Why are cities in the USA not built around rivers like European cities?
I’ve been struggling with big cities that aren’t on a river. Amarillo isn’t really big but it’s a great example of an exception to the rule. All I could come up with were Atlanta and Charlotte - that didn’t develop on rivers but a few miles from them. But they’re still on creeks which they relied on for fresh water. But as you point out - these were basically small villages (if they existed at all) before railroads put them on the map. This sort of scenario is slightly more common on the east coast where rainfall is abundant enough that damming a creek will quickly get you a large reservoir.
New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Chicago
Cincinnati
Kansas City
Omaha
Most large cities in the US are either coastal with large harbors, a large river and a harbor on or near the coast, or have a port on the inland waterway system
But even for cities large or small that don’t have a navigable port, they’re still located on or near a river.
Columbia, SC
Denver
Even our cities in the desert are built around rivers - Tempe
Edit: This is not meant to be an exhaustive list as most US cities and towns are adjacent to some form of waterway.
0 Comments