San Francisco-with or w/o a car
 

For a tourist in San Francisco, is it better to hire a car or to use local transportation? Is it easy to park? Need opinions.

In San Francisco, an auto is not only totally unnecessary due to an excellent mass transit system, it's a terrible burden due to (1) driving on steep hills, (2) absolutely no street parking, and (3) exorbitant parking fees. Do NOT use a car in SF!!

Simone, <BR> <BR>I agree with Paul completely on having a car in the city of SF. However, if your travel plans allow for it, you might consider renting a car and driving out of the city for a couple of days (up highway 1) is beautiful or to Napa or Sonoma. <BR> <BR>Maria

Amen to Paul and Maria! My husband and I travel to San Francisco at least once a year. The very first trip we made there and this was 10 years ago, we made the mistake of renting a car. <BR> <BR>We had a difficult time negotiating the city, no place to park, etc. Parking at the hotel was about $15 per day!!! A waste of money! <BR> <BR>Maria is right though about going out to Nappa. We love to spend a couple of days in the valley, particularly St. Helena and Calistoga. Sonoma is wonderful as well. <BR> <BR>San Francisco has one of the best mass transportation systems I have ever seen. <BR> <BR>I agree with my fellow forum members - don't do the car!!! <BR> <BR>Have a wonderful time, <BR> <BR>Elliana

Yes, don't use a car while within the city. But do check out this web site for exhaustive info on all forms of public transit in and around SF, including ferries: <BR> <BR>www.transitinfo.org/counties <BR> <BR>Here you can find out what goes where, how to use it, fares, etc,. plus info for connecting with surrounding counties.

Basically, if you are staying within SF you don't need a car. If you plan to spend alot of time outside the City get a car. <BR>

I have to disagree a bit on the Mass transit - I think SFs is pretty bad. It only shines compared to Most American cities, which have effectively no mass transit. I don't think you need a car in SF, however, as its a fairly compact city and very walkable. That said, if you are an experienced city driver - ie. have no problem driving in New York, Boston, or DC, than you won't find driving in SF a horror. It helps a LOT if you know the city. <BR> <BR>Basically, I'd recommend walking and taxis, and mass transit if it happens to go your way over a car, though the hills can seem very steep if you're not in good shape. If you are disabled a car might be necessary.

The first thing we always to when we arrive in SF is DUMP THE CAR! The hotels and garages get an average of 25 dollars per nite and your car gets dings and dents in the garages. If you fly in, (we drive because we live 2 hrs away) then catch mass transit (bus/cab) to your hotel and forget the rentacar. SF is best seen (somewhat like Paris, I think), one district at a time + by foot. That way you get to enjoy the different neighborhoods....you miss so much by car. And I hate driving on steep hills. (I know my feelings are on target, because recently, I saw a sign at the foot of a rather steep hill there, which read, "HILL", and someone had spray-painted "no sh--" across it!

I have to agree and disagree. <BR> <BR>I think a car can be a great asset for a couple of days in SF, and especially for trips outside the heart of the city. Yes, parking is expensive, but you can cover a lot of ground in a short time with a rental. I usually rent downtown so that I can drive the city, Golden Gate Park, across the bridge to the spectacular overlooks that one might miss without a car, up the coast, etc. <BR> <BR>Stop scaring people! There is nothing more fun than coming to an intersection in the city and seeing only sky above you and braving the crossing. <BR> <BR>I'd say split the trip between car and mass transit/walking.

I'm with Daniel. I rent a car virtually everywhere and while it's not cost effective if you'll be in the city ONLY, there is so much to see in the areas around the Bay that I think a car is indispensable. Then again, I, like Daniel, find driving in Paris, Rome, Florence and London a fun challenge. But SF is nothing like those for driving hassles.

I live in the SF Bay area. I believe that not only is a car not necessary but it is a liability. Contrary to what some have said, public transportation in the Bay area is pretty good. <BR> <BR>I go into the city quite often to attend ball games, dine, play tourist or whatever. By the way, I highly recommend taking a look at the new Pac Bell Stadium ( home of the SF Giants ). It is an awesome stadium. Unfortunately tickets are very hard to come by but it is worthwhile just seeing the stadium. <BR> <BR>Using, BART, Muni, Cable cars, train, ferries, light rail ( Santa Clara Valley ), etc. you can get around the complete Bay area pretty easily. <BR> <BR>Driving in San Francisco is not very fun as it is quite congested, a lot of one way streets, and of course parking concerns. Parking will generally run 13-16 dollars a day at the hotels and public lots right in the city. Some of the hotels have free parking that are not right in the central city ( i.e. Lombard St. ). I have never seen anything as high as $25.00 but I suppose it may exist. <BR> <BR>In any event I would recommend planning your trip so that you rent a car only if and as necessary for long trips out of the Bay area such as Napa, Monterey.

Overnight parking rates: <BR>Mandarin Oriental Hotel $32.00 <BR>Ritz Carlton $30.00 <BR>(both as of winter/spring 2000, my last visits).

Thankls for the info Frank. I didn't know that there was anybody that high.

Pretty disgusting, no? <BR>If it weren't for expense accounts, who would pay these prices? <BR>