skatterfly

On location alone, hands down I'd pick the second one (over by Luxembourg gardens). The first is just so so so far out of all the main tourist areas and it seems to be farther away from transportation options. The walk to the RER at the first option seems to be longer than the walk to the RER station at the Luxembourg option. Considering that with the first location, you'll be forced to take the metro everywhere, access to the metro/rer is going to make a big difference. So for me it's not so much the arrondisement it's in but the metro connections.

Yes, the first one has a sightly better layout and maybe a little bit more room, so if you don't think you can tolerate being all up on top of eachother for 7 solid days... it's something to consider. For 7 days, I'd sacrifice a little space for easier metro connections but my kids are still little (7 and 10) and both girls.

What I don't know first hand is the time it would take to walk from the 1st apt to either the RER/Metro station at CDG Etoile (where you'll have the straightest shot to everything) and also to the Ternes station (which sounds like it might not run as often and will add to the number of transfers you need to do.)

Good luck.

cathies

I've stayed in an apartment near the 2nd one you are considering and the location was great. We could either catch the RER to a connecting station, or a bus straight down the blvd st Michel. We would often wander through the Jardin du Luxembourg. It was a very quick trip to rue mouffetard where we could shop for groceries and there was a very nice patisserie nearby. On the blvd st Michel we found a few small grocery stores that were adequate.

My only reservation is that it is small for 4 people, however the location more than makes up for that.

djkbooks

I LOVE the location of the first one! Not only is that a beautiful neighborhood, you'd be right around the corner from rue Poncelet, a market street that is totally untouristy (unlike those such as rue Cler and rue Montorgueil). Yes, getting to the "major sights and attractions" would take a bit longer, but you would find that worth your while. We stayed a bit farther west (Hotel Concorde Lafayette) for two weeks and rode the buses everywhere, never took the metro at all.

It's also much more spacious (50m2 versus a more than "cozy" 38m2). And, the bathroom has a tub (which the ladies will appreciate) as opposed to a shower only. I'm also quite suspicious of the bathroom (there are photos with a glimpse of the shower) in the second property. I've seen "spacious walk in shower" in apartments and they are not so spacious. Often there's no place to put your toiletries and your elbows hit the sides when shampooing, etc. It's also impossible to get out of the way of the spray for doing other things.

That balcony does look useless. I would definitely not describe it as "a lovely balcony". It would appear there's barely room for one person to sit on it. In one of the photos, you can clearly see that there is no space to pull the chairs out!

Both listings, though, are seriously embellished regarding location. The Eiffel Tower is not an easy walk from either.

You can peruse the neighborhoods of each with Google Maps, street view and "search nearby" for things like supermarkets, patisseries, etc.

If your visit is during the warmer months, neither mentions a/c. You may want to verify location of windows, direction of sun exposure, whether there is cross ventilation. During a spell of hot weather, being on the 6th floor (which is actually the 7th and appears to be the top floor) would be very risky.

As for the "shlep", with four people and bags, take a taxi. It won't cost much more than public transportation. Once in Paris, after you've used the metro, you can decide if you want to save the few Euros on the return trip (you probably won't).

cw

I have one observation about the layout of the units. In the first there is a door to the living room and those in the bedroom can walk to the bathroom and kitchen without going through the living room where your daughters will be sleeping. In the second apartment, one has to walk through the living room to get to the bath and kitchen.

I would choose the first for the space and privacy and kitchen. The second is pretty tight for four people, though I like the balcony.

When are you going--will you need a/c? The second looks as though it's on the top floor and would be hotter in the summer.

I think your daughters will love being near the Champs Élysées.

justineparis

I would not want my girls wandering the Champs in the evening, but I would let them wander around the Latin Quarter in the evening.

Luxembourg Garden one gets my vote.

Jinky

I don't think I'd let 17 and 15 year old girls wander without an adult in any city they are unfamiliar with. Eapecially at night and not knowing the language. I'm a bit shocked that this has even been suggested.

We are taking our teen girls to Paris as well, and I certainly am not going to allow them to run off by themselves. Same goes for London and Amsterdam. Ours are 15 and 18. Am I just being an overprotective ninny?

cathies

A little bit jinky, sometimes we forget that their smart young brains are just as capable as ours. Some 18 year olds travel a lot on their own, however info understand that you will be anxious.

cw

I don't think anyone suggested that the girls wander around alone at night. But once they learn their way around I would assume they could walk around during the day if they and their parents were comfortable with that.

djkbooks

Actually, avenue des Ternes is much better than the Champs Elysees for shops, bakeries, cafes, etc. Once there, I think you'd feel comfortable with the girls wandering the neighborhood a bit on their own. You might want to send them out for fresh pastries every morning.

For a seven night stay, you will really appreciate the extra space...

justineparis

Jinky I am shocked that you think a 15 and 17 yr old are too young to wander around, really shocked. Kids ( including my 18 yr old nephew who grew up in rural Vancover island, and had never even been exposed to public transport here) travel to Europe independently at 18 and 19 all the time.. and you are afraid to let your kids walk down the street?????

I find some Americans a tad overprotective .. talking about their "children" who are like 20 and in college like they need to still take care of them all the time.

I let my 13 yr old boy run down the street to the Mcdonalds on his own in Paris, it was in a good touristy area, what could happen, he knows how to cross streets for goodness sake. I also had to let my 11 yr old daughter run downt the street from our hotel once and pick up some food, I WAS reluctant because she was so young, but i had terrible food poisoning and could not leave room, it was already 3 in afternoon and she was starving, and there was no room service etc. I admit that freaked me out, but there is a huge difference between an 11 yr old and a 15 and 17 yr old.

When you are in Paris, look around, on the streets and metro,, you will see local kids walking around without their mommies and daddies.. by 11 or 12 of course. Now, I know you are saying language, but what does that have to really do with it, do YOU speak the langauge? As long as they have a card with the address of the hotel written on it and 20 euros for a taxi if need be, what is the worst case scenerio??

They are MOST unlikely to be accosted or attacked in Paris, I would be far more nervous in many other places in North America .

janisj

"<i>Am I just being an overprotective ninny?</i>"

Yes . . . (meant in the most gentle way possible )

Besides - one of yours is 18 and is an adult (even in the States . . . )

Unless they have some particular 'issues'/mental disabilities it is perfectly OK/acceptable/normal/safe for teenagers to wander around London/Paris on their own.

But our European friends do need to understand this American concern (some would call it Helicopter parenting) is partly because MANY kids aren't at all familiar w/ public transport or walking around big cities and aren't very 'savvy'.

I live in a suburb of a large city. Here most kids have never (ever) taken a bus (except school buses), 99.9% have never taken a train, and they are driven everywhere - either by parents or friends.

Christina

The ones near ave Ternes isn't really right off the Champs-Elysees. I said there was no photo of the bathroom just because I couldn't see one, but I guess I didn't spend enough time perusing all the photos, that's all. I still don't think that location on Gay Lussac is very scenic, I've been there.

As for the kids runnign around, no teens don't have the same brains and experience as older people, they just don't. A lot of this is not innate IQ, but experience and cities and transportation. If the kids had no experience with either, I might worry for a long period, but depends on the location. My nephew got lost in London and he was 22, which totally amazed me, although no harm came to him. But I found out he didn't have a lot of common sense which maybe is a teen thing (more than 22), even though he is certainly smart enough on paper. It never occurred to him to carry a map around with him, for example. Well, yeah, I always carry a map with me when I'm in a strange city, you would easily get lost if you didn't have one. And some kids and adults even have literally no experience with public transportation, which surprises me but if they've never traveled or been in big cities, that could happen. I live in a big city with a metro and am amazed at some of the questions grown adults who are tourists ask me about using the metro.

justineparis

So worst case scenerio if a person gets lost is what? They have to figure it out, they are unlikely to be in any danger other then worrying anyone waiting to meet them.

I think we can agree a 15 yr old doesn't need to be let loose for whole day to tour city alone, but that two teens ( especially with an older teen , 17,18) are absolutely fine to wander in an area for an hour or two without mom getting too stressed out.

justineparis

Just over on Rick Steves forums, theres a Canadian boy who is 18 and considering a trip to Europe with his 15 yr old cousin( posted under General Europe Questions " Age limits at Hostels") ,, on their own.. Canadians on forum are suggesting not the best plan, but no one is freaking out about it. I wouldn't advise a 15 yr old and 18 yr old to travel on their own , but you can see that the difference between some people thinking.. a walk about town is one thing, a cross Alantic journey solo is another!

Jinky

Thanks for the gentle reminders that I need to relax and let the girls have some fun exploring on their own; my husband said the same thing I can imagine the excitement having breakfast or lunch at a cafe in Paris, just the two of them, without mom and dad there.

Not sure why I'm being so weird about this. As a high school graduation present, my mom sent my friend and I to Europe for four weeks. I was only 17! Shame on me for forgetting how magical Paris can be for a young girl, wandering around on her own without a care in the world.
Thank you kind Fodorites for reminding me

maxima

I would take the larger apartment. the second one seems pretty small for four people. You will need the space. Your kids maybe petite, or thin, but they are grown up when it comes to space for sleeping and sitting. And you will need space for four suitcases, even if they are small ones.

No matter where you stay, you will find that you will need to change metro stations, so I would not worry if a major station with multiple lines are not right out the door. Paris is also a great city for walking.

Definitely take a taxi from the airport. You are arriving at night, and with 4 people and your luggage it hardly pays to schlep. On your return trip you can decide if you want to taxi over to a train station and then take the RER to the airport.

Breakfast out in Paris is nothing special. But your girls might enjoy going to the local bakery for coffee and pastries. I would imagine that your girls would like some free time together and that way you and your husband also get some time together.

theflock

I like the location of #2 better, as well. Additionally, it looks like there is more storage space in the bedroom which can really make a difference in space. When there isn't hanging room for clothes and a place to stash luggage, there's a lot less space for living. The fact that the kitchen is open to the living room will make it feel larger than if the kitchen is a separate room.

IdyllicItaly

WP,

My preference is for the Luxembourg apartment. I love the fact that it's on the 6th floor with views of the rooftops. I also love the little balcony, even if it's not large enough for two people to sit there. Simply walking out and taking in the view should be a treat. Seeing the little balcony from inside would be please me, too.

I think some of the difference between the 50 sq. meter apartment and this smaller one is due to the larger bedroom of the former. Perhaps the living room areas are of a similar size.

Best wishes with your decision. I hope you'll report back on your choice after your trip.

janisj

Yes - definitely look at all the closet space in #2. That essentially makes up for the smaller sq feet.

I just think (just me personally) that the extra storage, the balcony, the better seating arrangements, and the location, would make #2 the better/more 'fun' apartment.

djkbooks

There are two closets (if you look at the floorplan) in the bedroom of #1.

Again, I would encourage you to "walk" around each neighborhood on Google Maps, Street View.

Just because #2 is in the vicinity of Luxembourg Gardens, Latin Quarter, etc., does not make the location "better". And, "more central" is not necessarily a good thing.

A windowless bedroom on the top floor is just too risky in summer, despite the "lovely balcony".

Interesting OP has not weighed in...