New York City hotel location
 

Which of these Marriotts is in a better location (close to subway, safe area, many restaurant options): Marriott Marquis in Times Square or Marriott Eastside (Lexington and 49th). Thanks.

Either is OK, but I'd take the Marquis any day over the Eastside, even though their elevators are a pain.

I agree with Patrick - either would be fine. I would pick the Marquis because I LOVE to walk around Times Square at night.

Marquis is definitely a nicer hotel, but it depends on what type of area you want to be in. Marquis in Times Square is definitely in the middle of it all, and if you don't get to NY often, and want to be where there's a lot going on, that's the one to choose. The Eastside is in a much quieter (at night) area.

Times Square is nice to visit for a few minutes, but I always advise visitors to stay elsewhere. So, personally, I'd avoid the Marquis like the plague unless that's your thing -- Times Square and all it's noise and crowds.

The eastside Marriott, in contrast, is in a great area near a #6 subway stop at 50/51st. Much better neighborhood -- certainly with better dining options.

Enjoy NY!

Ditto what Gekko said. Both are perfectly fine hotels, but I'd take Eastside over the Marquis because I wouldn't want to stay in the middle of Times Square. Depends on whether you want to be in the middle of a bustling tourist area or in a quieter, classier "hotel district."

Just a reminder. We may all have different goals of course. But for those of us who don't live in a huge bustling city, if we wanted a quiet little neighborhood we'd stay home. Some of us go to New York BECAUSE it is loud, busy, crowded and boisterous, as difficult as that is for those who live in the city to believe.

And I agree (NOT) about avoiding the horrible restaurants of midtown. Like the horrible Le Bernardin, La Grenouille, Cite, Judson Grill, and all those other horrible "touristy" places. Hah!!

Oh no here we go again....all of us....and not one the same! Once again tonight I agree with Patrick. I can't help but smile when I read "Times Square and all it's noise and crowds" - That's the point! I live in Amish dairy farm country and I love it here....

BUT when I go to New York

I go to shop on 5th ave and Bloomingdales & Saks (sorry we already have lots of little boutique shops in PA) AND eat at the Carnegie Deli and YES just BE in Times Square!

I'll save "Quiet & Classy" for when I am at Palm Beach or Longboat Key.

I'm also curious about the New Yorkers who tell tourists to avoid Times Square -- the most famous "tourist" area of the city. I wonder when these same people go to Miami, do they avoid South Beach in favor of staying out in suburban Kendall, the "real" Miami? Or when going to Los Angeles, do they avoid going to the "touristy" centers like Beverly Hills, Hollywood, and Santa Monica and instead seek out a residential neighborhood instead so they can experience the city the way residents do? When they go to Paris, I bet they don't stay in the 1st or the 6th because those are places where tourists stay. Do you think instead they stay in residential areas rather than the typical tourist centers? I'll never understand why these people can't figure out that we are tourists to New York BECAUSE we like the touristy places?

How about those who are constantly urging people not to stay in the Union Square area of San Francisco. I loved staying there and I had no problems. I was convenient to the theater, shopping and good restaurants. I like being in the Times Square area of New York because I enjoy being near the theaters.

NYC's Times Sq has noise and crowds?
Who knew? :-O
Next thing you'll tell me there's gambling at Rick's in Casablanca.
Loved the TS area and can't wait to get back to SF next week for UnSq, FW, Nob Hill and all then other "tourist traps".

I'd pick the Marquis over Lex/49th for location, especially if you plan to attend one or more Broadway shows.

Times Square is quintessential New York City. Walk half a block and you're out of Times Square, and away from noise, crowds...

We've stayed all over Manhattan, but when we have theater tickets prefer the Times Square "vicinity". It's just more efficient for pre/post theater dining and getting to the theater.

And, we do enjoy visiting Times Square on each and every visit.

Depending on your preferences, there may be "better" dining on the East Side, but there is plenty of magnificent dining within an easy walk of Times Square.

When selecting a hotel for a city, I generally get a one page map, then highlight my seeing/doing/dining/shopping destinations during our visit. Where to stay becomes apparent.

With the subway/buses/taxis, you can hardly go wrong anywhere in Manhattan.

BUT, being within walking distance of your major destinations has a huge advantage. You don't necessarily want to take a bus or the subway when you're all dressed up. And, it's often difficult/impossible to find a taxi as quickly at dinnertime/showtime/raining/snowing.

And, if you care to change/freshen up in your hotel room before heading out for the evening - that's a consideration as well.

I don't recall ever suggesting tourists avoid times square - just that there are other (IMO better) places to stay that are still in the cneter of the city and near many of the major things to see and do. (And yes, If I went to Miami - which IMO doesn't have a lot of interest - I would never stay in South Beach - although I would go there one evening. Nor do I stay in Soho in London or Pigalle in Paris - I prefer central, busy locations that are less tacky/dirty/noisy.) If I were a tourist in New York I would stay either at the Stanhope (which I understand offers great rateon Priceline - and is near Museum mile - one of the 3 major tourist areas in the city). Or I would stay in upper midtown - along Central Park - great for shopping and dining and within easy reach of almost everything. Native New Yorker or not I would never stay in Tmes Square (to me similar to trying to sleep in the middle of a carnival - which I could never take for more than an hour or two.) Times Square is no more convenient for downtown (Ellis Island, Statue of Liberty, Tenement Museum, WTC site, Canal Street) or uptown (a bunch of the greatest museums in the World and good upscale shopping) than a lot of other places. It is really especially convenient only for theaters - and since we cab afterwards being there would be no real benefit - just an annoyance. I know some people have said they like the bustle of New York - well obiously so do I - or I would never live here - but there is bustle in many other places besides Times Square - which I still find more tacky/tasteless than bustling. (And IMHO thinking Times Square is typical New York is a little like thinking EPCOT is really like europe.)

Personally, I think this is one of those fodors moments when someone asks a simple question which sparks off healthy debate on a subject of interest to alot of travelers to NY who will search on this topic in the future. I also like Central Park area(and stay there for business travel), but I find it is quite a bit more expensive. So when we go as a family we stay between Times Square and Central park, in the area around the Sheraton Manhattan. Easy walk to either place, and take the subway and/or cabs to the other areas.

p.s. That area I referred to btwn. Central Park and Times Square is around 7th and 52nd

Kal....have you stayed at the Casablanca??? It looks real nice...It was the only hotel around Times Square that "blew my skirt up"...had to find something else...it was booked.

circa, Thx for the info.
I'm having a heck of a time finding a "cheap" P'line or Hotwire hotel in NYC when we want to go in May.

May have to bite the bullet and actually "pay" for a real room at a real hotel!

Kal...the Casablanca is not cheap...but looks real nice....Traveladvisor reports all good.

Have you done the biddingfortravel bit for priceline???...there seems to be some good deals at the better hotels in Manhatten. Good luck. I plan to be NYC 4/27-5/4...staying at the San Carlos[50th & Lexington].

Kal, our local paper ran an article about the Wolcott celebrating their 100th anniversay with rates (Sunday - Thursday) of $100/night (+ tax). Maybe this would work for you if you can't get a PL room. I think you have to call the hotel directly or e-mail them as I did not see the $100 rates on the website. http://www.wolcott.com/wolgoo.htm email address is: [email protected], phone number is: 212-268-2900

Hey I live in NYC and agree the glamour of Times Square wears off after about 15 minutes. When it comes on where to stay when I am on vacation, I prefer to stay at a nice hotel in a nice area which is easily accessible by car or transit. (This isn't always downtown!)

Let's see, when I went to Boston, I stood in Chelsea, which is not a great part of town, but the hotel was nice and 10 minutes to downtown Boston. Most people prefer to stay in Back Bay or downtown.

I went to Miami and stayed in South Beach and hated it. This time I'm staying in Coral Gables, and the last few times I actually did stay in Kendall (at a friend's house, however!)

Went to DC and stood in the Woodley Park area by Rock Creek Park which, while not central, I found it better to be in a residential area, instead of being close to all the sights. My thing was I didn't want to be pegged as a tourist. LOL

However, as locals to NY and some visitors already know, technically there are very few hotels in Manhattan that are not in safe locations or close to the subway or have restaurant options. Basically almost any hotel (with the exception of a few) will have these options.

PS I received at my office details about a new hotel that just opened up called the Hotel Giraffe on Park Ave. South by 26th Street. Looked pretty snazzy from the brochure. Website was something like www.hotelgiraffe.com