2nd Trip to Italy- where would you go?
May 7th, 2008, 05:43 PM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2nd Trip to Italy- where would you go?
Hello! My husband and I are beginning to think about our 2nd trip to Italy, next March. We honeymooned in Florence & Montepulciano three years ago, and can't wait to go back.
We're pretty open this time, so I'm curious to hear itinerary suggestions from other Fodorites. It will be a short trip (5 nights), so we want to use the time well and not cram too much in. Perhaps 3 nights somewhere in Tuscany as a base (Siena?), and 2 nights in Rome.
A few things about this trip:
-If all goes well, I will be 3-4 months pregnant. This is a "last trip before baby" - so no major winery tours this time!
-We'd rather use public transportation (did that on our honeymoon too), but I'm not ruling out renting a car.
Where would you go? What would you do? Thanks in advance for helping me dream!
We're pretty open this time, so I'm curious to hear itinerary suggestions from other Fodorites. It will be a short trip (5 nights), so we want to use the time well and not cram too much in. Perhaps 3 nights somewhere in Tuscany as a base (Siena?), and 2 nights in Rome.
A few things about this trip:
-If all goes well, I will be 3-4 months pregnant. This is a "last trip before baby" - so no major winery tours this time!
-We'd rather use public transportation (did that on our honeymoon too), but I'm not ruling out renting a car.
Where would you go? What would you do? Thanks in advance for helping me dream!
May 7th, 2008, 05:47 PM
#2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5 nites Rome, with a day trip to Ostia Antica.
IMO, 5 nites is too short to divide between 2 locations because 1 day would be travel between the 2 places & the first day is mostly taken with flying in, transfering, checking in, & adjusting to jetlag.
have fun!
IMO, 5 nites is too short to divide between 2 locations because 1 day would be travel between the 2 places & the first day is mostly taken with flying in, transfering, checking in, & adjusting to jetlag.
have fun!
May 7th, 2008, 05:50 PM
#3
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With only 5 nights, I would stick to one spot. And I would choose Rome. Of course, I should admit that it's my favorite place! 
There's so much to see there, and you can take it as easy as you like if necessary (if you're expecting). Buses are a great way to get around if you can't walk much, although at 3 months, you should be fine. And of course you can always spend time relaxing in a piazza (especially Piazza Navona) just watching the people, performers, and artists if you don't want to move around much. Stay in a central location and have a great time!
There's so much to see there, and you can take it as easy as you like if necessary (if you're expecting). Buses are a great way to get around if you can't walk much, although at 3 months, you should be fine. And of course you can always spend time relaxing in a piazza (especially Piazza Navona) just watching the people, performers, and artists if you don't want to move around much. Stay in a central location and have a great time!
May 7th, 2008, 05:53 PM
#4
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, JulieAgain and I were posting at the same time, but it seems that we agree. On the other hand, I spent 36 days in Rome (over 5 trips) before ever taking a daytrip! But that daytrip was to Ostia Antica...
May 7th, 2008, 06:55 PM
#6
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of years ago my sister and I did 5 nights in Rome when she was in her first trimester. We had a great trip--and my niece has been to Rome and she doesn't even know it.
I suppose if you don't like cities this wouldn't be a great trip for you. But Rome is March is fantastic.
I suppose if you don't like cities this wouldn't be a great trip for you. But Rome is March is fantastic.
May 7th, 2008, 07:05 PM
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks so much for the replies! We initially thought of spending the entire time in Rome. But we live in NYC, so we're thinking we might need a bit of a break from big cities. However, your overwhelming responses will definitely make us reconsider
Keep 'em coming!!
Keep 'em coming!!
May 7th, 2008, 09:31 PM
#8
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 45,322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Tarheels, well for sure you do not know if you will be expecting next March but assuming that you are and that you will be 3 to 4 months into your pregancy you will no doubt be feeling wonderful.
Rome was my first thought. Five nights means four complete days without arriving or departing. Enough time to get a feel for Rome and to visit some of the wonderful sites and sights and to also enjoy some just relaxing time (if the weather cooperates) in outdoor cafes in wonderful piazzas. If the weather is not always cooperative there are many places to enjoy inside.
My other thought is Venice. But Venice being further northeast and since it is located between the Adriatic and the Dolomites it will probably be colder. But that you are from NYC that will no doubt not be a problem. You could take a day trip via the train (from the Santa Lucia Station in Venice) to Padova or Bologna or Treviso etc. if you wished to expand a bit further from Venice. But four days in Venice in my opinion would give you a chance to wander the calles, to really get a feeling for this magical city and it is so different from NYC..well it is different from any city in the world.
I agree with the others. I would settle on staying the five nights in one spot. I wouldn't lose over a good half day trying to go to stay in another hotel.
Best wishes to you..on your choice with Italy and with starting a family!
Rome was my first thought. Five nights means four complete days without arriving or departing. Enough time to get a feel for Rome and to visit some of the wonderful sites and sights and to also enjoy some just relaxing time (if the weather cooperates) in outdoor cafes in wonderful piazzas. If the weather is not always cooperative there are many places to enjoy inside.
My other thought is Venice. But Venice being further northeast and since it is located between the Adriatic and the Dolomites it will probably be colder. But that you are from NYC that will no doubt not be a problem. You could take a day trip via the train (from the Santa Lucia Station in Venice) to Padova or Bologna or Treviso etc. if you wished to expand a bit further from Venice. But four days in Venice in my opinion would give you a chance to wander the calles, to really get a feeling for this magical city and it is so different from NYC..well it is different from any city in the world.
I agree with the others. I would settle on staying the five nights in one spot. I wouldn't lose over a good half day trying to go to stay in another hotel.
Best wishes to you..on your choice with Italy and with starting a family!
May 7th, 2008, 09:34 PM
#9
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to ask you if you like cities etc. I think that really makes a difference. I melt after 3 nights in NYC - Rome was not my favorite.
One thing to consider is the weather in March. Are you going at the beginning or end? The further south the better the weather for you.
If it was me I would spend 2 nights in Venice and then 3 nights in Tuscany some place -
But I am not a city gal
One thing to consider is the weather in March. Are you going at the beginning or end? The further south the better the weather for you.
If it was me I would spend 2 nights in Venice and then 3 nights in Tuscany some place -
But I am not a city gal
May 7th, 2008, 10:01 PM
#10
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rome and a break from big cities...
IMO, this is no problem. Take a picnic for the day and go and discover the forum romanum and its Palatin hill. You will hardly notice you're in Rome.
You also have the Villa Borghese Park.
The general traffic 'pressure' is a lot lower than in NYC. You will consider lot's of the places you'll visit as very relaxing.
IMO, this is no problem. Take a picnic for the day and go and discover the forum romanum and its Palatin hill. You will hardly notice you're in Rome.
You also have the Villa Borghese Park.
The general traffic 'pressure' is a lot lower than in NYC. You will consider lot's of the places you'll visit as very relaxing.
May 8th, 2008, 03:44 AM
#13
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want a tiring time, doing lots and walking city streets a all day, then I'd agree with Rome (and I say this as one who loves Rome and has been a number of times).
A bit less tiring but still a city (although much smaller) & still walking - 5 nights in Venice.
If you want something more relaxing, I can't think of a better idea than copying ekscrunchy's trip to Amalfi - her trip report is currently in progress at http://www.fodors.com/forums/threads...p;tid=35128776
However the weather might not be good in March, so you may want to consider Sicily as having a slightly better chance of warm weather. With only 5 nights I'd just stay in Taormina.
A bit less tiring but still a city (although much smaller) & still walking - 5 nights in Venice.
If you want something more relaxing, I can't think of a better idea than copying ekscrunchy's trip to Amalfi - her trip report is currently in progress at http://www.fodors.com/forums/threads...p;tid=35128776
However the weather might not be good in March, so you may want to consider Sicily as having a slightly better chance of warm weather. With only 5 nights I'd just stay in Taormina.
May 8th, 2008, 04:26 AM
#15
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As suggested quite generally, I would take 1 spot and stay there for the 5 days.
Rome has been suggested extensively, but Venice might be a good alternative. You just walk and walk, and when tired, you hop on a public transport boat to have a complete different view of the city.
Rome has been suggested extensively, but Venice might be a good alternative. You just walk and walk, and when tired, you hop on a public transport boat to have a complete different view of the city.
May 8th, 2008, 04:35 AM
#16
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also suggest Venice. We went to Venice for 7 nights on our second trip to Italy. The first time we had stayed 3 days and it captivated me so much that we just had to go back and stay longer. And what a romantic place to spend your last "before baby" time together.
May 8th, 2008, 06:57 AM
#17
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Either Rome or Venice.
Venice really is magical, and although March can be very, very cold (and wet and windy) there, it might also be nice spring weather (a lot like NYC, come to think of it). No need for a car, obviously, and you can easily take a day trip or two via train to, say, Padua or Verona. Very romantic.
Rome is more likely to have nice weather (though still hardly a guarantee). Rome will not feel like a particularly hectic city to you if you're used to NYC, but it's not nearly so relaxing as Venice would be.
Both cities have excellent public transportation, but are also so compact that you'll likely be comfortable doing much of your visit on foot. Venice used to have a lot of really terrible food, but these days that's much improved (hurray for the internet) and you've got as good a chance of a nice meal there as you've got in Rome.
Were I in your place I'd probably pick Venice for this trip. As others have pointed out, I wouldn't bother to move from one location to another, as it's too hectic for this short of a trip.
Venice really is magical, and although March can be very, very cold (and wet and windy) there, it might also be nice spring weather (a lot like NYC, come to think of it). No need for a car, obviously, and you can easily take a day trip or two via train to, say, Padua or Verona. Very romantic.
Rome is more likely to have nice weather (though still hardly a guarantee). Rome will not feel like a particularly hectic city to you if you're used to NYC, but it's not nearly so relaxing as Venice would be.
Both cities have excellent public transportation, but are also so compact that you'll likely be comfortable doing much of your visit on foot. Venice used to have a lot of really terrible food, but these days that's much improved (hurray for the internet) and you've got as good a chance of a nice meal there as you've got in Rome.
Were I in your place I'd probably pick Venice for this trip. As others have pointed out, I wouldn't bother to move from one location to another, as it's too hectic for this short of a trip.
