Why no major city in NE Texas? (Houston, Dallas: schools, tax)

[MrMcCoySays]

everybody knows that the Tyler-Longview area is on the "come-up", but with little industry it may never be known worldwide. I've just always wondered why there isnt a thriving metropolis in what's arguably the most beautiful region of our state. ***** the land is fertile with tall trees, hills, rivers, and lakes. Not to mention that Nacogdoches is supposed to be Texas' very first town, so what made our ancestors decide that this was not the best region for civilization? ****** Has anyone else ever wondered this and thinks it would have been nice to have a big city in TX that EVERYONE could agree was really pretty.

[texan55]

i would say because of dallas

[case44]

Well, to be honest, I love East and Northeast Texas as much as anyone, but they don't particularly need a big metropolis to make it better, if that is the proper item per your asking. Both regions have plenty of fine small communities all around and many pine trees (well, south of I-30), plus lots of good nature, and many fine eating places. Tyler and Longview do just fine in East Texas, and Texarkana does just fine in Northeast Texas. If you want a big metropolis, you can always try Dallas......................in North Texas!

[Poltracker]

Transportation. Back in the mid to late 1800's and early 1900's, when the major urban areas were developing, this area lacked the necessary means of transportation other urban centers had. That being water or rail. Jefferson began the climb but dried up quickly when the logjam on the Red River burst and barges/boats were no longer able to make it up the Big Cypress. The rail service in that area is still limited. As the bigger urban centers that had the means of transportation developed, it was easier for business to move to them instead of trying to redevelop small towns. The interstate system has relieved this somewhat and encouraged business but you are still going to find the most aggressive business where there are multiple methods of transportation.
Dallas/Ft. Worth - major rail hub, interstate traffic
Houston - water (primary), rail, pipeline

[TexanByBirth]

Personally, I like it with the smaller towns. It lets the land stay the way it is. Besides, a large portion from Sherman to Honey Grove is all agriculture (plus a lot of other areas).

[destin04]

That's the major difference in Tyler. If Tyler was surrounded by large cities....the metroplex, Shreveport, even Houston then it would look a lot bigger. There are a lot of towns/cities with the population of 100K that are considered "nice - size cities" ....but when you live in the shadow of the larger cities they tend to think that towns such as Tyler are small. Tyler works hard at keeping the "historic districts" restored and there is a big push to re-create downtown Tyler. Keep watching!

[loves2read]

agree that major roads and infrastructure prohibited growth of dominant city but frankly--it was also attitude -- it is not a forward thinking area--poor schools--no tax base for supporting major city--and you can't grow one with out a tax base..
railroads don't really have major presence

[catman]

I wouldn't want that part of Texas to have a big city. I like it the way it is. Tyler is big enough. Having a really big city would just mess it up.

[Canine*Castle]

Originally Posted by catman

I wouldn't want that part of Texas to have a big city. I like it the way it is. Tyler is big enough. Having a really big city would just mess it up.

I agree. Why ruin any more pretty land?

[txstate]

Because its East Texas thats why. But its a nice place to drive through going to Shreveport/Bossier