Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Loop is the bigger business district than Lower Manhattan (at least using Canal St as the border). While the Loop is a bit of a 9-5 office district, there's still some stuff going on off hours. The Financial District is far more dead off hours. If you're talking about Lower Manhattan as a whole, than Lower Manhattan is the more vibrant one.
I still give an edge to Lower Manhattan as I find the narrow streets and claustrophobic skyscraper canyon neat (and unique). For example the Loop has nothing similar to this:
The Loop also has the canyon effect but what makes it unique from Manhattan's downtown is hearing the EL trains roaring along the tracks above the streets while seeing the flashes of random electric sparks. The view of the Loop from the trains above the streets just seem more scenic.
As for Midtown, you could combine the Loop, downtown Boston, downtown Philly and Manhattan's Downtown together and it would still be bigger. Midtown is basically the city of cities. Hong Kong or Sao Paulo are probably the only cities in the world that could give Midtown a run for it's money.
o yea but nyc cant do that with its trains. i noticed the el lines are much more independent then nyc subways.
if nyc subways were elevated in manhattan it would lines and lines next to eachother and on top of eachother.
i know but the 1950s nyc wasnt as developed as now, and thank god they threw them all away.
i like how the tunnels are mostly in the city, and the elevated lines are mostly located on the outer boroughs.
Manhattan had more people in the 50s than today (peak was in 1910); there were fewer taller buildings but everything had been built up. Elevated trains going through Manhattan would be annoying, but they would give some cool views. I like Chicago's El going through the Loop. Chicago's street are a little wider, but some Manhattan avenues are wide enough. I loved the views out of the elevated outer borough trains, too.
59th street down to 34th, to both rivers, is actually comparable to all of DT Chicago.
NYC just simply has more office space in roughly the same area.
yeah maybe just office space, manhattan in general dwarfs chicago downtown though and there is much more residential buildings not "counted" as office space in there. I would also say river to river Manhattan is wider than Chicago's DT and contains 60% of Chicago's entire population in 22 square miles. The daytime population is over a million more than Chicago's entire population as well, so the buildings obviously have to be there to accomplish this.
yeah maybe just office space, manhattan in general dwarfs chicago downtown though and there is much more residential buildings not "counted" as office space in there. I would also say river to river Manhattan is wider than Chicago's DT and contains 60% of Chicago's entire population in 22 square miles.
Midtown South is probably between 14th (or maybe 4th?) and 34th streets, which proportionally more retail and residences and less office, but still high compared to other American cities. Manhattan particularly stands out in job density:
numbers are 20 years old, but except for very new places the patterns should be about the same.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
