Santa Monica or Beverley Hills

[carys]

I would definately say SM !

[Guest]

Originally Posted by mickchick

As other posters are advising, Santa Monica is best for the beach, Beverly Hills or West Hollywood for the sights. But they are only about 20 minutes away from each other.
I would advise heavily against Santa Monica. The city has a policy of welcoming vagrants, and as a result you get all these poor unfortunates everywhere - begging, pan-handling, mostly no trouble, but at night often drunk and aggressive.
The whole resort has gone downhill. It used to be our favourite, but we were there last autumn and thought never again. Too sleazy, congested, and, as I said, the city's policy towards vagrants mean that the police are forced to give them free rein.
The nicest hotels are expensive, of course, but beware of anything too cheap - you get what you pay for there.
In Beverly Hills, try the London West, a new hotel in a smart, central area. Or the Crowne Plaza, as an earlier poster is trying. Ask for a Downtown view room as high as possible when you book - otherwise your view won't be very good.

See more...

Afraid I have to disagree here. I have stayed a week or so in (mainly) Santa Monica every year for the last decade nearly and never had a problem with the homeless - sure they are there, but no more so than other places (San Fran is the worst place I have seen for it).

As you go further south towards Venice, it does get worse in terms of hassle from the homeless folks but I have never had any trouble with them.

In terms of hotels, there are a few decent cheap hotels in the area as well. It may be 5 miles south, but the Marina International is a great budget hotel where rooms can be had for £30 - and I can be a bit of a hotel snob when I am away!

[DIBBadmin]

This thread has been automatically closed as it has not been posted on in 365 days.