One of the most enjoyable activities is traveling on vacation – at least for most people, but it takes a special sort of individual who actually loves to plan the activities when it comes to traveling. I know I don’t love it, but I am also willing to admit that I have opinions on where to go and what to see. Today we are going to have a conversation where wanted interest and unwanted responsibility intersect. … Welcome to EP 163: Architectural Wanderlust.
[Note: If you are reading this via email, click here to access the on-site audio player] Podcast: Embed Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Android | iHeartRadio | TuneIn
Today Andrew and I are going to talk about traveling for architects and how certain technologies have emerged that have made the process of planning excursions and itineraries a joy. Gone is the laborious process of buying travel books, searching the various “activities” based websites, where you are hoping that the comment and review from Frank from when he visited Bilboa last September actually is in some alignment with your own perceptions (or even values … is Frank an Architect?)
The premise for today’s post and conversation are simple … what happens when you use Artificial Intelligence to plan a vacation for you? What does the problem solving process look like, what sort of questions should you ask, and finally, a look about the sort of returns you get in response.
Question #1 jump to 6:02
Prompt Entered:
You are an architect going on vacation with the goal of selecting a place that is rich in its architectural culture as well as the opportunities to visit and experience significant architectural projects and properties. Once we have completed this exercise, I will ask you to put together a daily itinerary of things to see and places to visit. We will start this exercise by having you recommend 10 potential destinations for me to visit, but I want you to ask me a series of questions to make sure that you have the information and guidance you need to make an appropriate recommendation.
The Response:
To recommend the perfect architectural destination for your vacation, I’ll need to ask you a few questions to better tailor the suggestions to your preferences:
- Style of Architecture: Do you have a specific architectural style you’re most interested in (e.g., modernism, classical, vernacular, sustainable design, etc.)?
- Cultural Experience: Would you like to immerse yourself in a place with a deep historical architectural legacy, or do you prefer contemporary and cutting-edge architecture?
- Travel Comfort: Are you comfortable with long-distance travel, or do you prefer something closer (considering travel time as part of the week)?
- Interests Beyond Architecture: Would you like a mix of architectural exploration with other cultural experiences, such as museums, cuisine, or natural landscapes?
- Activity Level: Do you prefer a more relaxed trip with guided tours and time to reflect on the buildings, or are you looking for an immersive, on-the-go experience?
- Sustainability: Would you like to visit places known for sustainable architecture and environmentally conscious design, or is this not a priority for you?
The prompt above was a good starting place to begin this exercise. To better understand your holiday objectives, getting the program to engage with about what you hope to accomplish is a great place to start. You could get as specific as you want here, adding in all sorts of parameters, but for my process, I wanted to keep this fairly high level in order to potentially discover some place I should be visiting that I might not be considering.
Question #2 jump to 13:10
Prompt Entered:
For each of these cities, can you rate how safe they are for tourists on a scale from 1-10 based on the US State department travel announcements?
The Response:
- Barcelona, Spain
Safety Rating: 7/10
The advisory for Spain is at Level 2: Exercise Increased Caution due to terrorism and civil unrest. - Rome, Italy
Safety Rating: 8/10
Italy has a Level 2 advisory, recommending caution due to potential risks from terrorism, but it is generally considered safe for tourists. - Kyoto, Japan
Safety Rating: 10/10
Japan, including Kyoto, is at Level 1: Exercise Normal Precautions, making it one of the safest destinations on the list. - Chicago, USA
Safety Rating: 6/10
While popular with tourists, Chicago does experience elevated crime in certain areas. It is important to stay in well-traveled areas. - Berlin, Germany
Safety Rating: 9/10
Berlin is under Level 1: Exercise Normal Precautions. It is generally safe with occasional demonstrations, but tourists are usually unaffected. - Paris, France
Safety Rating: 7/10
France has a Level 2 advisory due to the potential for terrorism and civil unrest, particularly in large urban areas like Paris. - Copenhagen, Denmark
Safety Rating: 10/10
Denmark is considered very safe with a Level 1 advisory, making it a top choice for travelers looking for security. - Vienna, Austria
Safety Rating: 10/10
Austria is under Level 1: Exercise Normal Precautions, and Vienna is known for being very safe for tourists. - Lisbon, Portugal
Safety Rating: 9/10
Portugal is generally safe with a Level 1 advisory, although petty crime like pickpocketing can occur in tourist-heavy areas. - Mexico City, Mexico
Safety Rating: 5/10
Mexico has a Level 2 advisory due to elevated crime in certain areas, though central areas of Mexico City are safer than other regions.
While asking about the relative safety of the places you are potentially traveling might not be a priority for you, I was curious not only to see how the system would rank these cities, but the criteria used for this evaluation. In the end, I didn’t get much value from this step other than generating a few raised eyebrow moments and the occasional “……. really?”
Question #3 jump to 2:30
Prompt Entered:
Compare and contrast the pro’s and con’s for traveling to each of these destinations and rank them on all previously evaluated criteria from worst to best.
The Response:
Mexico City, Mexico
Pros: Mexico City is home to a rich blend of pre-Colombian, colonial, and modern architecture, including iconic works by Luis Barragán and the stunning Soumaya Museum. Its vibrant culture, cuisine, and art scenes add immense value.
Cons: Mexico City suffers from a higher crime rate, and while central areas are generally safe, there are parts of the city tourists should avoid.
Rank: The combination of safety concerns and the need for vigilance in certain areas brings it lower on the list.
Rating: 6/10
Chicago, USA
Pros: A birthplace of modern architecture, with famous skyscrapers, the Chicago Riverwalk, and the legacy of Frank Lloyd Wright. Culturally, it offers great museums and music scenes.
Cons: Like Mexico City, crime can be an issue in specific areas, though central tourist locations remain relatively safe. Weather can also be unpredictable, especially in winter.
Rank: Amazing architecture but somewhat affected by safety concerns.
Rating: 6.5/10
Lisbon, Portugal
Pros: Lisbon offers a charming mix of Gothic, Baroque, and modern architecture, with highlights like the Belém Tower and MAAT Museum. The city’s hills, viewpoints, and rich history make it attractive to visitors.
Cons: Petty crimes like pickpocketing can be an issue in busy tourist spots. The city can also be physically challenging to navigate due to its steep hills.
Rank: Rich in culture and architecture, but lower due to minor safety and logistical issues.
Rating: 7/10
Barcelona, Spain
Pros: Iconic works by Antoni Gaudí, such as the Sagrada Familia and Park Güell, make Barcelona an architectural gem. The blend of Gothic and modernist architecture is captivating, and the city has a vibrant cultural and culinary scene.
Cons: Barcelona faces challenges with petty crime, particularly pickpocketing, and can be crowded with tourists, which detracts from the experience.
Rank: Spectacular architecture but ranked lower due to safety and crowd issues.
Rating: 7.5/10
Rome, Italy
Pros: Few cities in the world can rival Rome’s historical depth, with iconic landmarks such as the Colosseum, the Pantheon, and Vatican City. It offers an incredible blend of ancient and Renaissance architecture.
Cons: Rome can be overwhelming due to large crowds and the challenge of navigating its busy streets. Petty theft is also an issue in tourist areas.
Rank: While Rome’s historical significance is unmatched, the challenges posed by crowds and tourist scams bring it down slightly.
Rating: 8/10
Berlin, Germany
Pros: A city steeped in history, Berlin offers a unique blend of neoclassical, brutalist, and contemporary architecture. Highlights include the Brandenburg Gate, Reichstag, and Bauhaus Archive. The city is also known for its vibrant arts and cultural scenes.
Cons: Berlin can feel a bit sprawling and less walkable compared to other European cities, though public transport is excellent.
Rank: Historically rich and culturally vibrant, but slightly less accessible due to its size.
Rating: 8.5/10
Paris, France
Pros: Paris is an architectural paradise, offering centuries of landmarks such as the Eiffel Tower, Notre-Dame, and the Louvre. It also boasts modern architectural marvels like the Centre Pompidou.
Cons: Paris can be expensive, and it faces challenges with pickpockets and large tourist crowds.
Rank: Paris’s unparalleled blend of historical and modern architecture makes it a top destination, but practical travel issues bring it down slightly.
Rating: 9/10
Copenhagen, Denmark
Pros: Known for modern, sustainable design, Copenhagen is a hub of contemporary architecture, featuring works by Bjarke Ingels and others. It’s also one of the most walkable and bike-friendly cities in the world, with a relaxed, eco-conscious vibe.
Cons: Copenhagen can be expensive, especially for dining and accommodations.
Rank: A top destination for contemporary architecture and urban planning, but costs slightly lower its ranking.
Rating: 9.5/10
Vienna, Austria
Pros: Vienna offers a stunning mix of Baroque and modern architecture, with iconic landmarks like Schönbrunn Palace and the Vienna Secession building. The city’s high quality of life, walkability, and cultural richness make it a standout.
Cons: Vienna is a very safe city, but it can feel more formal and less dynamic compared to some other European capitals.
Rank: Beautiful, safe, and architecturally diverse, Vienna ranks highly for its mix of tradition and innovation.
Rating: 9.5/10
Kyoto, Japan
Pros: Kyoto is a treasure trove of traditional Japanese architecture, with its meticulously preserved temples, shrines, and gardens. Its serene atmosphere and natural beauty provide the perfect setting for reflection and exploration. The city’s cultural offerings, such as tea ceremonies and visits to Geisha districts, add depth to the experience.
Cons: Kyoto’s attractions can be crowded, particularly during peak tourist seasons. The city also lacks a significant amount of contemporary architecture.
Rank: For those seeking a deep cultural and architectural experience, Kyoto is a top choice, offering unmatched opportunities for reflection and immersion.
Rating: 10/10
Now things are starting to get interesting because we are asking the system to assign a value based on a set of criteria that “we” (as in the AI and myself) have determined appropriate. I will admit that this cities that are on this list are not very surprising and if (or should I say “when”) I go through this process again, I would most likely identify some criteria to restrict some of the more obvious selections from my list. Asking for destinations from each continent, or possibly restricting the answers based on population (“avoid cities with more then 2 million residents”) would most likely yield more interesting results.
Question #4 jump to 2:30
Prompt Entered:
Restrict your evaluation to Copenhagen, Vienna, and Kyoto. I would like you to add in considerations for scenic beauty, ease of moving around, dining opportunities (both casual and formal), and overall budget considerations, and continue adding in the pro’s and con’s of traveling to each city, as well as the safety rating for each of these destinations based on current U.S. State Department travel advisories. Prepare a summary in conclusion.
The Response:
Kyoto, Japan
Pros:
- Cultural and Architectural Depth: Kyoto’s blend of ancient temples, such as Fushimi Inari Shrine, and serene gardens, like the Arashiyama Bamboo Grove, offers a deeply immersive cultural experience.
- Peaceful Atmosphere: Despite being a tourist destination, Kyoto maintains a tranquil vibe, especially in its temple and garden areas.
- Varied Dining Scene: You can enjoy everything from casual ramen or udon shops to refined kaiseki dining, focusing on seasonal ingredients.
- Scenic Natural Beauty: The city is especially beautiful during cherry blossom season and autumn, with temples and nature blending seamlessly.
Cons:
- Crowded in Peak Seasons: During cherry blossom season and fall foliage, famous sites can become crowded, which may diminish the serene experience.
- Navigational Challenges: While public transport is efficient, getting around can be tricky due to the spread-out nature of attractions.
- Language Barrier: English is less commonly spoken outside of major tourist areas, which could make some aspects of travel challenging.
Safety Rating:
10/10
Kyoto, and Japan as a whole, is considered extremely safe with a Level 1 advisory, meaning travelers need only exercise normal precautions.
Copenhagen, Denmark
Pros:
- Modern Architectural Innovation: The city is a hub for sustainable design and modern architecture, with notable works by Bjarke Ingels and a focus on eco-friendly urban planning.
- Bicycle-Friendly City: Copenhagen is exceptionally easy to navigate by bike, which is also a popular local transportation method. The city infrastructure makes it safe and convenient for cyclists and pedestrians.
- Excellent Dining Scene: Home to Michelin-starred restaurants like Noma and an overall emphasis on fresh, local ingredients, Copenhagen offers diverse and innovative cuisine.
- Green Spaces and Canals: The city has plenty of parks and waterfront areas, such as the scenic Nyhavn canal district, that add to its charm.
Cons:
- High Cost of Living: Copenhagen is one of the most expensive cities in Europe, particularly for dining and accommodation. Travelers on a budget may find it challenging to stay within their limits.
- Weather: The weather can be unpredictable, especially in the off-seasons. Rain and cooler temperatures can sometimes limit outdoor activities.
Safety Rating:
10/10
Denmark is rated as a Level 1 destination by the U.S. State Department, meaning travelers need to exercise normal precautions. It is considered extremely safe.
Vienna, Austria
Pros:
- Rich Historical and Cultural Heritage: Vienna is renowned for its Baroque architecture, classical music history, and imperial landmarks such as Schönbrunn Palace and Belvedere Palace.
- Walkable and Accessible: The city’s layout makes it easy to walk between major attractions. Public transportation is efficient, and many of the city’s best sites are within walking distance of each other.
- Culinary Traditions: From world-famous Viennese coffeehouses offering Sachertorte to more formal dining experiences with Austrian specialties like Wiener schnitzel, Vienna’s food scene is well-rounded and delicious.
- Cultural Hub: Vienna has a vibrant cultural scene, with concerts, opera, and art exhibitions running year-round.
Cons:
- Formal Atmosphere: Vienna can feel slightly more formal and less dynamic compared to other European capitals, which might not appeal to those looking for a more laid-back vibe.
- Weather: Winters can be cold, and snow may impact travel or outdoor activities. However, this may appeal to some travelers looking for a festive, wintry setting.
Safety Rating:
10/10
Austria, including Vienna, is considered extremely safe with a Level 1 advisory. Normal precautions are recommended, and crime rates are low.
Question #5 jump to 20:06
Prompt Entered:
For each of these locations, please elaborate by percentages on how a budget of $10,000 would be spent (travel, lodging, tourism adventures, cultural expenses, and dining). Summarize and provide key takeaway in conclusion.
The Response:
Here’s how a budget of $10,000 could be spent on a 1-week trip to Kyoto, Copenhagen, and Vienna. The percentages cover travel, lodging, tourism adventures, cultural expenses, and dining. This budget assumes you’re traveling from the U.S., but specific costs can vary based on departure location and personal preferences.
Kyoto, Japan
Kyoto is generally affordable compared to European destinations, especially when it comes to dining and lodging. The cost of flights to Japan, however, can be significant.
Travel (30%) – $3,000
Round-trip airfare from major U.S. cities to Kyoto typically ranges from $1,200 to $1,800 per person. Given this budget, $3,000 covers airfare for two passengers, including taxes and possible extras like seat selection or checked luggage.
Lodging (20%) – $2,000
Kyoto offers a range of accommodations, from traditional ryokans to modern hotels. For a mid-range to higher-end experience, expect to spend around $250–$300 per night. Over a week, this totals approximately $2,000 for a comfortable stay.
Tourism Adventures (15%) – $1,500
Entrance fees to temples and shrines are relatively affordable ($5–$15 per site). If you plan to visit iconic sites such as Kinkaku-ji, Fushimi Inari, and take part in traditional tea ceremonies or Geisha district tours, you can expect to spend around $200–$300 on such experiences. The rest could be spent on guided tours and cultural activities.
Cultural Expenses (10%) – $1,000
Cultural experiences like kimono rentals, tea ceremonies, or visiting a traditional onsen (hot spring) could range from $50 to $200 per experience. In Kyoto, you might also participate in calligraphy or cooking classes for an immersive experience.
Dining (25%) – $2,500
Kyoto dining ranges from casual meals costing $10–$15 at noodle shops to formal kaiseki dining experiences that can cost $100–$200 per person. If you have one or two high-end meals and a mix of mid-range and casual dining, $2,500 should comfortably cover a week’s worth of dining for two people.
Copenhagen, Denmark
Copenhagen is one of the most expensive cities in Europe, particularly for dining and accommodation. Budgeting for food and lodging is critical for this destination.
Travel (20%) – $2,000
Round-trip airfare to Copenhagen from the U.S. averages around $800–$1,200 per person. Budgeting $2,000 comfortably covers flights for two, including potential luggage fees or upgrades.
Lodging (30%) – $3,000
Accommodation in Copenhagen is notably expensive, especially for mid-range or luxury hotels. Expect to pay around $350–$450 per night for a decent hotel in the city center. Over a week, this totals approximately $3,000, leaving room for a good-quality stay without being overly luxurious.
Tourism Adventures (15%) – $1,500
Visiting iconic spots such as Tivoli Gardens ($20 entry), taking guided architecture tours, or exploring castles (like Rosenborg Castle) would cost around $500–$700. Copenhagen also has several museums and cultural spots, where you could spend a similar amount. Biking around the city or taking canal tours would add to the experience.
Cultural Expenses (10%) – $1,000
Cultural experiences in Copenhagen could include visits to design museums, performances at the Copenhagen Opera House, or attending events related to Danish design and architecture. A budget of $1,000 allows for exploring these rich cultural offerings.
Dining (25%) – $2,500
Dining in Copenhagen can range from casual meals at food markets ($15–$25 per meal) to fine dining at Michelin-starred restaurants. Given the budget, you could allocate $2,500, allowing for some high-end meals and a mix of affordable casual dining options throughout the trip.
Vienna, Austria
Vienna offers a balance of affordability and luxury, particularly in lodging and dining. Cultural and tourist experiences are generally affordable, though high-end dining can add to the expense.
Travel (20%) – $2,000
Round-trip airfare to Vienna from the U.S. averages between $800–$1,200 per person. A $2,000 allocation covers flights for two people, including baggage fees or minor upgrades.
Lodging (25%) – $2,500
Vienna has many affordable options for accommodations, with comfortable hotels or apartments available for $200–$300 per night. For a 7-night stay, $2,500 allows for a well-situated mid-to-high-range hotel.
Tourism Adventures (20%) – $2,000
Vienna’s cultural and historical sites, such as Schönbrunn Palace ($20 entry), the Belvedere Museum, and opera performances at the Vienna State Opera, offer a rich experience for visitors. Cultural attractions in Vienna tend to be reasonably priced, and you could allocate around $2,000 for multiple experiences, including guided tours, performances, and museum visits.
Cultural Expenses (10%) – $1,000
Vienna’s rich cultural scene includes concerts, opera, and ballet performances. A budget of $1,000 allows for a few high-end cultural experiences, such as a classical music concert or premium tickets for the opera.
Dining (25%) – $2,500
Vienna offers a range of dining experiences, from casual meals in traditional Viennese coffeehouses ($20–$30 per meal) to fine dining at Michelin-starred restaurants. With $2,500, you can enjoy a mix of casual and formal meals throughout your stay, including tasting Austrian specialties like Wiener schnitzel.
Budget Summary Breakdown by City
| Category | Kyoto (Japan) | Copenhagen (Denmark) | Vienna (Austria) |
| Travel | 30% ($3,000) | 20% ($2,000) | 20% ($2,000) |
| Lodging | 20% ($2,000) | 30% ($3,000) | 25% ($2,500) |
| Tourism Adventures | 15% ($1,500) | 15% ($1,500) | 20% ($2,000) |
| Cultural Expenses | 10% ($1,000) | 10% ($1,000) | 10% ($1,000) |
| Dining | 25% ($2,500) | 25% ($2,500) | 25% ($2,500) |
Key Takeaways:
- Kyoto offers the best balance between cultural immersion and affordability, with more of the budget allocated to travel due to its distance from most Western countries.
- Copenhagen is the most expensive overall, especially for lodging and dining, but offers outstanding modern architecture and urban design experiences.
- Vienna provides a rich historical and cultural experience at a slightly lower cost than Copenhagen, particularly in terms of lodging and tourism.
This section could, and probably should, have been much more developed – which suggests that I didn’t ask a good enough question and the results reflect a lack of specificity. Considering that with relative ease, you can simply keep asking for more detail, provide additional direction, as well as make continuous modifications, you could spend as much time and effort as you want to get the level of granularity desired.
The Major Prompt jump to 35:30
So after I had gone back and forth with the AI interface for about an hour, I asked the system to consolidate all of my directions into a single prompt – something that I could use repeatedly and only have to change out the final destination. This is the prompt I received:
Prompt Entered:
“I am planning a 7-day trip to Copenhagen, Denmark, with a focus on exploring architectural sites and related cultural experiences. I would like you to create a daily itinerary for me and my guest, with 3 activities each day that are geographically close to each other. Each day should have a mix of activities that appeal to an architect and also include broader cultural and scenic interests. Please include a variety of architectural styles, from historical to modern.For each day, I want two suggestions for casual dining options (in the price range of $-$$$), for both lunch and dinner. I would like these options to be well-reviewed and appropriate for the itinerary. Avoid recommendations in the $$$$ range.
For each destination or activity, provide a detailed explanation of why this is relevant or interesting to an architect. Ensure that public transportation or walking is the preferred method of travel between activities.
Finally, once the itinerary is set, create a color-coded map that marks all the destinations by day. Ensure that each day’s locations are marked with a unique color for easy reference. Provide a link to this map so I can view it.”
The Response:
The verdict is that this new consolidated prompt does not contain enough direction on the specifics that I want in order to yield the results I was able to create when I worked through the process one or two steps at a time. I am willing to recognize that this prompt will get you very close, certainly enough information will return that would allow you to evaluate the results and take action with additional direction to the system.
A word to the wise – I have a running history of all the prompts and exercises I have gone through when using ChatGPT but every now and then, some of my results will simply disappear and I no longer have access to the process I went through OR the results that were generated along the way. For example, I went through this exercise using both Copenhagen and Kyoto, yet all of my Copenhagen results are missing from my history, which from a timing standpoint isn’t that big of a deal since I worked through this entire exercise in less than 30-minutes, but the reality is that I don’t want to go through this exercise again in an effort to recreate results that were already prepared.
The “Itinerary”
Once all of this was completed, I simply asked for an itinerary to be made utilizing all previous criteria and direction … and this is what I received back: 7-Day Itinerary for Kyoto, Japan
While I was pretty happy with the results, I feel like there was a considerable amount of additional research and evaluation to work through before considering this a finished product. I have since gone back into the Kyoto Itinerary and added results for lodging suggestions based on where my activities are organized (including the websites to those places). Ultimately, I think this process would better served broken up into 5 or 6 distinct exercises rather than trying to generate the entire trip in a single go of things. Breaking activities up by day, adding returns to help convey public transportation, activities along the way, even asking for suggestions for photogenic locations (which you could organized based on sun orientation so that you don’t go to one spot to get a picture only to find out that it is in shadow in the afternoon). would really allow you to dig deep into your planning exercise.
Andrew: I did run through the same task as that was the premise for the show. As we go through the podcast we compare our tactics and prompts and results. Of Course, I did have a separate set of prompts and a different process for this exercise. While we shared some similarities, I think the prompts and even the process that Bob and I utilized were different enough that you might be interested in seeing the approach and results that I was able to achieve. Again, I do not see a great deal of differences in our outcomes, but they are definitely not the same type of results. So for that reason, I offer the results of my Set of Travel Prompts and the resulting 10-day itineraries for Barcelona, Spain and Tokyo, Japan. I can certainly say that my two itineraries do not provide the same information in the same format as Bob’s version. I think the important aspect of this is the comparison of the types of planning information you can get by tailoring it to your preferred output “style”.
Would you rather? jump to 58:26
Today’s hypothetical question went a direction that I did not foresee …
If you could halt your natural aging process at a specific year, where you would be locked into all things associated with that age, what year would you select? The criteria is that what every you have in terms of appearance, physical mobility, knowledge – EVERYTHING.
For my own answer, I selected an age that I thought would balance my physical abilities with my mental development … meaning I wanted to choose an age that would allow for as much mental development as possible while still having the ability to count on my body to perform sufficiently. I assumed that 25-35 years old would be the preferred age range, but not one person that I have presented this question to has selected an age within that range.
EP 163: Architectural Wanderlust
I don’t know if you have played around with these AI platforms with the idea of developing a travel itinerary, but it was a lot of fun and an activity that I would highly recommend when the time comes for you to plan your next holiday. Everyone has different goals and priorities and the process of travel planning would look different based on your particular goals and objectives. For someone like myself who abhors travel planning, this exercise was awesome and I was really happy with the quality of the results. It won’t completely remove your need to do some research and organize your plans, but it will get you extremely far along that journey.
Cheers and have fun,
Special thanks to our sponsor Petersen, which manufactures PAC-CLAD architectural metal cladding systems. Visit pac-clad.com to learn more.