Good places for a holiday in California?

BetterThanThou

I'd like to go on a holiday to California in the summer. I'm not quite sure where to go. The only place that's out of the question is San Francisco, as I'm hoping to go there next April. I've never been to any part of California, so I've got little insight in this. I'm going with one other person. The other person is the type who's happy to laze around on the beach/at the pool all day, I'm the type of person who likes to explore a place's culture, scenery and get the most out of what the location has to offer. So I'd be looking for somewhere that has the best of both worlds, and somewhere that's not in the middle of nowhere.

athtrasna

Southern California sounds like the place for you. Depending on where you choose to base yourself there is a lot to see and do. I'd be inclined to hire a car and break your time up into a night or two here and there.

San Diego is one of the most beautiful cities in California, and worth a visit. Laguna Beach has an arts festival in the summer that's very impressive. There are loads of beach towns up and down PCH that are beautiful and interesting. Head inland to the Palm Springs area..lots of history, different scenery and nice hotels with pools if that's what your friend wants. I really would break the trip up into short stays in 3 or most locations.

InTheTrees

How long?

What about driving? One of the most popular things to do is drive up the coast. There's also Yosemite, and the mountains.
Las Vegas is really close to the California border.

Its possible to figure out a route to take that avoids SF.

BetterThanThou

Driving isn't really a possibility, I don't drive, and the other person refuses to drive on the other side of the road. The holiday will likely be a week, possibly 2 at most, but no more than that. The holiday won't be drinking centric at all, as neither of us are into drinking. I may have phrased me being into the "culture" incorrectly. By that I mean, I don't like the tourist parts, if I go to Spain, I want to live like a Spaniard, if I go to Italy, I want to live like an Italian, if I go to California, I want to live like a Californian. San Diego seems beautiful and it's a place I've considered, if I have the funds for 2 weeks, I may book 1 week in one place and the 2nd in another. Ideally, a city is best, I'm not too interested in places in the middle of nowhere.

InTheTrees

Its a tough decision. Part of the attraction of the Western USA is the scenery so picking one place to spend a week is hard. My first choice would be SF but you'll be there next year.

I think I'd pick Santa Monica (in LA). There's hotels with pools, and there's beaches, and there's enough shops and life around to keep you occupied during the day although you'd need transport to see the major sights but there's many types of guided tours available.

What about taking the train? There's a train service all the way down the coast from Seattle to LA. About 1200 miles. Its two nights over about a day and a half so you get a cabin, which is really fun, food is included. the trains are really nice, clean and well kept up. There's a raised glass topped observation car where you can sit and look out at the pacific zipping past.

Fly into Seattle, take the train and see some of the country and then spend four or five days in LA?

http://www.amtrak.com/coast-starlight-train

athtrasna

BetterThanThou wrote: »

if I go to California, I want to live like a Californian.

Sorry but there's no such thing. It's a very very diverse state. Huge differences North and South, central and coastal. San Diego probably ticks more of your boxes than most other destinations. A week is quite a long time. If you do plan to do a second destination, how do you plan to get there? Public transport is poor.

InTheTrees

athtrasna wrote: »

Sorry but there's no such thing.

There is one thing that is common to almost all americans; on their sixteenth birthdays their parents take them to the Dept of Motor Vehicles and they get a drivers license, so they can drive the car they've just been given.

Crazy really, the absolute reliance on cars but there it is.

InTheTrees

athtrasna wrote: »

San Diego probably ticks more of your boxes than most other destinations. A week is quite a long time.

And are the San Diego hotels close to the beach? I'm not too familiar with SD. That's why I'd suggested Santa Monica. There'd also be more to occupy them for a week in LA. EVen without public transport.

CaliforniaDream

InTheTrees wrote: »

And are the San Diego hotels close to the beach? I'm not too familiar with SD. That's why I'd suggested Santa Monica. There'd also be more to occupy them for a week in LA. EVen without public transport.

We stayed in a hotel that had a beach right beside it with fire pits all along. Some of the rooms had private areas with your own fire pit.
San Diego is gorgeous. Definitely go there.

Paul_Hacket

San Diego is a nice city however if you won't be driving I'm not sure it will be the ideal destination for you. You CAN get to most of the main attactions (beaches, La Jolla, Midway Museum, Zoo, Seaworld, etc.) via public transport, however it is a bit of a pain in the neck. You'd probably be best off staying in La Jolla if you can find somewhere decent and affordable as it is more walkable there than other parts of the city. Speaking of which, San Diego isn't really a "city" as most people visualize cities. It's extremely spread out and low rise, so bear that in mind.

You say above that you're more into culture than beaches. If that's the case SD really may not be for you. I've always had a relaxing time when there but it's about one of the least cultural places I've ever been to. The "Old Town" in the center of the city is just a collection of shops selling tourist trinkets. Anytime I've been to SD I've used the city as a place to relax and chill at the beach before going on driving trips to other parts of California or the South West. Honestly, I'm not sure if I would fly all the way from Ireland just to do that (I live in NYC).

San Francisco would definitely be better for you but you say that's not an option. Not really sure what to say - in California the car is king (SF aside) and without one I really think you'll feel you're missing out.

InTheTrees

The trouble is that one of the really stand out cultural aspects of California Living is the car culture.

It takes about twenty minutes to get a driving license, cars are cheap, petrol is cheap.

And its been like this for getting on for sixty years, back in the 1950's when gas was 10c/gal and nobody knew what pollution was, they really thought the way of the future was for everyone to have a car and drive everywhere, and they designed the cities for that. So a lot of the more spacious and western cities are very very spread out. And because everyone could afford a car, public transport, buses, trains werent event considered. And barely are now.

The only reason San Fransisco is different and has a slightly more european feel is that its built on a peninsula so geographically it had nowhere to expand, but its tiny. Smaller than Dublin? Or similar size? So spending a week in the city is pretty long for holidays. But it is walkable.

InTheTrees

Paul_Hacket wrote: »

San Francisco would definitely be better for you but you say that's not an option. Not really sure what to say - in California the car is king (SF aside) and without one I really think you'll feel you're missing out.

Agreed. Which is why I was thinking Santa Monica (in LA). Its got hotels, its on the beach, and there's bars and restaurants and shopping right there.

It would take paying for tours to sightsee the rest of LA, but you could spend a week there.

CNTRLR

my 2 cents would be venice beach, stayed there last year for a few days, it is a bit on the touristy side in the summer but you can rent a bike and cycle all along the coast, up to malibu is not out of the question if you like a nice cycle. venice is on the beach and outside of our hotel/apartment we had the venice boardwalk then the beach so we went for a jog every morning.

Getting around LA is difficult without a car, but if you have a bike then things a easier to get to, but for the major things lacma, etc then public transport is the best bet.

I also stayed in long beach, that was also very nice with plenty to see and do but i think a car is a must have there.

Be careful with san diego, the prices can be really expensive if its around comic con, which is on in the middle of july.

InTheTrees

CNTRLR wrote: »

my 2 cents would be venice beach, stayed there last year for a few days, it is a bit on the touristy side in the summer but you can rent a bike and cycle all along the coast, up to malibu is not out of the question if you like a nice cycle.

Agree. Venice Beach turns into Santa Monica, they're pretty much connected. Its a nice area.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Santa+Monica+Pier/@34.0139556,-118.4956124,16z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x71282abcd653c317?hl=en

BetterThanThou

Thanks for all the replies. I've been reconsidering things, and San Francisco could be a possibility. I'm hopefully going there next April to see WrestleMania(It's actually in Santa Clara, but I'll probably stay in San Francisco), I'll probably go for about 5 days, with 1 of those days being taken up by WrestleMania. So is San Francisco the type of city that could potentially be boring the second time? Or would it be grand to go there twice in one year?

CNTRLR

there is a lot to see and do in san fran, you could easily spend 2 weeks there, the night life there is very good with some very good clubs, also for culture etc there is a lot to do such as the SFmoma, alcatraz, and seal pier to name a few.. however a beach might be hard to come by in downtown san fran but maybe some one else know better

athtrasna

I must be unique here, I hated San Francisco and never want to go back. Nice people, nice hotels. But crappy weather relative to Southern California and homeless people everywhere you turn, to be honest I couldn't wait to get out of there. Loved Alcatraz, very moving place but it goes on the list with Boston, been there done that. Have been to a lot of US cities but those two were the ones I have no desire to return to.

InTheTrees

athtrasna wrote: »

I must be unique here, I hated San Francisco and never want to go back. Nice people, nice hotels. But crappy weather relative to Southern California and homeless people everywhere you turn, to be honest I couldn't wait to get out of there. Loved Alcatraz, very moving place but it goes on the list with Boston, been there done that. Have been to a lot of US cities but those two were the ones I have no desire to return to.

I lived just south of it for years. And I can appreciate how people could dislike it. (I'm not one of them though!)

Its a pretty city and because of its geography its a little more dense and so its walkable which is attractive. But its tiny, you could walk across it in two hours(?), so I'd only give it two or three days. The fog can be frustrating, it kind of follows a pattern though so it can be worked around.

A major attraction of SF though is the surrounding country. There's Napa Valley, Tahoe, Monterey, Marin county all very close. And there's some nice parts of Silicon Valley too.

InTheTrees

CNTRLR wrote: »

however a beach might be hard to come by in downtown san fran but maybe some one else know better

Yup, its very Northern California. You wont get a Tan on Holiday in SF. Well thats not strictly true the weather is beautiful, its just not a place to go if you want to laze beside a pool and get dark enough to make your friends back home envious.

For that you need to go further inland where it bakes during the summer. Even Napa Valley is outside the fog belt and its pretty much cloud free for the entire summer. Beautiful area too.

athtrasna

InTheTrees wrote: »

I lived just south of it for years. And I can appreciate how people could dislike it. (I'm not one of them though!)

Its a pretty city and because of its geography its a little more dense and so its walkable which is attractive. But its tiny, you could walk across it in two hours(?), so I'd only give it two or three days. The fog can be frustrating, it kind of follows a pattern though so it can be worked around.

That may have been part of our problem, we did 5 days in San Francisco. I think it's like Vegas, dip in for 2-3 days and then move on.