Laserfiche WebLink
<br />most advantageous. If this is not the case, then the systems we plan <br />need to function differently. <br />Another major item is the need to address the means of implementation <br />directly in the planning. Assuming "some one" will implement a plan if <br />it is good enough just is not good planning. Storm drainage in the urban <br />region is the responsibility of many. For the systems to function in any <br />near optimum fashion all components of the system must be planned and <br />implemented with due recognition for all other components. In other words, <br />all plans should be developed and compatible on a hierarchical scale, <br />beginning with those jurisdictions that have control over the streets <br />and curbs and gutters to the jurisdictions that have control over the <br />major receiving water areas. <br />I~ith the potential of properly designed nOllstructural measures, vary- <br />ing degrees of perforn~nce may be entirely appropriate. The criteria <br />approach (a priori designation of acceptable performance levels) should be <br />considered outmoded because it probably will not result in the optimum <br />solution. <br />And last, and probably one of the critical and most important elements, <br />how will the system look and what disturbance of the landscape is involved <br />in its implementation? At this stage it cannot be overemphasized that the <br />specific works themselves and their meshing with the remainder of the <br />urban system, the neighborhoods and other social infrastructure must be in <br />consonance with the public attitudes. The concepts of single purpose <br />facilities designed with only functional considerations have caused most of <br />the objections to implementations of regional storm management systems. <br /> <br />35 <br />