Boston (Charles River), New York (Hudson River), Philadelphia (Delaware River), or Washington D.C. (Potomac River)? (better, compared)

[Trafalgar Law]

Boston (Charles River), New York (Hudson River), Philadelphia (Delaware River), or Washington D.C. (Potomac River)?

Which river bisects your favorite urban setting in the Northeast Corridor's major cities?

- Type of development (along the river)

- Urban form of neighborhoods and districts (along the river)

- Architectural variety seen (along the river)

- Most recreational setting (along the river)

- Most picturesque setting (along the river)

- Most historical context (along the river)

- Most "iconic" of the rivers being compared

Compare them. Pictures are welcomed, follow City-Data terms of service while posting pictures though.

[gladhands]

The Charles is the only river that I feel is a vital part of the city. The Charles is the only river that I feel is a vital part of the city. The Westside Highway and Henry Hudson keep the Hudson river from being fully ingrained into New York life… That and the fact that there's no subway line running west of Eighth Avenue

[qworldorder]

In the cases of New York City and Philadelphia, there is another major "river" that contends--the East River for NYC and the Schuylkill for Philadelphia. River is in quotations because I realize the East River is a tidal strait, and the Schuylkill, while a true major river in its own right, is a tributary of the Delaware River.

Regardless, based on your criteria, I think the Schuylkill actually beats the Delaware River in scenery and recreation, the latter of which I find underwhelming. And the East River can be argued as well, with all of its famous bridges, the Roosevelt Island Tram, better skyline scenery, central location between the 3 most populous boroughs, and mob infamy. The Hudson is too big and serves as an urban disconnect between NYC and NJ, imo.

[stanley-88888888]

^ mystic river ?

[odurandina]

The ass end of my back yard is the Charles River in a neighborhood up river... got 12 turkeys cackling out back too.... ducks, geese, deer and the odd turkey buzzard.

The Head of the Charles happens a few waterfalls down from the end of my property. Effing blows i can't canoe from the back of my barn to the Atlantic Ocean.

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by stanley-88888888

^ mystic river ?

The Mystic doesn't flow through the city the same way that the Charles does. There's also no equivalent to the Charles River Basin in the Mystic.

[btownboss4]

The thing is unlike the Hudson and Delaware, the Charles and Patomac don't have massive port and industrial areas. The Charles River was never the economic lifeblood of Boston (thus the parks on both sides). The only industry that was on the Charles were mills further up the river in Waltham and Newton. The Delaware River or Hudson River for Philly/NYC were their economic lifeblood for a long time.
The Rivers are not really comparable.

[FrankInPhilly]

Originally Posted by qworldorder

In the cases of New York City and Philadelphia, there is another major "river" that contends--the East River for NYC and the Schuylkill for Philadelphia. River is in quotations because I realize the East River is a tidal strait, and the Schuylkill, while a true major river in its own right, is a tributary of the Delaware River.

Regardless, based on your criteria, I think the Schuylkill actually beats the Delaware River in scenery and recreation, the latter of which I find underwhelming. And the East River can be argued as well, with all of its famous bridges, the Roosevelt Island Tram, better skyline scenery, central location between the 3 most populous boroughs, and mob infamy. The Hudson is too big and serves as an urban disconnect between NYC and NJ, imo.

Yes, this ^^^

The Schuylkill is more important to Philly than the Delaware when it comes to recreation, visuals, commercial/residential development ... pretty much anything other than commerce. The Delaware's eye candy is the Ben Franklin Bridge: it's an attractive and historic structure, and it provides great views of the city from its sidewalks.

[boulevardofdef]

Originally Posted by gladhands

The Charles is the only river that I feel is a vital part of the city. The Charles is the only river that I feel is a vital part of the city. The Westside Highway and Henry Hudson keep the Hudson river from being fully ingrained into New York life…

What about Storrow Drive? Just yesterday I was in Beacon Hill and thought about going down to the Charles, but I had second thoughts because it was too inconvenient to cross Storrow Drive.

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by boulevardofdef

What about Storrow Drive? Just yesterday I was in Beacon Hill and thought about going down to the Charles, but I had second thoughts because it was too inconvenient to cross Storrow Drive.

Storrow Drive is kind of a bummer. The bridges over it are spaced out well, imo, but the riverfront definitely would be nicer if that road weren't there.

Even with Storrow, though, I'd say that the Esplanade is more accessible from the inner city than riverfront parks on the Potomac or Schulykill, and the Delaware and East rivers just don't have as nice parks along them.

You could easily walk from the Public Garden to the Esplanade in 5min or less.