specific subject, such as a par�cular
community want, issue, or geographic area focused on gathering
informa�on in a variety of methods to inform a strategy or a plan.
This may or may not involve community outreach.
Survey: A specific type of research method examining a condi�on,
situa�on, opportunity, or value by gathering responses from a
sample representa�on of the whole community.
Community Forms represent measures that community members can
take outside of or in tandem with local government.
Stakeholder Ac�on: A formal group or organiza�on collabora�ng on
an issue or opportunity. Poten�al outcomes of this form may be to
perform outreach or educa�on, conduct a study, create a strategy, to
contribute to a government planning process or take immediate
ac�on themselves.
Community Ac�on: A formal or informal resident-ini�ated atempt
to address a community topic or opportunity.
Individual Ac�on: An informal atempt by a resident or non-resident
of the community to ini�ate and/or complete an Ac�on Item.
Ac�on Item Descrip�on
132
This field provides ini�al informa�on on the ac�on item, applicable goals
and principles, scope of the ac�vity, and connec�on to the Trigger
Condi�ons.
Trigger Condi�ons
Trigger Timing provides a general guidance on when to ini�ate ac�ons
under current condi�ons. They are classified into three categories:
Do Now…indicates a general consensus and willingness to move
forward with the ac�on following the adop�on of the Plan with
indica�on there are few barriers to ini�a�ng the ac�on at any given
�me.
Do When…indicates a general consensus and willingness to move
forward with the ac�on condi�oned on other factors being present—
another ac�on, event, or set of circumstances. It may indicate there
are some barriers to ini�a�ng the ac�on at any given �me, but those
barriers are expected to change in the near to mid-term.
Do If…indicates a general consensus and willingness to move
forward with the action conditioned on other factors being
present—another action, event, or set of circumstances. However, it
indicates there are significant barriers to initiating the action at any
given time. But those barriers could change in the long term and if
they do, the action would be ripe.
Poten�al Triggers provide examples of catalyst directly or indirectly
responding to an Ac�on Item. Since the Plan was created under current
condi�ons, this field should remain flexible to consider the condi�ons at
the �me ac�ons are expected to occur.
Lead Agency
The primary initiator, funder, and/or manager of the action item.
Poten�al Suppor�ve Agencies
May provide support in the form of consultation, finances, assistance,
partnership, or collaboration.

Review Frequency
Since the list of ac�on items was created under current condi�ons, the
Trigger Timing may need to be periodically reevaluated to not miss
specific opportuni�es. As of the plan’s adop�on date, ac�on items have
been assigned the following frequencies:
Ongoing: This ac�on item may currently be in-progress or occur
frequently, and review of it will need to happen regularly throughout
the future.
Periodically: A scheduled �meframe outlining the pending
occurrence or review should be created and managed.
One-�me: This ac�on item will only need to occur or be reviewed
once.
Applicable Goals and Principles
These numbers reference the ac�on item to specific goals and principles
listed in the plan. Not all principles and goals may be listed, as some may
be too broad and would apply to prac�cally every ac�on. Rather, the
most relevant, adjacent, and specific goals and principles are referenced
here. This helps demonstrate the interconnectedness of the item and its
ability to achieve or implement mul�ple goals or principles in the plan.
ID
An internal iden�fier (ID) provided for quick reference. The ID references
the group (A or B), a number, and the priority (H, M, L).
Post-Adop�on Success
The final step in any community planning process is to establish a system
for successful adop�on, implementa�on, measurement, and calibra�on
from every city en�ty and external agencies.
Set-up future par�cipa�on
133
• Acknowledgement that the city alone cannot deliver on the
Plan’s vision, goals, and principles because the BTDP is a
community plan, it will require the entire community.
• Request buy-in at all levels of city government and from all
departments in implementing the BTDP, so that is understood as
the community’s plan and the city’s plan, not the Community
Development Department plan.
• Be the lead advocate for the BTDP in conversations with external
agencies, especially landowners, developers, and investors.
• Effectively communicate the BTDP’s vision, goals, and principles
at every opportunity.
• Continuously review and revise regulations, codes, workflow
processes, and communication systems to ensure efficient and
effective completion of the community’s shared vision for the
district.
Set-up future support
• Identify internal and external action item champions.
• Secure public, private, and philanthropic financial support in a
variety of forms, including inclusion of action items and related
investments through the Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
• Although the majority of physical change will be driven by the
private-sector investment in new development and
redevelopment, the city can update the Comprehensive Plan,
including the Future Land Use Map, to prepare a streamlined
process for future development.
• Integrate the newly amended Comprehensive Plan, including the
BTDP into the current and long-term decision-making process for
all city department. While encouraging external agencies to
utilize as one of the factors in their systems as well.
Set-up future accountability
• Continue to nurture, invest in, and maintain relationships whose
cooperation and shared belief in the BTDP vision, goals, and
principles are critical to coming to fruition.
• Develop a monitoring system to keep awareness high in
appropriate situations and track progress within government or
outside of it.
• Remain adaptive and not prescriptive to the direction set by the
community, so that the overall direction isn’t lost, but flexibility
is built-in to respond to market conditions or development ideas.
• Implement accountability at this highest level possible to ensure
procedures exist for identifying responsible department and
agencies; communicating and connecting work from various
departments and agencies across projects to match the Plan; and
managing effective delivery of the vision, goals, and principles.

134
Group A. Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan Ac�on Items
High Priority
Potential
Applicable
Action Item Trigger Potential Lead Supportive Review
ID Action Item Description Goals and
and Form Timing Trigger/s Agency Agencies Frequency
Principles
(alphabetical)
A1H Development Assess downtown zoning and Do Adoption of the BTDP. City developers Ongoing 2.1.1
2.1.3
8.1.1–
8.1.4
Code development regulations in the MDC now… departments investors 2.1.4
2.2.1–
8.1.6
9.2.1
Amendments and make amendments for better engineers 2.2.7
2.3.1
9.2.2
9.2.9
alignment with the Plan’s vision, goals, architects 2.4.2 9.2.10
3.1.1 10.1.2
MDC and principles for the whole of 3.1.2 10.1.4–
3.1.4 10.1.6
downtown and its sub-areas. 3.1.5 10.2.2
3.1.7 10.2.3
3.1.8 10.4.2
3.1.10 10.4.3
3.2.5 11.2.1
3.2.10 11.3.10
5.1.1– 11.5.1
5.1.5 11.5.7
5.1.12 12.3.3
5.2.2 12.3.4
6.1.2

A2H Rezonings Assess zoning in and around Do Adoption of the BTDP. City developers Ongoing 2.1.1
2.1.3
9.2.9
9.2.10
downtown and rezone areas for better now… departments investors 2.1.4
3.1.1–
Comp Plan alignment with the Plan’s land use and engineers 3.1.8
3.2.5
FLUM redevelopment vision, goals, and architects 5.1.1–
5.1.6
MDC principles for the whole of downtown 5.1.12
5.2.2
and its sub-areas. This could include 8.1.1–
areas adjacent to downtown as well. 8.1.4
8.1.6
9.2.2

A3H City-owned Assess city-owned property and Do After a downtown City consultant One-time 3.1.1–3.1.8
3.2.8
Land determine potential future use, when… housing and/or departments 10.1.1
10.1.3
Assessment considering all variables and tools, market study are 10.1.5
10.2.1
including public and private completed and A1H 10.5.1
11.5.7
Study ownership, land swaps, development and A2H are
potential, public-private-philanthropic complete.
partnerships, etc.

135
Group A. Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan Ac�on Items
High Priority (con�nued)
Potential
Applicable
Action Item Trigger Potential Lead Supportive Review
ID Action Item Description Goals and
and Form Timing Trigger/s Agency Agencies Frequency
Principles
(alphabetical)
A4H Economic Assess current City development Do Adoption of the City CoC Ongoing 1.3.2
1.3.1
9.1.1–
9.1.3
Development incentives to determine the now… BTDP. Federal, departments developers 1.1.3
1.2.1
10.1.1
10.1.3
effectiveness and need to modify or state, and private DMI 2.5.1
2.5.5
10.1.5
10.1.6
Program introduce of new ones to implement monies/programs to GMCF 2.5.4 10.2.1
3.1.1– 10.2.3
Strategy downtown and generate the Plan’s tap into, along with investors 3.1.9 10.2.4
3.2.5– 11.2.8
vision for development. Establish basic strong community 3.2.7 11.3.10

strategies for incentivizing interest/ new local 3.2.9

3.2.11
12.2.4
12.2.1
development in specific sub-areas to initiatives. 4.3.1
4.3.2
achieve goals and capture value of 5.1.1–
5.1.6
growth to fund area improvements and 5.1.8–
5.1.12
further catalyze development. 5.2.1–
5.2.3
8.1.6

A5H Housing Develop a strategy for increasing the Do Adoption of the City developers Period- 2.3.1–2.3.3
3.1.10
Development number, types, and quality of housing Now… BTDP. Completion departments CoC ically 3.3.1
4.1.1–4.1.3
units in and adjacent to downtown. of A4H. DMI 4.2.3
4.3.1–4.3.4
Strategy Establish and layer incentives to MHA 5.1.1–5.1.6
5.1.9–5.1.12
increase effectiveness. 5.2.2
6.2.2
11.2.8
11.3.10
12.3.4

136
Group A. Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan Ac�on Items
Medium Priority
Potential
Applicable
Action Item Trigger Potential Lead Supportive Review
ID Action Item Description Goals and
and Form Timing Trigger/s Agency Agencies Frequency
Principles
(alphabetical)
A1M Linear Trail Achieve direct, safe, and visible bicycle Do If… A medium- to City adjacent One-time 1.5.5
2.6.2
Access and pedestrian access from downtown high-growth departments property 3.2.4
4.2.1
to the Linear Trail and the riverfront. scenario in the owners 5.2.4
6.2.3
Strategy Address safety and connectivity issues Riverfront sub- DMI 6.2.4
7.2.1
for bicycles and pedestrians between area prompting KDOT 7.2.2
9.2.6
the current downtown area and crossing Railroad 10.6.2

recreational opportunities along and reconfiguration/ USACE 11.1.3

11.1.2
south of the levy. relocation. State 11.2.1–11.2.7
11.3.1–11.3.5
and federal
transportation /
recreation
grants.

A2M Parking Create parking management strategies Do if… A3H, A4H, A5H, City consultant One-time 2.1.1
2.1.3
10.4.1–
10.4.3
Management to improve utilization of existing or A3M departments CoC 2.2.1
2.2.6
10.5.1
10.6.1
infrastructure and the need for and concludes need, DMI 2.3.1
2.2.2
10.6.2
11.3.7
Strategy location of additional parking in the or medium to 4.2.7 11.4.5
6.2.5 11.4.6
form of structured parking to support high growth 8.1.4 11.5.4
8.1.9 11.5.7
additional development. Solutions scenarios are 8.1.10
should explore improving multi-modal achievable in sub 10.1.1–
10.1.7
alternatives, including park & ride, and areas or groups 10.2.1–
10.2.4
EV charging infrastructure. of sub areas. 10.3.1–
10.3.3

A3M Market Study Identify gaps in sectors and demand for Do Now… Economic City CoC Period- 2.3.3
3.1.1–3.1.10
creation of additional commercial development departments ically 3.3.6
3.3.8
Study space for uses and businesses in line funding
with this plan in order to inform availability.
capacity creation and aid with business
recruitment.

137
Group A. Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan Ac�on Items
Medium Priority (con�nued)
Potential
Applicable
Action Item Trigger Potential Lead Supportive Review
ID Action Item Description Goals and
and Form Timing Trigger/s Agency Agencies Frequency
Principles
(alphabetical)
A4M Streetscape Identify streetscapes, parks, and public Do Major City adjacent Period- 2.6.1
2.6.3
11.3.1–
11.3.6
Plan spaces for potential improvements. When… redevelopments departments property ically 3.2.3
3.3.7
11.5.1–
11.5.5
Develop a cohesive typology and style occur or planned in owners 4.2.6
5.2.4
11.5.8
11.5.9
Plan for different streets and sub-areas in respective sub- consultant 6.2.3 12.1.3
6.2.4 12.1.5
alignment with the vision, goals, and areas, areas or DMI 8.1.5– 12.2.1
8.1.7 12.2.3
principles of this plan, deployable in change/ 8.2.1– 12.2.5

coordination with redevelopment or improvement, and 8.2.8

10.6.1
12.3.1
12.3.3
other improvement opportunity. sub-standard 10.6.2
11.1.2
and/or auto-centric 11.2.1
11.2.2
streetscapes/ 11.2.5–
11.2.7
intersections.

A5M Art Coalition Form a group coordinating and directing Do Existing agencies private CoC Ongoing 2.6.4
3.2.1
a holistic approach to developing arts, now… agree to agency DMI 3.1.3
3.2.5–3.2.7
Stakeholder entertainment, and culture in collaborate on FHDC 3.3.3
3.3.4
Action downtown. Organize, promote, and current community GMCF 7.1.1–7.1.6
7.2.1
encourage the development of arts and interest MAC 7.2.3–7.2.7
7.3.1–7.4.4
entertainment in downtown, find development MOAL 8.2.5
funding, and serve in an advisory role for activity. Grants or private and 8.2.5
9.2.5
the selection, placement, and other funding for non-profit 11.6.7

maintenance of art and organization, art or culture. agencies

coordination, promotion, and execution WHR
of events.
A6M Farmers Identify location and develop siting, Do Conclusion of A3H. City MHK Farmers One-time 2.5.2
3.2.8
Market design, and operational logistics of a when… State and federal departments Market Inc 7.1.5

Structure permanent farmers market structure funding for food or RockStep

that would extend the market season, health access.
Strategy increase visibility, improve sense of Economic
place, and improve economic mobility of development
local vendors. funding.

138
Group A. Beyond Tomorrow Downtown Plan Ac�on Items
Low Priority (con�nued)
Potential
Applicable
Action Item Trigger Potential Lead Supportive Review
ID Action Item Description Goals and
and Form Timing Trigger/s Agency Agencies Frequency
Principles
(alphabetical)
A1L Historic Develop a plan to address topics such Do Historic preservation City CVB One-time 1.1.1
3.2.2
Infrastructure as, tourism, economic development, When… grants or funding. departments DMI 4.3.1
4.3.3
Plan museum facilities, signage, and MRCPA 7.2.8
7.2.9
historic documentation. Could include RCHS 9.1.1–9.1.8
9.2.3
Plan updated historic surveys for SHPO 9.2.4
9.2.7
new/expanded historic districts and 9.2.8

individual properties.
A2L Alley Identify needs and opportunities for Do if… A4M identifies need City adjacent One-time 3.2.3
11.6.1–11.6.7
Improvement alley improvement, use, and for ally improvement departments property 12.1.2
12.1.3
activation, prioritizing utility, comfort, or if any other owners 12.1.5
12.1.3
Strategy and safety. Assesses opportunity for strategy identifies DMI 12.3.1

waste consolidation and utility ally improvements as

improvement coordination. necessary and/or
desirable.

A3L Sidewalk Fill sidewalk gaps in and around Do Transportation City BikeWalkMHK Ongoing 2.6.5
3.2.4
Gaps downtown. Capitalize on adjacent Now… funding. Adjacent departments FHMPO 4.2.1
4.2.6
redevelopment opportunities. redevelopment. KDOT 5.2.4
6.2.3
Strategy Accessibility issues around downtown 10.6.2
11.2.3
should also be assessed. 11.2.4

A4L Bus Assess current bus operations and Do FHATA is currently FHATA City Ongoing 4.2.5
4.2.6
Operations opportunities to make improvements now… reviewing consultant departments 5.2.4
6.2.1
for downtown service. service proposals. FHRC 10.6.2
11.4.1–11.4.7
survey K-State 12.3.5

MPO

139
Group B. Auxiliary Area Ac�on Items
High Priority
Potential
Applicable
Action Item Trigger Potential Lead Supportive Review
ID Action Item Description Goals and
and Form Timing Trigger/s Agency Agencies Frequency
Principles
(alphabetical)
B1H East Plan for future development patterns along Do This process has City One-time 1.4.1
1.4.2
Manhattan US-24 and areas north. Also, impact and now… already started. departments 11.1.4

Gateway Plan increased connectivity across Tuttle Creek

Blvd into downtown.
Plan

Medium Priority
Potential
Applicable
Action Item Trigger Potential Lead Supportive Review
ID Action Item Description Goals and
and Form Timing Trigger/s Agency Agencies Frequency
Principles
(alphabetical)
B1M Poyntz Plan for appropriate land uses and Do Adoption of the City One-time 1.4.1
1.4.3
Avenue streetscape improvements west of when… BTDP. departments 11.1.2
11.2.1
Corridor Plan downtown, with emphasis on pedestrian 11.2.2
11.2.5
and bicycle amenities, experiences creating 11.2.7
11.3.1–11.3.5
Plan cohesion between the two districts, and 11.3.9
11.4.3
opportunity to develop an enhanced 11.5.2

gateway. 11.5.3
11.5.8
11.5.9

140
Group B. Auxiliary Area Ac�on Items
Low Priority
Potential
Applicable
Action Item Trigger Potential Lead Supportive Review
ID Action Item Description Goals and
and Form Timing Trigger/s Agency Agencies Frequency
Principles
(alphabetical)
B1L Goodnow Park Plan for the neighborhood and explore its Do if… Adoption of the City neighborhood 1.4.1
1.4.4
Neighborhood role in relation to downtown. BTDP. departments association
Area Plan Neighborhood
support and
Plan advocacy.

B2L Kansas Plan for future improvements along the Do if… A medium- to City FHRC 1.4.1
1.4.5
Riverfront Plan Kansas River and connected to downtown. high-growth departments RiverfrontMHK 7.2.1
7.2.2
Include possible recreational opportunities scenario becomes KSDoC 7.2.5
9.2.6
Plan and more formal programmed spaces, a possibility in the KSDoWP 11.1.2
11.1.3
creating a unique destination and regional Riverfront sub- 11.1.4

attraction. area or if more

direct connectivity
from downtown
to the Kansas
River is
achievable.

141
Acknowledgements

142
Acknowledgements City Manager’s Office
Rank and �tle, then alphabe�cal order by first name when applicable
City staff would like to thank the following commitees and individuals
who lent their exper�se, guidance, support, and work in the crea�on of Ron Fehr City Manager
this plan. Note: City of Manhatan, KS, unless otherwise noted. Jason Hilgers Deputy and Interim City Manager
Brenda Wolf City Clerk
City Commission Jared Wasinger Assistant City Manager
Rank and �tle, then alphabe�cal order by first name when applicable Wyatt Thompson Assistant City Manager
Kristen Dolf Assistant to the City Manager
Member Title
Chelsea Johnson Assistant City Clerk
Wynn Butler Mayor
Lauren Page Executive Assistant
Susan Adamchak Mayor Pro Tem
John Matta Commissioner
Karen McCulloh Commissioner Community Development Department
Peter Oppelt Commissioner
Rank and �tle, then alphabe�cal order when applicable

Stephanie Peterson Director

Manhatan Area Urban Planning Board John Adam Assistant Director
Rank and �tle, then alphabe�cal order by first name when applicable Ben Chmiel Senior Planner (author)
John Verssue Planner III (author)
Member Title
Ann Gaziano Department Coordinator
Ben Burton Chair
Alex Corrado Intern, Planning
Debbie Nuss Vice Chair
Ann Christian Member Anna Greene Intern, Architecture
Hannah Fehr Member Colton Thompson Intern, Planning/Architecture
John Ball Member Nick Saia Intern, Bicycle/Pedestrian
Ken Ebert Member Coordination
Phil Anderson Member Rebecca Boles Intern, GIS Coordination
Seth Larson Intern, Architecture

City Departments
Thank you to all the directors, managers, and staff of the various city
departments who provided valuable insight and informa�on.

143
Downtown Plan Steering Commitee Downtown Plan Technical Commitee
Alphabe�cal order by first name Alphabe�cal order by first name

Member Representation Member Representation

Amanda Purdom Downtown Property Owner and/or Investor Aaron Wintermore Riley County Police Department
Ben Burton Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board (start)
Blade Mages Manhattan Area Chamber of Commerce Captain Brad Jager (end)
Blake Bauer Large Business Owner Adrienne Tucker Parking Services Division
Bobbi French Neighborhood Resident, Downtown Proper Alfonso Leyva Parks and Recreation Department
Brad Simonsson (start) Manhattan Town Center Mall Amanda Webb Riley County Planning and Zoning
RockStep Capital (end) Department
Cindy La Barge Woman-Owned Business Owner Andrew Lawson Communications Division
Colene Lind Historic Preservation Anne Smith Flint Hills Area Transit Authority
Doug Barrett Minority Business Owner Ben Chmiel Community Development Department
George Matthews Neighborhood Resident, South Downtown Brian Johnson Public Works Department
Jocelyn Guilfoyle Downtown Manhattan Incorporated Cody Kramer Parks and Recreation Department
John Matta City Commission Gina Synder Downtown Manhattan Incorporated
Jonathan Mertz Neighborhood Resident, North Downtown Jake Powell Fire Department
Marshall Stewart Kansas State University Jared Tremblay Flint Hills Metropolitan Planning
(start) Organization
Cheryl Grice (end) Jason Hilgers City Manager’s Office
Rob Dudley Small Business Owner John Adam Community Development Department
Scott Seel Housing Market Analysis Steering John Verssue Community Development Department
Committee Marcia Rozell Manhattan Convention and Visitors Bureau
Wynn Bulter City Commission Rachel Sherck Legal Department
Rina Neal Finance Department
Rob Ott Public Works Department
Sam Dameron Public Works Department
Stephanie Peterson Community Development Department
Stephen Metzger Pottawatomie County Planning and Zoning
Wyatt Thompson City Manager’s Office

144
Contributors and Coordinators • Manhattan Area Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors and
Alphabe�cal order HYPE
• Manhattan/Riley County Preservation Alliance
Thank you to the following individuals and organiza�ons whose • Manhattan Town Center Mall
par�cipa�on in the plan contributed to the vision for downtown. • Public housing
• Realtors and real estate
Be Able
CGN Advisors, Limited Liability Corporation • Religious institutions
Flint Hills Regional Council • Riley County government non-elected personnel
Justin Jennings, AIA • Senior and elderly populations
Midwest Concrete Materials, Incorporated • Transportation and transit
RockStep Capital
Wareham Hall, Incorporated Manhatan Community & Businesses
Finally, a special thank you to the 1,700+ community members and the
50+ downtown businesses who responded to the Beyond Tomorrow
Stakeholder Groups
Downtown Plan Surveys, as well as the hundreds of individuals who
Alphabe�cal order
atended public input opportuni�es to help us beter understand what
Thank you to the individuals who par�cipated in one or more downtown means to the community and inform where it could go in the
stakeholder groups represen�ng their organiza�on or a sector of the future.
community.

• Arts, entertainment, and placemaking

• Business ownership via Downtown Manhattan Incorporated and
the Manhattan Area Chamber of Commerce
• Community at-large and adjacent neighborhoods
• Community and social services
• Convention and visitors
• Developers and investors
• Downtown Manhattan, Incorporated Board of Directors and
membership
• Greater Manhattan Community Foundation Board of Directors
• Kansas State University administration, faculty, and staff
• Kansas State University students via the Student Government
Association and Student Planning Association

144