|

02-09-2009, 12:25 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
21 posts, read 10,841 times
Reputation: 34
|
|
|
Killeen, Fort hood, Temple area may be the next DFW in the 22nd century, but not any time soon. I can give in one near certain fact about the area; It Will Grow. It has Fort Hood. It has the IH 35 passing through it. It has a lot of space to expand into.
Full disclosure: I did part of my growing up there and graduated from high school there in 1973. It has improved considerably since then. It had no where to go but up. Killeen is not a small town anymore. It is now quite livable, particularly if you are an adult and can depart if you feel the need of change. I thought I had found one of the ends of the Earth when I was a kid there in the 60s and early 70s. I have been around and have seen much, much, much worse.
|
|

02-09-2009, 02:35 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rose Captial of The World
1,420 posts, read 840,864 times
Reputation: 341
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXTwizter
With all the growth in the Waco/Temple/Killeen area, are we poised to be the next DFW in the near future?
|
No
San Antonio-Austin is more probable.
|
|

02-16-2009, 01:30 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Washington D.C. by way of Texas. Maybe Chicago next year
4,572 posts, read 2,530,920 times
Reputation: 997
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt
No
San Antonio-Austin is more probable.
|
again, i stated this on page 3 or 4, the distance between Killeen and Austin is not that big. When SH 195 is completed, you can now get to Georgetown in 25 minutes. Many people live in Killeen and work in Austin and it's a growing percentage to. I don't think Austin and Killeen will ever become one MSA. But a CSA is not out of the question.
|
|

02-17-2009, 12:13 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rose Captial of The World
1,420 posts, read 840,864 times
Reputation: 341
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade
again, i stated this on page 3 or 4, the distance between Killeen and Austin is not that big. When SH 195 is completed, you can now get to Georgetown in 25 minutes. Many people live in Killeen and work in Austin and it's a growing percentage to. I don't think Austin and Killeen will ever become one MSA. But a CSA is not out of the question.
|
If thats your way of thinking lets go ahead & lump Beaumont-Port Aurthur in with Houston's Metro. Its about the same distance from Baytown to Beaumont & about as many one horse interstate side towns in between. The upper Texas & Louisiana Coast along I-10 is just as dense as the I-35 corridor from Waco to Austin.
|
|

02-17-2009, 12:41 AM
|
|
Not a member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
199 posts, read 116,078 times
Reputation: 96
|
|
|
No, Killeen sucks bigtime.
|
|

02-17-2009, 06:30 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
495 posts, read 173,164 times
Reputation: 143
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin
Let's hope not. We already have an area named DFW and it would be real confusing to have DFW 2. Especially if they built another big airport and named it DFW 2 Airport. Planes wouldn't know where to land.
How about we name it WTK or KTW ? We could have a drawing to see which initials come 1st.
|
I just call it the Hood Metro. Suitable to military and gangs alike.
|
|

02-17-2009, 07:57 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
357 posts, read 220,839 times
Reputation: 70
|
|
|
Simply no.
Last edited by Mark-Tyler is Special; 02-17-2009 at 08:08 PM..
|
|

02-18-2009, 09:13 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Washington D.C. by way of Texas. Maybe Chicago next year
4,572 posts, read 2,530,920 times
Reputation: 997
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt
If thats your way of thinking lets go ahead & lump Beaumont-Port Aurthur in with Houston's Metro. Its about the same distance from Baytown to Beaumont & about as many one horse interstate side towns in between. The upper Texas & Louisiana Coast along I-10 is just as dense as the I-35 corridor from Waco to Austin.
|
It's about 40 minutes from Baytown to Beaumont right? I think it's slightly different compared to Killeen and Georgetown. Keep in mind that I am against this because all it is ugly sprawl.
|
|

02-18-2009, 09:46 AM
|
|
Dad
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Clear Lake
4,846 posts, read 4,117,575 times
Reputation: 1128
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade
It's about 40 minutes from Baytown to Beaumont right? I think it's slightly different compared to Killeen and Georgetown. Keep in mind that I am against this because all it is ugly sprawl.
|
No. I drive from SE Houston to Port Arthur every day for work and that is excatly 90 miles. Baytown is about 15 miles from me, so I'd say it's about 70ish miles from Baytown to Beaumont.
To top it off, the drive is essentially nothing but farm land + washed up marsh from Ike's storm surge. Way out that way, the surge washed in 15 miles from the Gulf, and all the bayous and tributaries further inland swelled up as well. Due to that reason alone, I don't think they'll ever develop it out unless there is no land left at all. The land that way = soup. And from the looks of it, a lot of that area was left abandoned.
I don't understand why so many people think Houston and Beaumont are only 30-45 minutes apart. The metros are an average of 100 miles away from each other, and overall they are quite different culturally.
|
|

02-18-2009, 11:20 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
307 posts, read 208,424 times
Reputation: 108
|
|
|
absolutely not.
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|