Making futures visible requires us to examine the history of the future, question its dominant voices and better understand those that have been marginalised, underrepresented, silenced or unable to speak. In order to open up the debate on futures by offering different ways in which we might view ideas and visions for future places Dunn and Cureton (2020) propose three thematic types: Technological Futures, Social Futures, and Global Futures. The point here is not to ignore technology and try to return to some pre-industrialised ideal of what life could be or even further back in history. It is more that by placing emphasis on complementary types of future we can explore different ideas, including those which are deterministic and path dependent. Our findings illustrate that when visions are intentionally viewed through different critical lenses the various registers of information, the respective themes and features, within the visualisations come to the fore in different ways. By actively identifying visions that represent Social Futures and Global Futures parallel to Technological Futures it becomes possible to have a broader conversation on what is preferable and how this is framed. This talk will focus on Technological Futures as they are a useful way in which we can question the most dominant ways in which the future of urban places are conceived such as through Smart Cities.