Alright. There are many choices out there, but what are your thoughts about the London Marble Arch? How large are the rooms? Is the lounge open on weekends? I read that it was and that it also had evening offerings. Is it near the tube?
This would not be a choice for me, unless I was not paying. Having stayed there, there are many better choices. Grosvenor JW, is a wonderful hotel, and a much better location.
Jerry, may I ask what you didn't exactly like about the Marble Arch?
You said you liked County Hall, right? It looks like the JW Grosvernor is a few blocks from the Marble Arch. Do those few blocks make that much difference in terms of equaling a better location? Forgive my ignorance, never been before.
It's very simple; the County Hall and JW Grosvenor are different class of hotels and will provide you dfiffrent level of experience. The Marble Arch does have a Concierge Lounge with a good service, but the JW Grosvenor offers a authentic and very nice afternoon English snacks, etc.
JW Grosvenor is in good locations as well, across the street from Hyde Park, near Tube, etc.
As to which I prefer, the answer depends, on your budget, etc.
On the other hand, since it’s your first time in London Marble Arch would not be my first option, stay at the JW.
Stay at the JW,
the area is much safer, and you can walk to so much more. I would not stay at the Marble Arch, if given a choice.
Good to know! Safety is a concern for my family. What about County Hall? Is that area safe?
Safer, and a whole lot better located. I have not looked up the prices, but when your family and you can walk to:
Churchill War Museum
Westminster Tube Station
Waterloo Train Station
This is a nice property. Try to go to some of the previous posts on London Hotels and see what others and I have had to say about our stays.
Okay, so Marble Arch is off the list. I'm really liking Country Hall for it's location. Again, it's VERY helpful to have input/ discussions from those in the know!
I've been reading old posts... have some more to go!
I agree with everything Jerry said. I stayed at Marble Arch once and have seldom been so freaked out by an area in which a major hotel is located. First of all, it was very hard to find even though it's not all that far from the tube station, but especially after dark it did not feel safe, especially around the park area. The hotel itself seemed little different from your average Fairfield Inn. About the only compliment I can pay the hotel is that the restaurant served good food. But I always stay at the County Hall.
Thanks! It's always nice to know these things, especially for us first time travelers to a new area for us!
WOW! I'd like to feel comfortable at night walking around not having to keep a watch out. Thanks for your input!
Another series of excellent and useful posts on London Marriott properties! I have found the numerous tips, suggestions and advice offered by the veteran MI travelers (Jerrycoin, Prof Chiara, newhiltonmember, ss, tryt53, Blava007, et. al.) to be outstanding. I have gained a wealth of practical travel knowledge by simply following the discussions on this site. Thank You veteran MI travelers.
Thanks for your kindness!
Many of us have "Lived, learned, and PAID" for a bad time. Location and comfort many times does not come at a premium price. When you have loved ones, on a "Once in a lifetime trip", you will long forget the price if it is a memorable experience. I am especially sensitive for "First timers", who have loved ones on a special trip and are "Heading for disaster", to seemingly save a few dollars, euro's or British Pounds. It's not worth it.
Anyone, and you are always welcome to ask specific questions on this MI site, and someone should be able to help.
I have not stayed at the Marble Arch, but all the comments here are the reasons why. I also think it looks like any other Marriott, so you could be in Peoria, instead of London. The JW is great, and has a great location, even it's pricey. The other hotel that is nice is the Marriott Park Lane. This property is in an old, restored building, and I had a view of Hyde Park (right across the street) from my room. You really felt like you were in London, both by virtue of the location and the architecture. I loved it, and it's in the best location for walking around Mayfair. Also, I have heard only good things about County Hall, but its location on the other side of the river is not as good as the JW or the Marriott Park Lane.
Agree with on Marble Arch! The other hotels really depend on each travelers needs/desires. Really like the St. Pancras property, but would prefer not to stay there. Both the Mayfair and County Hall properties are great locations. You just have to go across the river from County Hall, but it is a historic trek.
I have seen that the other properties are more "London" being near Hyde Park, but I think you've said it best, Jerry - The other hotels really depend on each travelers needs/desires. County Hall (I've realized I've been calling it Country Hall...oops!) is looking good! I prefer a hotel on the river vs. park and I'm liking this whole historic trek we must take to get into the thick of London!
I think it also depends on what you mean by saying "more London.' To me, as a medieval historian (and with those sites that interest me), Hyde Park and Kensington are of little interest. By contrast, across from Parliament and Westminster, in the old City of London, or in Southwark or near Tower Bridge (alas no Marriotts near the latter two) are my 'real London.' I should add that at the County Hall the walk across the bridge is not long or difficult, except for navigating through the people stopping to take pictures, and right around the back of the County Hall is the Waterloo Train station (south).
More London threads
Retrieving data ...