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.
Well Chicago is the original skyscraper city and it's downtown is also one of the cleanest in America.
But Manhattan is like a wonder of the world.
I think only the city of Tokyo has a better skyline and maybe Dubai.
Tokyo?! Tokyo has one of the most nondescript skylines of all the mega cities in the world; strange to put it as the only city to have a better skyline than NYC in the world.
Riding the El Train around the high rise buildings in downtown Chicago
The boat tour in between the Chicago skyscrapers
The beach with the Chicago skyline in the background
There are plenty of other things you can find in DT Chicago that you can't find in Manhattan -- eg good deep dish pizza, an aquarium or symphony concerts in Millenium Park. But I don't think anyone has said that Chicago offers nothing that you can't find in Manhattan.
Your question was how DT Chicago compares to Manhattan. My answer: if you confine your visit to Chicago's downtown core -- which, for purposes of this discussion, I will define as the Loop, Streeterville, Gold Coast and a small slice of River North -- the differences are fairly nuanced. Yes, Manhattan is much more intense and crowded, while DT Chicago is cleaner and, arguably, more handsome. But a first time visitor would likely find more similarities than differences. The biggest difference is that Manhattan's core is huge, while Chicago's is pretty small. And once you get outside of the part of DT Chicago mentioned above, the differences become much more pronounced. For example most of River North, the much ballyhooed nightlife and gallery district of Chicago, looks nothing like any neighborhood of Manhattan. It's peppered with surface lots, is fairly quiet (by Manhattan standards) and generally has a very different look and feel to it. Very cool neighborhood nevertheless with a lot of good action, but it's not really comparable to any neighborhood in Manhattan. The same can be said about much of West Loop and South Loop. The neighborhoods to the north of DT Chicago have also been discussed at length. We can argue about their merits but everyone would agree that they are not really comparable to Manhattan in any way, shape or form.
There are plenty of other things you can find in DT Chicago that you can't find in Manhattan -- eg good deep dish pizza, an aquarium or symphony concerts in Millenium Park. But I don't think anyone has said that Chicago offers nothing that you can't find in Manhattan.
Your question was how DT Chicago compares to Manhattan. My answer: if you confine your visit to Chicago's downtown core -- which, for purposes of this discussion, I will define as the Loop, Streeterville, Gold Coast and a small slice of River North -- the differences are fairly nuanced. Yes, Manhattan is much more intense and crowded, while DT Chicago is cleaner and, arguably, more handsome. But a first time visitor would likely find more similarities than differences. The biggest difference is that Manhattan's core is huge, while Chicago's is pretty small. And once you get outside of the part of DT Chicago mentioned above, the differences become much more pronounced. For example most of River North, the much ballyhooed nightlife and gallery district of Chicago, looks nothing like any neighborhood of Manhattan. It's peppered with surface lots, is fairly quiet (by Manhattan standards) and generally has a very different look and feel to it. Very cool neighborhood nevertheless with a lot of good action, but it's not really comparable to any neighborhood in Manhattan. The same can be said about much of West Loop and South Loop. The neighborhoods to the north of DT Chicago have also been discussed at length. We can argue about their merits but everyone would agree that they are not really comparable to Manhattan in any way, shape or form.
Yes manhattan offers more but those are 3 things in downtown Chicago would not be something I will be able to experience once I go to NYC. Not to take anything away from Manhattan but those are three unique things that only Chicago can offer when comparing both cities.
Yes manhattan offers more but those are 3 things in downtown Chicago would not be something I will be able to experience once I go to NYC. Not to take anything away from Manhattan but those are three unique things that only Chicago can offer when comparing both cities.
Chicago is a great city and absolutely worth a visit (in fact, repeated visits). Anyone arguing to the contrary is a moron.
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.
