San Francisco Hotels
 

Can anyone advise me on the following San Francisco hotels:<BR>Kensington Park<BR>SW<BR>Handlery Union Square<BR>Grosvenor Suites<BR>Savoy<BR>Warwick Regis <BR>Hotel Vintage Court<BR><BR>Any comments or other suggestions appreciated. Thanks!<BR><BR><BR>

We've stayed at the Warwick Regis and it was fabulous, service, room, amenities.. I've never been to the others, so I can't render an opinion on those, but if I were in SF again, I'd be staying at the Warwick. Location is good, too.

What's the neighborhood like there? I was thinking it was starting to get marginal.

hpl:
Yes, you're right about the neighbothood. I too have notice that Union Square and much of Downtown SF is pretty grimy and uninviting: lots of street people and prostitutes. I would choose Marina or Cow Hollow areas instead.

San Francisco is over rated. I was there for four days in March and I saw alot of Bums and scum to last me a long time. The whole town is turning into a skid row. It's too bad. S.F. was a great place to visit at one time. Now you better watch your back.
Come to Chicago. My kind of town. Everthing is great but we don't brag about it.

Jim,

I agree with you in your assessment of SF. SF has been a progressive deteriorating over the past decade or so. Now it has gotten to the point of sheer repulsiveness in many of the areas frequented by tourists. It really is a shame.

We were in San Francisco last weekend and stayed at the Chancellor Hotel on Union Square. The service was great, our room was clean and everything we needed with a view of Union Square - everyone there was helpful and friendly and one of our favorite restaurants was right across the street - Scala's Bistro, also next door is Sear's Fine Dining - a great old San Francisco restaurant for breakfast. Also, we have stayed at the Galleria Park Hotel, Donatello Hotel and Beresford Arms - all were great bargains - and Union Square is great. Enjoy your trip!

I stayed at the Grosvenor Suite about 6 months ago on business. It's a '60s apt. building that was converted to a hotel. Had a very large room with a kitchenette although breakfast is included in the room rate. Good location near Nob Hill. It's not fancy but I would definitely stay there again.

We could hear street noise at the Vintage Court so if you stay there specify a quiet room away from the street. The rooms were decorated nicely even though it is older.

I too have come to the conclusion that SF seems to be overrated and is in dire need of some major clean up efforts to get rid of the homeless as well as other derelicts on the street. A hotel in Union Square would be the last place to consider staying until they clean up that neighborhood.

any comments on radisson-fishermans wharf? hotel bijou? hyatt-embarcardero?
i want to be close to a trolley stop to have access to such a great city!

Jasper
We recently stayed at the Radisson Fisherman's Wharf and loved it. It is a three star hotel.Our room was very clean and the staff friendly. We asked for a bay room view and if we left our window open we could hear the harbor seals on Pier 39 bark, which might drive some people nuts, but we liked it. We could see Alcatraz from our room as the hotel is right across the street from Piers 41 and 39. We walked to the cable cars and took them to Chinatown. The hotel is very close to the Golden Gate Bridge and driving to wine country, Muir Woods, Sausalito, San Jose, and Santa Cruz. It also offers free parking if staying there (It's advertised in the 2003 Convention brochure as such) It's close to a grocery store which we shopped at for bagels, peanut butter and banana's for breakfast. Not only was it cheaper to have breakfast in our room, we saved a lot of time and could get going on the day's activities. Have fun!

jasper - if you want to be close to public transportation, the Hyatt Embarcadero is an excellent choice.

cd and j correa...thanks! i actually think it would be kind of cool to hear the seals bark like that! i loved sf when i was there 3 years ago, and can't wait to get back. this time around i want to return to the haight, and make it to the places i missed last time...city lights book store, harry dentons starlight room, lombard street, etc...any resteraunts not to miss? i know these hotels will probobly be $$$, but thats the price you pay for convenient location like that. and if you're gonna do it, do it right! : )

Try the Palace Hotel in the business district. Very nice. They even have afternoon tea.

Jim
I QUITE happily agree with you--Chicago is way underrated IMHO.But man, it gets coooooooollllld!!

I saw a segment recently on the 6pm news (natinal news) about the problems with the /bums/homeless in S.F. and fact that it's definitely hurting the tourist/hotel business. Apparently they are doing something about it - of course not everything agrees with how they are handling the problem.

Jasper
I got the Radisson for $80.00 on Priceline and I felt that was good with the free parking. A restaurant we enjoyed was across the street on Pier 39 &quot;Pier Market&quot; moderate price and good crab cakes and wonderful clam chowder we would always ask for a window view that overlooks the harbor and Pier. If you have a car, drive the &quot;crooked&quot; part of Lombard St. We took a cab and went down it but decided we could have done that! However, he picked us up at the hotel, took us down, stopped and took of picture of us at the bottom, took us back to the hotel for $10.00.

cd...sounds fun! i know it's touristy and stuff but hey...i haven't brought myself to bid on priceline because aren't you stuck w/the hotel they give you? i'd rather know what i was getting, i'm kind of spoiled : )

The cash not care program is proving to be very controvercial. I don't know much about the details, but it seems like a good idea in theory - providing vouchers for services to the homeless rather than cash.

Unfortunatele a court in SF has stopped the care not cash program from being implemented. It doesn't look like SF is going to be cleaned up any time soon, I am sad to say.

The voters approved it, but then the court ruled that the voters don't have the power to approve something like that. Hmmmmm

SF does have a homeless problem, but I don't think it should deter people from visiting the city. I don't think that the problem is so bad as to negatively impact tourists. They will probably get panhandled, but it's not a big deal.

The liberals are the cause of S.F.s problems. The feel sorry for the bums but don't care about a mother walking down the sidewalk with her little kids looking at some bum urinating or lying in the grass with himself exposed.

Who runs that town the usless bums or the hard working people of San Frncisco?What they need is not free everything buta kick in the butt out of town.

Well, if you spend your hard earned money on a vacation you don't want to be harrassed by a homeless person at every other street corner who wreaks of urine. Yuck. :b(

Jim,

No kidding, SF is going to have to get its act together sooner or later. I just dread every time I HAVE to go there on business.

you guys, is it really that bad? i will be there for two nights in June. staying at Park Hyatt in Embarcadero area. maybe the whole town is not bad, just specific areas? if so can you please advise me where to avoid. i live in new york city so even though i dont like to see dirty smelly bums around, i dont think i will be too shocked by it.

Karebear,

The sketchiest areas anywhere near the Tourist Zone are
1) 5th-9th Streets between market and Howard (No reason for you to go here, there is nothing there, only empty store fronts and a couple of adult video stores and cheapo electronics &amp; luggage rip-off stores)

2) a small area called the Tenderloin which is basically about 3 blocks west of Union Square. Again, nothing here of any interest to any tourist. This are is less shady that area #1.

Union Square, FW, Northbeach, Ghiradelli Sq, the Embarcadero, The Metreon area * other areas of interest to tourists are all perfectly safe.

A change is coming! San Francisco's next mayor will be Gavin Newsom. Ultra-liberals poo-poo him because he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth - but he's the only member of the board of supervisors with the guts to tackle the city's homeless problems.

Dollars to doghnuts you'll hear better things about San Francisco once he takes office.

Tourist-wise the homeless problem isn't overwhelming - but definitely annoying. Reminds me of NYC in the early '80s.

I agree with BayArea's assessment of the situation.

I think most posters know I'm a big SF fan and tend to stay out of these bash contests but I heard a bit of irony on SF radio this a.m and saw it in the Chron's website.

There is a &quot;nation's largest psychiatrists association&quot; (Amer Psych Assoc.) convention in SF now and it appears one of the docs was assaulted by a homeless man with a Hx of mental probs....near UnSq.
We wish her a speedy recovery.

This just may be the straw that broke the camel's back.

Doesn't Gavin own a restaurant in SF?
Maybe that why he's pushing it?
www.sfgate.com for the article.

Having said that, I still can't wait to go back next month. Maybe because DANGER is my middle name!
:)&gt;-
Kal D. Kahuna

Pugger, I live in Ca. and fly to S.F. about twice a month, I've stayed at the Kensington Park &amp; the Vintage Court, they were just okay, not dumps but nothing special, the locations are both good.
Here are my suggstions: www.argenthotel.com new nice rooms great staff and lacation
www.marriott.com be sure to get the one on 4th street not Fisher Man's Warf (never stay in that area)also the W on 3rd street www.whotels.com
Expedia &amp; Hotels.com usually have good deals
If you would like any more info. on S.F. restarants etc. please feel free to email me at [email protected]
Best of luck
Fluffy

karebear,

Yes, unfortunately it is that bad in SF. The main areas to avoid basically includes downtown/Union Square, South of Market, and the Mission.

I was in New York City las month. It is spotless compared to San Francisco, no exaggeration. You will be in for a shock when you see SF. I have read that per capita San Francisco has 10 times the homeless population that New York City does. That basically explains the general poor condition of SF.

We stayed in Fisherman's Wharf and had a really good time. There were homeless on the streets but did not bother us. The only homeless that were rude were some at the cable car turnaround who sang to us as we waited for a car and were upset when we did not give them money. The rest of our 5 day experience was good, actually very good.

I have stayed in the Union Square area twice in the last two months. I think it is a great area. We did not run into the homeless, filth, etc. anymore than any other city or town I have visited in the last few years. The Union Square area has great shopping, retaurants, etc. and is so convient to many ares in the City within walking distance. San Francisco is a great city - enjoy your trip!

thank you everyone for your responses on where to avoid. i guess everyhwere has its bad points. i planned this summer trip to California after people had make me forget my other two ideas New Orleans and Key West because NO was supposedly dirty and smelly and hot and Key West was also dirty and had a lot of bums around. I will be in napa 2 nights, monterey 2 nights, and i only have 2 nights in SF and originally i was scared this wouldn't be enough, but now i think it will be perfect.

karebear,

If you think that SF is not dirty and smelly with lots of bums, just wait and see. I have been to both New Orleans and Key West. They are spotless compared to SF.

Jeez Louise! I live in the city and my neighborhood is spotless. It is a much gentler city than NYC (which I love and adore, too). Some neighborhoods are nicer than the others--and, if you are looking for a bargain by staying in certain neighborhoods...you get what you pay for...and, if you don't bother to venture out of those neighborhoods, you have a very limited view of the city...

Chuckles, Maybe your neighborhood is clean, but that is true for most of the suburban residential areas in SF. The trouble is that the parts of SF that are dirty and frequented by street people are the very same parts of town that tourists are in. The homeless aren't going to hang out in a residential subdivison to beg for money. They are smart and park themselves in tourist areas where there are more people for them to harass for money.