Last year we took our family on a four week European trip hitting four countries. It was great, and everyone (kids aged 4, 6 and 13 at that time) had a wonderful time.

We are beginning to plan for another three or four week adventure next summer, from mid-July to mid-August. My wife and I are having a debate over visiting three countries over this period, or establishing a base in a rented apartment from which we could take excursions, but really getting to know one place.

I am worried that we will end up getting bored living a “regular” life. She believes we will truly get to know a place. Of course, we could both be right.

I wanted to put this question forward to the board. I am sure others, with more travel experience, might be able to give us some guidance.

If you have thoughts on where we should go for an extended stay, we would love to have them. For an extended stay, our inclinations are France, Italy, Switzerland or Greece. We have some experience in all of these countries. But we would be open to other places as well.

Thanks for your thoughts and experiences.

Assuming you mean to rent a car, I would plant myself in Tuscany or Umbria for a month. A self-catering place with a pool. We only stayed 5 nights, but I can't even imagine getting bored in a month!

Hello tn, my husband and I took several two month trips and he always wanted to stay in Italy which was more than fine with me. And so we did. But personally I wouldn't want to stay in the same place for three or four weeks. Family members did stay in the same villa for three weeks in Tuscany a couple of years ago. They really enjoyed their time but personally that would have been too long of a time period for me. Two months in Italy with a car, and travelling around Italy was always perfect, and spending time on Capri and Sardegna etc...well and some time in Switzerland.

I don't know what would the best for your family but personally one place would become boring for me also. As far as a villa in Tuscany or Umbria with a pool for that length of time, well having had a pool for ages that wouldn't appeal to me. But it does come down to what each person is looking for regarding their vacation and what is one person's "cup of tea" is not anothers. Best wishes to you and your family and I hope you can plan a trip that will work well for all of you.

We toured around Eastern Europe a couple of years ago, then flew to Naples and rented a villa for a week. Why not do a little of both? Or travel for 2 weeks, then do 2 different 1 week rentals in 2 different areas? Or put the 2 weeks of driving in the middle?? All sorts of combos possible.

I would stay in one country, but four different one week rentals. If you did Italy, you could base yourself in Rome, then Tuscany, then on the coast, and then near Lago di Como, for example. You would get to understand the local culture, etc. but still have plenty to explore.

I would only pick a place to stay for a month where I really, really liked the food, and where I felt that it would be rewarding to either walk in a new direction every day, or have an interesting city within easy reach.

As much as Switzerland awes me, I wouldn't pick it for a month (although in Switzerland's defense, if you pick the right spot, both with a train station and a lake, your opportunity for a variety of ways to enjoy nature can feel limitless).

Although I live in Italy, I can think of few places where mid-July to mid-August would not be terribly hot -- and driving in Italy is a challenge. I think Umbria might be the very best spot to pick if you choose Italy (with a swimming pool!). Much of the driving is fairly easy, but you can also hop a train or bus when you weary of driving. I think Umbrian wine is great. I'm less enchated with the food, day in and day out. (I try to remember St. Francis was a vegetarian.) The appeal of Umbria is the density of outstanding art sites, plus the very, very beautiful nature close at hand around Gubbio and the Piano Grande and nearby lakes. Perugia is a fascinating city the minute you take time to get to know it. Really fascinating. And places like Spoleto (the music festival!), Todi, and Orvieto will knock your socks off. But the hilly towns might aggravate your kids.

I think Greece, with its poor infrastructure and different alphabet, would be a nightmare for a month.

I don't know France all that well, but that might be my choice for a month's stay. Roads are good, food and wine are easy, lots of charm. Myriad little villages to explore, while at the same time, a lot of relaxation. I would still want to be close to some big city, however. I just don't know France well enough to know which one it is.

I could also stay in Paris for a month, and I think it's quite enjoyable to be there in August when the Parisians have left. Just make sure you get air conditioning. And your kids will obviously have less freedom than if you stay in small Italian or French town.

Last but not least, why not someplace cooler? Like Belgium? Food is great, you can catch trains to Paris, Amsterdam, Antwerp, etc. Roads are flat, so you can bike. There's history. There's foreign languages -- but also a lot of English.

Ok, I admit it. I just love Belgian food.

I think I could do Sorrento for a month. You're certainly close to alot of great places - Pompeii, Naples, the Amalfi Coast - might provide enough variety to keep the kids from getting bored.

tn - as a Mom of four who has traveled with the entire clan a lot - I suggest two weeks in one place and two weeks in another. It will give you a good amount of time to settle in, have some "down' days but keep the older children not as bored perhaps.

You oldest will be an older teen at the time and might require a little more activity then obviously the younger ones.

I think with 2 weeks both you and your wife will have what you desire and the children will have enough time to settle in etc.

Keep us posted.

I agree with momddtravel. I like the idea of two weeks in one place, and then two weeks in another. This would allow for day trips and getting to really know an area. We just traveled for two weeks through Paris, Munich and then all around Austria. I felt cheated by only having a couple of days here and there. I thought it would have been better to concentrate on two areas for the two weeks.
But, with a month, I would pick to big cities and book two apartments that have washers and dryers and a/c and spend days traveling outside of the city as well as immersing in the culture of the country.

I personally am with loveitaly on this one. While I think the idea of staying in one place sounds very relaxing and nice, in the end I know that I would get bored and start itching to move around. I just don't want to waste time hanging around an apartment/villa and pool in Italy on my vacation. But everyone is different. I would perhaps pick three/four places and base myself in each place for a week.

I do like the idea of maybe breaking it up and doing two different locations for two weeks. This would give you a nice feel for an area but perhaps without getting bored of it.

Best wishes,
Tracy

I am laughing here at the posts that talk about getting "bored" after a week or two in one place. Especially because so many here talk about wanting to "live like a local." For what? A week?

I guess I have a different perspective from most folks. I've owned a home in France for 17 years, and even when I have the luxury of hanging out there for 6 weeks or more at a time, I'm never, ever "bored," and trust me, my place is VERY rural and remote by most standards. Even when I travel elsewhere, as I do often, it's not uncommon for me to park myself somewhere in a tiny village for 3 weeks at a time (in Umbria, for example - I did that for 6 weeks in 2006). I never get "bored." I don't understand that kind of boredom.

Sure, I understand the mentality of wanting to move around and see lots of places, have lots of experiences. I travel like that too. I think it just depends on what kind of trip you want. But as for getting "bored," to me that's impossible.

You and your family are lucky to be able to have such an extended stay in Europe!

Personally, if I had that time, with our family (2 kids, currently 9 & 13) I'd probably travel around, but stay in each place for a longer period of time. There's just so much I want to see!

I like the idea of several one-week stays. You could vary your locale - city, country, etc.; stay in one country to several (but maybe not 4) countries.

My chief concern, however, would be avoiding the heat. For that reason, during that time of year, I'd focus on northern Europe and/or the mountains. For example, Switzerland and Austria, and then the Netherlands for some city (or at least more urban) time, or even Scandanavia.

Use your last, successful, trip for ideas. Did you then, or in retrospect, wish for extra time in certain places? Did you spend more time travelling from place to place, and want to spend less time doing that this time? Or was your travel time just right? If visiting a city, did you hit the most famous of the must-sees, or did you also enjoy smaller museums or churches, or quiet out-of-the-way courtyards? If the latter, then more time in one place (depending on the place) might allow you more time to find those lesser-known treasures (that is, whatever you consider to be a treasure). But if you haven't sought those out on previous trips, then maybe spending more time exploring one place in depth would be less interesting to your group.

Also, on your previous trip, did you get tired of crowds and tourists, or was that more-or-less ok with you? Did you like the bustle of city life, with the greater selection of sights, restaurants, cafes, beautiful squares? Did you seek out more rural or local places, maybe the type where you had a harder time making yourselves understood, or where there were fewer tourist attractions? We've found that we're more and more looking for less-touristed places - our last trip included driving through the countryside of the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary. We loved it, but there were drawbacks (less tourist infrastructure, though we almost always found English translations or English-speaking people when we needed it; fewer restaurants and few souvenir shops). But at the same time, we've also found that we "need" at least one big city on our trips as well, because we also enjoy art and history museums. So think about what your group got the most out of on your previous travels.

Enjoy your planning!

Three or four weeks in France is a great option. There is a lot to see and many different regions to explore.

You could spend a lot of time in Italy also.

Three or four weeks in Switzerland or Greece would be a waste of time and money.

I usually try to cut a swath through a region in a month. You could fly open jaw or travel in a circle. I plan for travel days no more than every other day. On travel days I plan for no more than three to four hours in a car or train; by the time you add checking in and out, getting meals and a site or two enroute, the day will be shot.

I plan for travel days no more than every other day. On travel days I plan for no more than three to four hours in a car or train; by the time you add checking in and out, getting meals and a site or two enroute, the day will be shot.
-----

That kind of travel is great for many but I do not recommend it for traveling with three children.

This has probably already been said, but among the many ideas floated here,
the one I'd try would be to schedule one long period in one place and then travel about a bit for the remainder of your time. How long the long period is would depend upon how much you identify in the area that you'd like to day trip to and how wedded you are to giving yourself and your kids an opportunity to really get to know a single place. Minimum two weeks and max 3 would be my thought. Besides all the suggestions for tuscany and Umbria, consider Provence and Normandy coast, latter having possibly best climate for the time of your stay. This should give you an opportunity to try out your idea of staying in a single place without a complete committment to it. Then you can weigh your reactions to your experience and see how you want to handle upcoming trips in future years--without completely tieing yourself down to the idea immediately.

What I finally ended up with for my 5 week stay was at minimum 4 nights in one place - maximum is 2 weeks. I am traveling solo with an 11 year old who does not have the strongest constituion but does have a strong will LOL.

My family made me promise I would never "do" to them what we did on our first trip to Europe - Paris, Montruex, Florence and Rome - cut short by a few days due to travel delays - so Paris was only 2 nights (was supposed to be 3).

The next time we are traveling as a whole group to Europe we are doing 10 nights in Paris in one apartment with an overnight trip to London.

"But as for getting "bored," to me that's impossible. "

Kids can get bored in one place but also tired of moving around a lot. You know best what your family enjoys.

I would stay away from hot places unless you are looking for a beach destination ( or a house with a pool).

Austria is a nice spot - has culture, hiking, lakes, good transportation ..
close to Northern Italy and Slovenia.

Belgium and Holland could be a good combo..
close to France and Germany.

Lots of options to pursue, tn, from the posts! Might I add another? I love France, but in the summer parts of it are uncomfortable temperature-wise if you don't have a pool and/or AC. However, in mid-August a few years ago we spent time in the Grenoble/Annecy area with three other couples & thoroughly enjoyed it. Cooler! We actually rented an old, charming home in the hills outside of Talliore with gorgeous views of the lake & the city. You can hike, parasail, rent bikes, swim, etc., there. Lots of dining options! A couple day trips to Geneva, Switzerland, & the Mt. Blanc area of the Alps were fun. Great hiking opportunities at Mt. Blanc.

Doing this with 3 children compared to 3 couples presents a different dynamic; but if you're thinking of dividing your time into 2 or 3 places, this area is definitely a viable option for one of those. Good luck & happy planning!

My sister and I took a 16 day trip to the UK last year, taking our 14 y/o nephew along. We did one week in London and then we were on the move for the remaining 9 days in Scotland (2 in Inveraray; 2 in Plocktion; 2 in Inverness; and 3 in Edinburgh). I personally liked staying in one place a little bit more than moving around, but the 14 y/o was more than ready to leave London after a week.

With a group, you'll probably end up with folks who prefer the extremes, so I'd say split it between 2 or 3 places, and take day trips from those bases, too.

We can all give opinions, but this (more than most questions) I think is something only you and your family can decide. What do the kids want to do? At least the older I'm guessing would have an opinion.