Where is a good place in LA to live? -

I want to go to LA next year for 6-8 months to see what it is like over there, but i don t know where a good place to stay is, or how much it is going to cost me. any help? thanks xx

We see this every day in this forum: Everyone who wants to move here is looking for ��cheap/affordable and safe . However, such a place just doesn��t exist; the two terms are mutually exclusive. It s all about supply and demand: If it s in SoCal, then it s not going to be cheap to begin with. If it s a safe area, then it s more expensive. If you want to live here and enjoy the weather, then you have to pay for it. You put up with the smog and the traffic, enjoy the weather and pay your rent or mortgage. My advice is to start checking out craigslist, rent.com, and apartments.com if you are looking to rent. You��ll quickly see that the minimum rent for a non-war zone is about $1,000-$1,200 per month for a studio or 1BR. Really nice areas (like the West LA area) easily run $3,000 or more. Want to live near the beach? Expect to pay a premium. LA is such a big place, there are so many neighborhoods/cities where you can live. Of course, even within a city or neighborhood, there are safer sections and less-safe sections.In Los Angeles, some nice sections are West LA, Brentwood, Westwood, Marina Del Rey, Playa Del Rey, Los Feliz, Silverlake, and Eagle Rock. Palms and Mar Vista are pretty good, too. In the Valley(part of LA), you have Encino, Tarzana, Studio City, Toluca Lake, Granada Hills, Woodland Hills, Sherman Oaks, West Hills, and Chatsworth. Glendale and Burbank are good places, and are incorporated cities of their own.To the east: South Pasadena, parts of Pasadena, Altadena, Arcadia, Monrovia, Glendora, San Dimas, Laverne, Azusa, Rancho Cucamonga.Along the beach: Santa Monica, Marina Del Rey, Playa Del Rey, Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach, Hermosa Beach, Torrance, Palos Verdes, Rancho PV.In Orange County aka The OC : Seal Beach , Huntington Beach , Newport Beach , Corona Del Mar , Laguna Beach , Dana Point , Capistrano Beach , San Clemente , Brea, Yorba Linda, Orange, Tustin, Irvine, Laguna Hills, Rancho Santa Margarita, Lake ForestTo the west: Agoura, Calabasas, Thousand Oaks, Westlake Village, Simi Valley, Moorpark.This is not an all-inclusive list, but it s a start.

How much money do you have to spend a month on living expenses? What do u plan on doing while youre out here? Will you have a car (practically a must out here)? Do you have a preference of what you want to live near? L.A. is a bit pricey overall but with more info you can probably find a good deal on a place or renting a room or something.

Are you a legal US resident? If not, you may not be able to stay in the US more than 90 days or 180 days depending on your citizenship.Sort out your US visa first.And plan on spending $4500 a month while you are here. Of which $200 a week will be car rental. You must have a car to stay in LA very long.

Nowhere really, but if you must live somewhere I figure that the outskirts of LA would be the best place.

You should try Brentwood, Bel-Air, Beverly Hills or the Hollywood Hills...

beverly hills

What is the best way to get around san francisco? -

Im going to visit the city in january and was wondering what is the most afforable and reliable source of transportation. I m not sure if i should take a cab (may get a little pricey) or just ride the cable car ( but i dont want to wait in those long lines) anyone with some advice?

The cable car as a means of transportation is lost in antiquity. It s considered a tourist attraction and that s it.Cars are nice to have - but not necessary and much more expensive (not to mention a hassle if you re visiting tourist areas). The most logical solution would be Muni, which encompasses several bus and rail lines. There are no lines to wait in (it s not an amusement park ride - it s public transportation) - you simply wait at the stop for the next bus/train to come and, when it does, you get on. Simple - no long lines . Most, depending on time of day and how busy the route is, come every 5 to 20 minutes.Riding any bus/train within the Muni system is $2 which gets you a couple hours worth of riding (and unlimited transfers in that time for no additional cost) and the system covers the entire city with MANY different lines. The cable car, on the other hand, is $5 per one-way ride, only covers a small portion of the city, and is very slow (hence only a tourist attraction). The latter you ll be waiting in line for, the former you won t. Obvious choice.Here s the Muni website, complete with a plan a trip option: http://www.sfmta.com/cms/home/sfmta.phpAnd here s a map of the entire system: http://transit.511.org/static/providers/��

The cable car is a tourist attraction - there is a very limited selection of routes, and there are often lines to get on a car. You should definitely ride the cable car once so that you can report to your friends that you did it, but unless you are going where it goes, it s not a very reliable means of transportation.Taxis are expensive. May be an option to get into the City from the airport, but not always easy to get a cab on the street if you are anywhere other than the downtown financial district.BART is the subway system. Reasonable way to get around, and a very effective way to get from San Fransisco over to the East Bay area (Oakland and Berkeley). SF Muni is a trolley system that is practical in the city.If you are going down the penninsula, you will need to look into Caltrain and the various light rail options.Frankly, when my wife and I go to San Francisco, we say in the South Bay area and rent a car. Driving in San Francisco is a bit intimidating, but not nearly as bad as New York or Boston. Parking is available (although sometimes pricey downtown). And a car gives you flexiblity that you wouldn t have relying on public transportation.

San Francisco is a great place for walking. Short blocks and many bars, coffee places restaurants in most neighborhoods. Traveling by Muni Bus is a good way to go - usually there is a bus within a block or 2 from just about every location in SF. Get a tourist map of the city - they are everywhere for free - at the airport or at hotels or tourist site. Past the advertising sections, there will be a good map of the major areas of the city. Also it will have info of current events attractions. i ususally pick one up when I get back to SF. Also BART will take you from SFO into SF - check at the SFO transportation counter for directions to the bus transfers. BART will also get you to Oakland airport.

If you are planning to see the usual places in The City, walking and city buses. Either cabs or parking is pricey. If you planning to go outside the city to places such as the wine country or Muir Woods, then rent a car. If you do rent a car, you can see more of the city such as the view from the top of Twin Peaks and the vewpoint at the Sausalito side of the GGB (and Sausalito of course, once you are there).

actually, surprisingly enough, with the recent MUNI fare hikes, BART withing the SF city limits (embarcadero to balboa park) is actually 25 cents CHEAPER than MUNI(only $1.75). it limits where you can travel, but is great if you are headed downtown or want to explore the underrated southern part of the city.

Between the MUNI trains and buses, you should have no problem getting around the city. SF is small. A car rental is not needed.

i would say a car if possible, but MUNI is fairly decent

going alone? adult? go on a tourist bus ive been on one forgot how much it cost for adults

Going to chicago today! which is better? -

The Willis tower skydeck or the John Hancock observatory?

I ll vote for the Hancock Observatory. I think the views are better, especially with it being on the lake. Also, there is much more to do in the area surrounding Hancock, as it s more shopper/retail friendly, versus Willis, which is in a more strictly business location.

The Sears Tower and the Hancock observatories are over-priced and bland. BUT go to the Hancock and there is a bar/restaurant on the 95th floor called The Signature Room. It s posh and you can enjoy the spectacular views over drinks and conversation. Don t worry if it s a cloudy day. The city looks really cool with fog drifting between the buildings when viewed from above like this.As for the Willis Tower I don t know. There s no tower in this city by that name. Anyone that says otherwise can pry the Sears Tower from our cold dead fingers.

My two cents. Both have their pros.MichaelB is somewhat correct that the Hancock is free but IF AND ONLY IF you follow Haggis advice and go to the Signature Room on the 95th floor. There is very much a paid admission observation deck on the 93rd floor that is the tourist observation deck. There is a small portion that is OPEN AIR with nothing but mesh between you and the Chicago air on the west side overlooking Bloomingdales. I assume it is open this time of year but would be bloody cold at that altitude with the unimpeded winds. From this one you can best see Michigan Avenue/Mag Mile.If you are looking for panoramic views of the loop and center city this is the better observation deck. If you watch the weather on NBC 5 their view is to the south from here - and to the north along Lake Shore Drive on WGN 9 Weather.The Sears Tower (renamed the Willis by them dang far ners :) does have the experience of the glass cube on the west side with the glass floor up 93 stories above Wacker Drive. Your view will be in the heart of the majority of Chicago s skyscrapers which is cool but can also tend to obstruct some views you might get from the Hancock. You can see some cool details from this one though such as the Flamingo sculpture and the north and south branches of the Chicago River.It has been a while since I have been to either so I am not familiar with any multi-media presentations they may offer. Many years back the Hancock had a 10 minute or so presentation on Chicago narrated by Oprah.I hope that gives you some of the views you can expect from each. You won t be disappointed with either apart from a cloudy day on which you might not see much at all - so be careful. Especially if you can t see the top of the building - in that case you ll see nothing.

The Willis (formerly Sears) Tower Skydeck is higher than the Hancock Observatory, but the Hancock is closer to the lake and offers some impressive lakeshore views. You could go to the Signature Room at the Hancock and have lunch, but there is the possibility that you won t get a seat near a window. The Willis Tower SkyDeck has ledges which extend out from the west side of the building allowing you to see down to the street below.

The Willis Tower Skydeck is better because they have these glass cubicles where you can walk on glass and get a magnificent view of the city (and 4 or 5 other states).

hard to say, they are both great! I have been to both many times at day and night, ot both watching the sun go down and the city lights come on.

It s really up to you! The Hancock has food and shopping nearby, but the view is spectacular either way.

The Hancock is free, the Sears is $15