writealiving

Hi everyone! I've been trying to figure out a trip to take solo in February and LA seems to be calling me. I was looking for a beach vacation but wondered how realistic it would be to stay in Santa Monica or Venice to be by beach and then travel into the heart of LA to see the Walk of Fame, some studios and clubs, and the shopping. I would like to do some touristy things but would like beach as well. I don't know the areas and don't know if there is public transportation like here in NY. I don't know if anyone could direct me. Is staying in Santa Monica and going into LA the same as staying in Queens and going into Manhattan or is more involved? Is it more timely, etc? I found deals at the Oceana, the Biltmore, the Standard, and Vivre Joie de Vivre. I'd appreciate any advice. I'd be coming in for about 5 days.

sf7307

writealiving, first of all, what do you want out of a beach vacation? You cannot count on warmth in February -- it might be beautiful, or it might not, but it almost certainly will not be "lying on the beach" weather, and the water will be frigid (the Pacific is always cold, in winter, it's frigid). That said, if you want to be by the beach for the ambiance, that's certainly doable.

There are those who will tell you that public transportation is doable in Los Angeles -- I'm not one of them. The LA area is just so spread out that I think you would spend too much time traveling from place to place. It's NOT like Queens to Manhattan, well, to start with, there's nothing like Manhattan in LA, but even if you were just referring to downtown Los Angeles, or even Hollywood, it's more like Jones Beach to Manhattan!

Just as an example or two, I google-mapped Loew's Santa Monica to the Farmer's Market (18 minutes by car, 56 minutes by public transportation). 19 minutes v. 1 hour to the La Brea Tar Pits.

writealiving

Thanks, Sf. I do get that it's not like Manhattan. I was trying to get an idea about travel times and the way things are spread out. As far as beach, it was more ambiance than lying on it or swimming. It seems like I'd spend way too much time in transit stressing myself out if I stayed in Santa Monica. So would you say that I should stay at the Bitmore, Standard, or Joie de Vivre and maybe do one day trip to visit the Pier. I'm very open to suggestions. I have no one thing I have to do, just a few touristy things that would be interesting. I like to travel with some suggestions but nothing set in stone and sort of discover. Is LA good for that?

sf7307

writealiving, I actually don't live in LA (I live in the Bay Area), so I'm sure there are others who can give you better (i.e. more specific) information. Is there no way you would rent a car?

writealiving

Sf, I'm aware from other forums that you're from the Bay Area. You gave me great advice when I went to San Francisco last February. I wasn't sure if I should or shouldn't get a car. I guess I just wanted an idea from anyone who has gone or lived there about the transit situation since I hear so much about LA traffic. Could it be as bad as NY? My preference would be to stay in Sana Monica and go into different parts of LA which is doable with a car. But if people said too much traffic, too far, etc, I'd stay in Hollywood or Downtown. Usually I can get a good picture, but for some reason, this one's throwing me.

yk

I've spend quite a lot of time in LA in the last year or two without a car.

It's not too difficult to stay in downtown (eg, the Biltmore, or the Westin) and use public transportation.

You can take the Metro express bus 720 or 920 from downtown LA to Santa Monica. The 920 is the *super* express, whereas the 720 is the regular express. It takes about an hour to get there.

If you click on my username, you can find a few LA trip reports by me.

MomDDTravel

I live in Southern California - I would stay in SM or Venice and rent a car...

suze

I'd stay in Santa Monica or Venice, rent a car, and drive into the downtown area when you wanted to see those things. LA is a very *car oriented* city, and while public transportation is an option, it would not be my choice. Sure there's traffic but everyone is used to it. I was surprised the caliber of drivers I saw there.

sf7307

I agree with momdd and suze, stay at the beach and rent a car. Then you'll have complete flexibility, including driving to your destinations in something other than rush hour (there's always traffic in LA, but rush hour can be something like the LIE at 4 o'clock)

suze

I grew up in Los Angeles (Venice) and spent one summer for work in downtown LA (Biltmore Hotel). I *love* it, but imho you need a car. If you really feel strongly about not renting a car, honestly I'd go to San Francisco instead.

writealiving

Thank you so much everyone! I will rent a car regardless of where I stay. I'm glad for the input because besides the car rental, now there's valet fees to look at. Lol, my cheapie trip is going up. I'm leaning towards staying in Santa Monica and enjoying the beach ambiance and then heading into the touristy things I want to do at will. I appreciate all the advice!

SeaUrchin

Yesterday it was around 78 degrees in Santa Monica so it was good beach weather, now there is a cooling trend and it will be in the high 60's with sprinkles, you never know in So Cal. There is plenty to do in that area and WLA, Hollywood, West Hollywood, Bev Hills, Century City is just a straight shot up surface streets, pleasant really except for rush hours.

obione980

I thought there was now quite a good Metro in LA. Does it not go anywhere useful??

lvk

The Metro doesn't go to the beach.

I'm not a big fan of Santa Monica or Venice. The 10 freeway and west- east surface streets are a disaster. The detours caused by construction along the 405 are only going to exacerbate those problems.

For better "beach ambience", check out the South Bay beach cities- Manhattan, Hermosa & Redondo. Lodging is generally cheaper and many places offer free parking. From there, you can take the less-crowded 105 freeway east to the 110 for your Downtown L.A. and Hollywood destinations.

writealiving

Thanks Ivk. I actually had found some pretty cheap stuff in Redondo and Hermosa but I thought Venice and Santa Monica were closer. I will have to look into those again. Thank you!

suze

I'd also consider doing it the other way. Staying somewhere downtown-ish maybe around Fairfax district, Melrose, parts of Hollywood and do your beach-time in reverse.

sf7307

Love the "strand" in Manhattan/Hermosa/Redondo beach, and like the towns in the same order. Not a fan of the Redondo beach pier, but it's easily avoided even if you stay in the area. Good/fun shopping and eating in the area, great beach, and as lvk said, easy drive to Hollywood, Beveraly Hills, downtown and even to Santa Monica and Malibu if you want to take a ride.

sf7307

If you use googlemaps, go to Manhattan Beach, CA, and zoom in a lot -- you can see the Strand and the beach on the map.

SeaUrchin

The trouble with staying in Redondo and nearby is that you have to use freeways. In Santa Monica you can use various surface streets to get into B. Hills, and the cities she wants to see on the Westside.

Jean

To see/do the things on your list (Hollywood, studios, clubs, shopping) in five days from a hotel/base in a beach town, you'll need a car. Clubbing and late night public trans are not really compatible, and getting to Universal Studios would take 60-90 minutes one way and to Warner Studios 90-120 minutes one way.

But if you really prefer not to rent a car, then stay in downtown L.A. and take the Metro to Hollywood, Universal Studios, Pasadena (shopping) and take taxis to/from the clubs. You can also take the metro (or LAX FlyAway bus) from the airport to downtown L.A. and from downtown L.A. to Manhattan Beach. The beach trip will take 60-90 minutes one way and involve a shuttle bus from the station in MB to the pier.

You can search L.A. public trans here:

www.mta.net