Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
About the other cities on the list, Las Vegas is one of the youngest cities with nothing there before 1910 or so and there is always something new being built here. The architecture I think still can't beat Dallas however there is a very sleek feel to the place. The monorail there was also really cool especially how its totally automated and unmanned, wish they would extend it longer.
Out of the cities on the poll, it was a tough choice between Atlanta and Los Angeles. I haven't been to Dallas yet but it does look futuristic from the pics I've seen, especially with the glowing lit-up buildings at night. When I think of futuristic cities, I think of Tokyo and other Asian cities, with post-modern architecture, flashy neon lights, and big LED screens everywhere. Los Angeles seems to fit that description as far as American cities. SF and Seattle can fit that criteria as well. Atlanta has surprised me with a lot of hi-tech features, and its architecture, but it may not seem as futuristic in 2010 as a lot of other cities have caught up and even passed it up. Atlanta in 1996 on the other hand, I felt it was ahead of its time then.
While I think Dallas is definitely in the top two most futuristic cities on this list (and not even for its skyline,) I had to go with Houston.
Houston is a trend-setter for modern development. It is the birthplace of the whole master-planned community concept, which dominates a lot of its edge cities and, like it or not, gives cues to a lot of developers across America. The skyline is spread out across the city and dominated by tall glass buildings and was one of the first to have so much glass, which is definitely a more modern look.
There are a lot of cutting-edge local industries that are making advancements in the medical field or renewable energy as examples. It also has NASA and plenty of top opportunities for engineers that you just can't find anywhere else.
The touristy things mostly hint at the future as well, such as the museum of natural science, the space center, or the glass pyramids of moody gardens. Plus, the sports teams are named the "Astros" and "Rockets."
While Silicon Valley has a lot of high-tech companies, San Francisco is definitely not the most futuristic. If it isn't self-evident, walk down the streets and you'll see a lot of old Victorian houses, streets that look like quilts they've been patch repaired so much, a downtown that is actually starting to look slightly dated (with a few exceptions, of course) and, a great deal of the well-known features are simply historic relics like Alcatraz or cable cars. The Golden Gate bridge is still the part of this city that was most ahead of its time, but it's not as impressive by today's standards of futuristic engineering by any means.
Austin, though I think it is a bit over-hyped, is experiencing the largest skyscraper boom in America right now. There are so many 'futuristic' looking buildings going up or supposed to go up in the next few years that the once tallest building, the Frost Bank tower, is supposed to be the only building built before 2000 to be in the top 10 tallest buildings in Austin by 2015. Austin also has a strong showing in the tech field. However, I would still not consider Austin as futuristic as Houston or Dallas.
I am just curious; what makes a city futuristic? Modern buildings/architecture? Newer infrastructure? pioneering transit? I am confused as to really what this means.
If modern architecture how about all the new modern sky-scrapers in Chicago? newer infrastructure? maybe atlanta (the Marta is getting much better and their airport coninues to evolve and grow). Pioneering transit; not sure
But what about futuristic as "Portland" - more forward looking in their control of sprawl; less car dependancy. In many ways what we see in this thread are many sunbelts here with modern sky-scrapers and a huge dependance on the car. that seems to me like a modern interpretation of the 1950s and not really futuristic - just an observation for what it's worth
futuristic; how about the new Genzyme HQ in Cambridge or the Comcast building in philly - two new buildings with a huge green focus
I am not sure how to assess one area versus another; I am unsure of the criteria
Dallas and Houston have skylines that mostly consist of 80's built buildings. They haven't gotten a new tallest in over 20 years (since the oil boom, basically). Nothing wrong with that, but no one would call it "futuristic".
Same goes with many of the cities on this poll. Las Vegas and Miami probably are the only real contenders, followed by Charlotte and Austin.
I would say Dallas, or Miami. Especially these 2 cities at night. Miami at night with all the multi-colored buildings, and multi-colored lights make it look VERY futuristic. This Miami photo showcases my point. Photos by Jake Guanthardt: Downtown Miami on Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jake-g/3499341743/ - broken link)
I would say Dallas, or Miami. Especially these 2 cities at night. Miami at night with all the multi-colored buildings, and multi-colored lights make it look VERY futuristic. This Miami photo showcases my point. Photos by Jake Guanthardt: Downtown Miami on Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jake-g/3499341743/ - broken link)
I agree Dallas and Miami are more futuristic.
Atlanta and Houston are more of your classic skylines.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.