| Abstract: | Abstract Most federal and state coastal laws were framed with a distinct emphasis on preservation of rural/recreational areas. Yet in recent years a rural/urban coastal dichotomy has emerged. This has been especially prominent in the siting of energy facilities since these operations are often water dependent; power plants, for example, need huge amounts of cooling water, and offshore oil and gas extraction requires onshore support facilities. Recently, this issue has gained special prominence on the East Coast with the commencement of offshore oil and gas exploration. A case study was conducted in Hudson County, New Jersey, in New York harbor. In this area five oil‐related facility proposals were rejected from 1972 to 1976, primarily due to citizen opposition. Citizen activists now see the urban waterfront as a special place to which they want access and amenity uses rather than a continuation of past, almost exclusive industrial development. Hudson County citizens share the aspirations of those in several urban coastal areas which have experienced waterfront revitalization, including Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, New Haven, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle, and Toronto. Innovative siting which utilizes inland, rather than coastal, locations is suggested as one way to lessen urban/rural siting tensions. |
