San Francisco - Never been to SFO - Taking Anniversary trip - Where should I stay?

1. Never been to SFO

2. Taking 8-year surprise marriage anniversary trip with my wife (we are from Seattle)

3. Looking for a hotel with great city view near good shopping/downtown/tourist districts. I prefer "grand" hotels but looking to keep it under $500/night. Want excellent service, valet (we are renting a car), great view of the city. We want good central access to all the main tourist type activities.

Suggestions on where to stay?

Ethan

1. Never been to SFO

2. Taking 8-year surprise marriage anniversary trip with my wife (we are from Seattle)

3. Looking for a hotel with great city view near good shopping/downtown/tourist districts. I prefer "grand" hotels but looking to keep it under $500/night. Want excellent service, valet (we are renting a car), great view of the city. We want good central access to all the main tourist type activities.

Suggestions on where to stay?

Ethan

You should be able to have your pick of SF hotels for that price range. Expect to add about $50-60 a night for valet parking.

As a resident I never stay in hotels in SF, so l have no personal experience with rooms here. In other threads I've seen the St. Regis and Ritz Carlton mentioned as good lux properties.

Also, try searching the Luxury Hotels forum - there are some good suggestions there.

Congrats on your anniversary, Ethan. The Westin St. Francis is right on Union Square, so if being in the middle of the hustle & bustle is your thing, that's a very good choice. It's an old 4* hotel that I think qualifies as "grand".

Now, great views are hard to come by at SF hotels -- so many other buildings in the way. I see that some of the higher rooms in the tower at the St. Francis have good views; they price them accordingly. http://www.westinstfrancis.com/accommodations/tower-building

The cable car runs on Powell Street, just outside the hotel's doors. Muni Metro (light rail), the F line (above-ground trolley) and BART are all within a couple of blocks.

Enjoy your stay in SF. BTW, to avoid confusion, you might reserve SFO for when you're talking about SF International Airport.

Congrats, I would also go for the Westin St. Francis, valet parking is 50$ per nights which is normal in San Francisco. I would send them an email or call them prior so they would give you an upgrade if possible.

I'm not that fond of the Westin St. Francis - I'd look at TripAdvisor and go from there. For top-end hotels, there are always the Four Seasons, St. Regis, Ritz-Carlton, Mandarin, and Taj Campton.
http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotels-g60713-San_Francisco_California-Hotels.html

Do make sure to have dinner at a wonderful SF restaurant. There are so many of them.

I'm not that fond of the Westin St. Francis - I'd look at TripAdvisor and go from there. For top-end hotels, there are always the Four Seasons, St. Regis, Ritz-Carlton, Mandarin, and Taj Campton.
http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotels-g60713-San_Francisco_California-Hotels.html

Do make sure to have dinner at a wonderful SF restaurant. There are so many of them.

I'd not include the Four Seasons, given the OP's desire to be in the middle of the hustle & bustle. The FS is several long blocks removed from that.

I'd not include the Four Seasons, given the OP's desire to be in the middle of the hustle & bustle. The FS is several long blocks removed from that.

I think the FS qualifies as providing great access to all the usual tourist activities. The Ritz is actually a bit more inconvenient as it is up a pretty steep hill, whereas the FS is a flat walk to almost everywhere the OP would want to go downtown. I've heard from friends, however, that it's not the best FS in the system. The Taj Campton is in a great location if the hotel quality can be confirmed.

I would also go St. Francis. It is truly in the "heart" of SF. You walk out the door and you are in Union square. You truly are in the center of everything. If I were a spouse getting treated, I'd want to be there.

The FS is on market, and there are usually unsavory people walking around, especially if you go back to your room at night. The Taj is great, but it doesn't feel as "grand". The lobby is very small and sedate, almost like a boutique hotel. You walk into the St. Francis, and you are in a grand hotel.

With regards to the car rental, I would only rent it when you're ready to leave the city. It's very expensive to park, and not worth it. Take a taxi into the Westin, enjoy SF, then get your car rental when you want to go somewhere such as Napa, Marin, Sonoma, or Monterey.

If you want to splurge, eat at the Bourbon steak restaurant downstairs of the St. Francis. It is a Michael Mina restaurant, and the food is excellent (but very expensive). For a cheaper, more casual option, go to Scala's Bistro on union square. It's Italian food that's always solid food and not too expensive. For anniversary meals, I would pick: Gary Danko, Fleur de Lys, Masa's, or Acquerello. Other places to consider for an anniversary are: La Folie, Michael Mina, or Quince.

Have a great time!

Westin St Francis -
In addition to all of the above,

1) Very impressive lobby.
2) The tower building has those outside elevators you've probably seen in movies or commercials. Incredible views as you ride up or down.
3) Used by many celebrities - every time you hear about it in the future, it will remind you of your stay. Corny, I know, but the feeling is real.
4) Easy walking distance to a number of top restaurants and theaters.

I would go with the Grand Hyatt at Union Square. In the center of The City and it is a high rise where you should have decent views.

I would stay away from the Westin. You never know where they might stick you. You might get the old building where the rooms are very small and dated. Imagine spending 300+ on a room which is no larger than a broom closet. Plus $50 a night for parking is a rip off.

You might also look at the Fairmont, mark Hopkins and Ritz on top of Nob Hill. The cable cars go by these properties or you can walk down the hill to Union Square.

I would go with the Grand Hyatt at Union Square. In the center of The City and it is a high rise where you should have decent views.

I would stay away from the Westin. You never know where they might stick you. You might get the old building where the rooms are very small and dated. Imagine spending 300+ on a room which is no larger than a broom closet. Plus $50 a night for parking is a rip off.

You might also look at the Fairmont, mark Hopkins and Ritz on top of Nob Hill. The cable cars go by these properties or you can walk down the hill to Union Square.

The Grand Hyatt also works, but there isn't any worry about room selection at the St. Francis if the OP orders a Tower Room with a view. That's a room category (and a pricier one). I think the St. Francis has more of a "grand" feel to it than the Hyatt, but otherwise I agree with you.

I would go with the Grand Hyatt at Union Square. In the center of The City and it is a high rise where you should have decent views.

I would stay away from the Westin. You never know where they might stick you. You might get the old building where the rooms are very small and dated. Imagine spending 300+ on a room which is no larger than a broom closet. Plus $50 a night for parking is a rip off.

You might also look at the Fairmont, mark Hopkins and Ritz on top of Nob Hill. The cable cars go by these properties or you can walk down the hill to Union Square.

I agree with you that the Grand Hyatt is an excellent choice. I hadn't thought of it. It is essentially on union square, but it is around the corner. The only thing that I would say Westin vs Hyatt is that the Grand Hyatt has a little too much of a "chain" feel. It doesn't have a really grand lobby, and it is like many other Hyatts when you walk in. The St. Francis--with its marble columns--feels very grand. But I will say the Hyatt is an excellent choice.

I think Fairmont & Mark Hopkins are fantasitc choices also. They are great hotels. They are on Nob hill, which is good and bad. Great views, great area, but really nothing to do around there. The Mark Hopkins is surprisingly inexpensive. It's usually sub $200 per night, and it's an excellent hotel.

I think Fairmont & Mark Hopkins are fantasitc choices also. They are great hotels. They are on Nob hill, which is good and bad. Great views, great area, but really nothing to do around there. The Mark Hopkins is surprisingly inexpensive. It's usually sub $200 per night, and it's an excellent hotel.

Both definitely have the "grand" feel (the Fairmont a bit more, IMO), but as you note, they are several steep blocks away from any action. If the OP doesn't mind some walking, these hotels are also good choices.

Both definitely have the "grand" feel (the Fairmont a bit more, IMO), but as you note, they are several steep blocks away from any action. If the OP doesn't mind some walking, these hotels are also good choices.

I also agree that the Fairmont will give you that classic "grand" feel. IMO, I feel the Westin St. Francis is more of a business hotel (towers), and a bit noisy & small in the old wing. I love the Huntington but hard times of late are showing. It's always great to walk down the hill and take a cab or cable car back up. Be sure to stop in the Huntington for a drink, it has a grand bar with a very romantic feel.

I would forget the car. Will save you $50 in parking + the rental cost (which is never low in SF). If you really find that you need a car for a day, rent one downtown for the day and turn it back in when you are done. With what you save on parking + rental, you can take cabs anywhere you need to go. And, SF is a city meant to be seen by public transportation.

If you want "grand" stick with the St. Francis. But,
grand" ends at the lobby unless you are prepared to spring for a real suite. If you want nice rooms, I would go with the Ritz or Omni. Not quite as "grand" in the lobby, but some great rooms.

If you really find that you need a car for a day, rent one downtown for the day and turn it back in when you are done.

I completely agree. It's not just the expense of parking/valet with a car, but also the hassle of driving through some very congested, unfamiliar streets. Much better to do that only if you're heading out of town, and then rent only as long as your excursion.

Since you are willing to go all out for hotels, you will have your choice. I'm not sure what the meaning of "hustle and bustle " is for you for an anniversary trip. Do you want to be near great shopping? In the center of the downtown so it feels like a city? If so, Union Square is likely your best bet although I would go for the Fairmont for a true feeling of luxury and great service. I have also heard amazing things about the Campton Taj although I have never stayed there.

I would recommend against the intercontinental although i like the chain generally The SF location is full of conventioneers and not very special.

I also would use the $$ you'd use for a car and take cabs everywhere. There is NO reason to have a car in SF for the kind of trip you are planning. As others have said if you plan a day trip just rent the4 car for the day or two days.

Since you are willing to go all out for hotels, you will have your choice. I'm not sure what the meaning of "hustle and bustle " is for you for an anniversary trip. Do you want to be near great shopping? In the center of the downtown so it feels like a city? If so, Union Square is likely your best bet although I would go for the Fairmont for a true feeling of luxury and great service. I have also heard amazing things about the Campton Taj although I have never stayed there.

I would recommend against the intercontinental although i like the chain generally The SF location is full of conventioneers and not very special.

I also would use the $$ you'd use for a car and take cabs everywhere. There is NO reason to have a car in SF for the kind of trip you are planning. As others have said if you plan a day trip just rent the4 car for the day or two days.

Good advice - I would also sign up in advance for www.uber.com. I now use it as a cab substitute. I sometimes take cabs if I see one on the street within a minute of walking outside, but otherwise, I just use Uber.

It's more expensive than cabs by about 2-2.5 times, but it is far more reliable and you don't need to carry cash. Getting a cab downtown is usually not a problem (but it's also not guaranteed), but if you want to go out to the neighborhoods for dinner or something, Uber is fantastic for getting home.

The Stanford Court Hotel, on top of Nob Hill just across the street from The Fairmont, used to be one of my favorites, but I have not stayed there in years.

IMO do not go to the Westin St Francis. Despite the historic facade and great location, it's basically a large convention hotel with indifferent service and rooms, with the possible exception of some suites in the older building. I would try for the Palace Hotel just down on Market Street, near museums as well as shopping. It's also Starwood, as is the St Regis.

Good advice - I would also sign up in advance for www.uber.com. I now use it as a cab substitute. I sometimes take cabs if I see one on the street within a minute of walking outside, but otherwise, I just use Uber.

It's more expensive than cabs by about 2-2.5 times, but it is far more reliable and you don't need to carry cash. Getting a cab downtown is usually not a problem (but it's also not guaranteed), but if you want to go out to the neighborhoods for dinner or something, Uber is fantastic for getting home.

we use it relatively often ...it's pricey but extremely reliable and you travel in nice towncars not cabs.

we use it relatively often ...it's pricey but extremely reliable and you travel in nice towncars not cabs.

Good to know. I've never heard of this until this thread. I looked at the website, and it's not crazy expensive. A cab ride now SFO-San Francisco is around $42 to $44 dollars, and then you add the tip, it's at least $50. With uber, it's $65 flat rate, tip included. You ride in a nicer car and you don't have to worry about the cabbie trying to jack you with the route.

Good to know. I've never heard of this until this thread. I looked at the website, and it's not crazy expensive. A cab ride now SFO-San Francisco is around $42 to $44 dollars, and then you add the tip, it's at least $50. With uber, it's $65 flat rate, tip included. You ride in a nicer car and you don't have to worry about the cabbie trying to jack you with the route.

From our home in Lower Haight to most of the Mission restaurants is about $15-20, and a cab is about $10-12 including tip. Considering it is impossible to get a cab in this neighborhood, it's a great value.

The OP's requirements are surprisingly difficult in SF. As the tenor of the posts above makes clear, the old grand hotels have either deteriorated over the years or are located in areas which are now less desirable for tourists. Of the suggestions above, I would recommend the Palace which is not too far from the hustle and bustle and nearer the new center of gravity of the City. However, I did stay there a couple of years ago and decided that it would be more to the taste of an octogenarian...

After that, I would look at the faded grandeur of the Nob Hill hotels with their views of the Bridge and the Bay, accepting that I would need always to take a cab back up to them, although it's a pleasant walk downhill from them.

But perhaps the request needs to be looked at differently. SF has many newer hotels with a newer type of luxury in mind. In this category I would put the Palomar, with a location very close to Union Square (but no views), the Vitale, with fantastic views of the Bay and a location right beside the tourist magnet of the Ferry Building and its farmers market, or possibly the W, with its location right next door to SFMOMA and with great views from the top floor.

In short, the reality of the situation is that time, and SF, have moved on from when the old grande dames of the SF hotel business made their names.

The OP's requirements are surprisingly difficult in SF. As the tenor of the posts above makes clear, the old grand hotels have either deteriorated over the years or are located in areas which are now less desirable for tourists.Actually, given that the OP mentions "great views" twice, I think that the perfect choice is the Mandarin Oriental - except that his/her budget would be exceeded (maybe a weekend special or a promo rate would mitigate the cost, it would pay to check the promotions page of the M/O website.

In short, the reality of the situation is that time, and SF, have moved on from when the old grande dames of the SF hotel business made their names.

I think that's accurate. The W and the Four Seasons are arguably the new "grand" hotels in that they feel more in sync with San Francisco as it is today. The older hotels mentioned upthread are still nice, but it does feel like time is starting to leave them behind. Still, the lobby of the St. Francis, atrium of The Palace and the architecture of the Fairmont are unique and gorgeous.

I think that's accurate. The W and the Four Seasons are arguably the new "grand" hotels in that they feel more in sync with San Francisco as it is today. The older hotels mentioned upthread are still nice, but it does feel like time is starting to leave them behind. Still, the lobby of the St. Francis, atrium of The Palace and the architecture of the Fairmont are unique and gorgeous.

The Palace's atrium is severely faded these days, and is dire need of a refresh. The lobby is also very, very badly lit and the furniture is reminiscent of some of the stuff I got at Goodwill during college. I have never been in the rooms, so perhaps they are better, but I wouldn't stay at the Palace for the feeling of a "grand" hotel.

The Palace's atrium is severely faded these days, and is dire need of a refresh. The lobby is also very, very badly lit and the furniture is reminiscent of some of the stuff I got at Goodwill during college. I have never been in the rooms, so perhaps they are better, but I wouldn't stay at the Palace for the feeling of a "grand" hotel.

I've seen a room and it was nothing special; I agree about the lobby. I still love the atrium, though.

The Palace's atrium is severely faded these days, and is dire need of a refresh. The lobby is also very, very badly lit and the furniture is reminiscent of some of the stuff I got at Goodwill during college. I have never been in the rooms, so perhaps they are better, but I wouldn't stay at the Palace for the feeling of a "grand" hotel.IRRC the Palace closed during 1993-1994 for a "to the bones" renovation; it may be that, as it closes the second decade after re-opening, it needs another (at-least-moderate in scope) refresh to keep the public areas up to par).

I find the standard Palace rooms smallish but comfortable, and nicely, but not extravagantly, furnished (my last stay was on April 17-18, 2006, for obvious historical reasons :) )

My taste in SF runs to funk and thus I like the Kimpton (http://www.kimptonhotels.com/hotels/hotels-sanfrancisco.aspx) properties (like the Hotel Triton pics here (http://gallery.me.com/deirdre#100258&bgcolor=black&view=grid), including pics taken within a couple of blocks of there), but for luxury, I tend to think of the Palace and Fairmont. As a local, though, I haven't stayed in either of those two.

One last personal comment here. My wife and I recently stayed in the Tower of the St Francis. At no time did we feel any sense that the hotel was run down or deteriorated. We had previously stayed in a room in the old section and our feelings were not nearly as positive.

The Grand Hyatt, the W, and even the Four Seasons could be anywhere. If we really want to feel as if we are somewhere special, the refurbished sections of the older grand hotels - especially the St Francis and the Fairmont - are our personal choices.

P.S. Although the atrium at the Palace is unique, we were very disappointed with our overall stay there, including the service and attitude of the staff.

Sad to read the previous posts on how much the Palace has deteriorated.