Growth Challenges and Opportunities in the Texas Triangle

By: A. Arroyo

Engineer  |  Texas Urban Planning Agency | April 2025

© 2025, All Rights Reserved, Texas Urban Planning Agency.  All persons and entities are permitted to use this document and its contents free of charge, provided such use complies with the additional terms and conditions set forth below, which are a condition of authorized, non-exclusive use.

Growth Challenges and Opportunities in the Texas Triangle

Executive Summary

The Texas Triangle—defined by the metropolitan regions of Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio—is home to more than 22.5 million people in 2025, with projected growth to 31 million by 2040. This region drives the state’s economic strength but is facing increasing strain from rapid population growth, rising freight volumes, deteriorating infrastructure, and environmental degradation.

This report outlines the pressing challenges and key opportunities shaping the future of mobility and development in the Texas Triangle:

• Population & Urban Growth: By 2035, both the DFW and Houston metro areas are projected to exceed 10 million residents each. Continued population expansion will require significant infrastructure investment, especially as property acquisition becomes cost-prohibitive for freeway expansion.
• Intercity Travel Demand: Over 175,000 people travel daily between major Triangle metros. For example, 70,600 travel daily between Houston and DFW. Ground and air traffic combined stress existing infrastructure and contribute to inefficiencies and environmental damage.
• Freight Movement Pressures: In 2024, over 9,000 freight trucks travel daily between Houston and DFW, expected to double by 2050. Interstate 45 alone will need $7.2 billion in repairs, excluding expansion costs. TxDOT’s broader freeway investments across the Triangle reached nearly $967 million in 2024 and are part of a projected $740 billion statewide need through 2050.
• Environmental and Public Health Impacts: Air quality declined in 2024 with 122 ozone action days and 69 poor air quality days. Vehicle traffic is a primary contributor. Fatalities from freeway crashes in the region totaled 1,376 in 2023, with no fatalities recorded from commercial aviation within the Triangle.
• Equity in Funding: Airports and freeways benefit from public funding, while high-speed rail proposals like Texas Central are expected to be privately financed, despite offering public benefits and potentially easing infrastructure burdens.
• Socioeconomic Viability of Rail: Data show strong potential ridership on high-speed rail, especially between DFW and Houston, where 78% of travelers earn more than $50,000 annually, and many travel for business purposes.
• Transit Integration and Development: Effective high-speed rail will require enhanced local transit connectivity in DFW and Houston and transit-oriented development around station sites to ensure accessibility and sustainable operations.
• Strategic Infrastructure Planning: Failure to address growing infrastructure needs could force businesses to seek alternative locations, threatening the Triangle’s economic dominance. Inclusive collaboration across political, business, and residential sectors is vital to building a robust, future-ready transportation system.

---

Introduction

The Texas Triangle, encompassing the metropolitan regions of Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW), Houston, San Antonio, and Austin, represents the economic and demographic powerhouse of Texas. As of 2025, the region’s population stands at 22,550,219, according to the United States Census Bureau. This figure is projected to grow to 25 million by 2030 and 31 million by 2040. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the growth-related challenges and opportunities facing the Texas Triangle using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Texas Comptroller, Texas General Land Office, and other reputable sources. It analyzes the region’s population dynamics, infrastructure burden, environmental concerns, and high-speed rail potential, in a neutral policy tone.

Current and Future Population Trends

The rapid growth in the Texas Triangle’s population is most pronounced in its two largest metros: the Houston metro area, with 7,824,643 residents, and the DFW metro area, with 8,282,068. Combined, these areas hold 16,106,711 people. The Austin and San Antonio metro areas have populations of 2,098,362 and 2,828,941 respectively, totaling 4,927,303. Additionally, the Brazos Valley station area (including College Station, Bryan, and Huntsville) contains 334,695 residents. This results in a population of 16,441,406 along the proposed Texas Central High-Speed Rail route with station stops, plus an additional 355,464 in counties between major metros, forming the intermediate corridor.

The region’s urban and semi-urban growth has placed increasing strain on public infrastructure. With real estate prices continuing to rise, state authorities anticipate difficulty acquiring land for freeway expansion, even as congestion worsens. This presents a significant challenge in terms of transportation equity and capacity (U.S. Census Bureau).

Transportation Demand and Intercity Travel

Daily travel between major cities in the Texas Triangle demonstrates the high demand for intercity connectivity:

• Houston to DFW: 3,600 air passengers and 67,000 ground travelers (total: 70,600).
• DFW to San Antonio/Austin: 4,800 air passengers and 45,000 ground travelers (total: 49,832).
• San Antonio/Austin to Houston: 4,700 air passengers and 50,000 ground travelers (total: 54,819).

Altogether, more than 175,251 people travel daily between major Texas Triangle cities using various modes of transport. This reflects not only the region’s economic interdependence but also the immense pressure placed on roads and airports (U.S. Department of Transportation, Cirium, TxDOT).

The average occupancy rate in passenger vehicles between DFW and Houston is 1.47 persons, and 42% of those vehicles carry a single occupant. This low occupancy contributes to traffic inefficiency and environmental degradation (Texas Urban Planning Agency).

Freight Traffic and Road Infrastructure Strain

I-45 alone facilitates half of all freight traffic in the Texas Triangle. In 2024, about 9,000 semi-trucks and large box trucks traveled daily between Houston and DFW. By 2050, this is expected to increase to over 20,000 trucks per day. The heavy vehicle usage, combined with personal travel, will necessitate an estimated $7.2 billion in freeway repairs on I-45 alone through 2050. This estimate excludes any widening or modernization projects (North Texas Council of Governments, Texas A&M University).

TxDOT reported spending $59 million in 2024 to repair freeways in urban Triangle metros and an additional $21 million on rural Triangle freeway segments, including Interstates 10, 20, 30, 35, and 45. Another $877 million was spent on minor freeway expansions and treatments to mitigate congestion and improve safety (TxDOT).

In total, the Texas Triangle contains 27,759 lane miles:

• Houston: 11,800
• DFW: 11,574
• San Antonio: 1,419
• Austin: 1,289
• Rural areas: 1,677 (National Highway Safety Administration)

Between 2013 and 2023, Texas added 514 miles of any type of public transit within the Triangle while 3,783 lane miles were added for vehicles of any type.

Environmental and Safety Considerations

In 2024, the region experienced 122 ozone action days and 69 poor air quality days, 22 of which were severe enough to harm healthy individuals. The EPA and scientific communities continue to warn of worsening environmental conditions due to unchecked emissions (EPA, National Weather Service).

Traffic-related fatalities in 2023 within the Triangle totaled 1,376:

• I-45: 135 deaths
• I-35: 186 deaths
• I-10: 159 deaths
• I-20: 48 deaths
• I-30: 39 deaths
• Other state freeways: 146 deaths By contrast, no deaths occurred aboard commercial passenger aircraft flying between or within Triangle cities during the same period (NHTSA, NTSB).

Equity in Transportation Funding

Commercial airports and roadways in Texas receive local, state, and federal taxpayer support for operations, maintenance, and upgrades. For example, federal and state funds keep airports operational, while roads and freeways are maintained by TxDOT with public money. High-speed rail, on the other hand, is expected to operate without any public subsidy despite serving a similar public function. This inconsistency raises questions of funding equity and long-term transportation strategy (U.S. DOT, Texas Legislature, CBO).

Routinely, the public argument uses the word “investment” to describe how new roads and freeways are paid for by the state and federal government while the word “funding” is used when referring to public transit services.  This often creates a subtle yet incorrect shift in the public’s mind that roads are free and public transit is a taxpayer burden.  In reality, both are burdens paid by the taxpayer anad by drivers or riders.

Under Article VIII Section 7-a and 7-b of the Texas state Constitution, significant funding limitations or requirements guide what the state and TxDOT can use the money for.

This section mandates that a portion of certain state revenues be used specifically for road construction and maintenance.

• Motor Fuel Taxes: Three-fourths (75%) of revenue collected from state motor fuel taxes must be used exclusively for acquiring rights-of-way and constructing, maintaining, and policing public roadways.
  
• The remaining one-fourth (25%) is allocated to public education.

It requires that a portion of state oil and gas production taxes and motor vehicle sales/rental taxes be deposited into the State Highway Fund, provided certain conditions are met (e.g., rainy day fund thresholds).  This leaves local municipalities struggling to find ways to finance other modal transit types such as rail, bus, bike or something yet realized.

These funds are restricted to use by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) for constructing, maintaining, and acquiring rights-of-way for non-tolled public roads.  Thismeans that none of the money may be used for any type of metro, commuter or light rail transit construction or maintenance, bus or BRT routes, or bike lanes.   A balanced approach to solving the region’s transportation needs requires allocating money for all types of transit, freeways, rail and other model types.  In the absence of a balanced approach, Texas will end up with some of the worst traffic congested roads and freeways in the nation despite spending more to expand road and freeway infrastructure capacity and it will negatively impact the state’s GDP growth and the positive business environment it now enjoys.

Property Acquisition and Landowner Negotiations

The Texas Central HSR route between Dallas and Houston crosses 1,601 private properties. So far, 411 of these properties have been secured via purchase or easement agreements. Out of the remaining 1,190 property owners, 751 have shown willingness to negotiate. The remaining 439 owners either refuse to sell or are seeking better compensation (Texas General Land Office, Texas Central, Texas Supreme Court).

An alternative approach could involve elevated rail viaducts over non-cooperative properties. A revenue-sharing model, such as $2 per train per property, could generate over $5 million annually for these landowners, creating a sustainable and mutually beneficial arrangement.

Socioeconomic and Business Case for Rail

A significant portion of travelers between DFW and Houston are high earners:

• 39% earn more than $100,000/year
• 24% earn between $75,000–$99,999
• 15% earn between $50,000–$74,999 These figures exclude commercial vehicle operators but include business travelers and affluent professionals. The potential ridership base appears to have the economic means and frequency of travel to support high-speed rail fare levels (Texas Comptroller, US Chamber of Commerce).

Urban Transit Integration and Station Planning

While DFW already operates extensive commuter rail and light rail systems, integration with the HSR station will require connectivity improvements. Houston’s METRORail Red Line is among the most heavily used in the nation on a per-mile basis, but overall regional rail coverage is minimal. A coordinated expansion of clean, safe, and high-frequency local transit will be essential in Houston to complement HSR operations.

Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) at station areas in DFW, Houston, and Brazos Valley will further enhance viability. Incorporating high-density housing, commercial space, dining, and retail will create self-sustaining ecosystems that support both ridership and operating revenue. Lease income from TOD tenants can bolster the financial health of the rail system (University of Texas, Surface Transportation Board).

Expanding Freight Traffic in the Texas Triangle

Freight movement is a vital component of the Texas economy, and the Texas Triangle serves as a key corridor for commercial goods transport. A significant portion of the state’s freight traffic traverses the I-45 corridor, which alone accounts for half of all freight movement within the Triangle. In 2024, approximately 9,000 semi-trucks and large box trucks traveled each day between the DFW and Houston areas. This number is projected to more than double by 2050, exceeding 20,000 daily freight vehicles (North Texas Council of Governments, Texas Department of Transportation, Port of Houston).

The increasing volume of freight traffic poses multiple challenges. First, the wear and tear caused by heavy trucks accelerates the deterioration of roadway surfaces, necessitating frequent and costly repairs. TxDOT estimates that $7.2 billion will be required for repairs to I-45 alone between now and 2050, not including expenditures on roadway expansion or congestion mitigation. This financial burden compounds existing maintenance costs for the region’s 27,759 lane miles of highways and freeways.

Second, the integration of freight and passenger traffic on shared roadways leads to congestion and increased risk of accidents. Heavy trucks contribute to bottlenecks, particularly during peak travel times, and limit the efficiency of the overall transportation network. The resulting delays impact supply chains, commuters, and economic productivity.

The continued growth of freight transport in the Texas Triangle underscores the importance of exploring alternative freight corridors and multimodal solutions. Enhanced rail freight networks, targeted highway investment, and the potential for shifting short-haul cargo to more sustainable modes should all be considered as part of a comprehensive freight management strategy for the region.

Long-Term Freeway Investment Projections

According to TxDOT and statewide transportation planning estimates, Texas is expected to spend as much as $740 billion through 2050 to address the growing demands on its freeway infrastructure. This figure includes both routine maintenance and large-scale expansion projects necessary to accommodate increasing volumes of personal and freight traffic (Houston Chronicle, TxDOT). This investment highlights the sheer scale of infrastructure Texas must finance to keep pace with population and economic growth in the Triangle.

These anticipated costs add urgency to the consideration of alternative transportation solutions. Without them, the state risks not only overwhelming its freeway system but also incurring higher long-term costs due to delayed infrastructure improvements, rising land acquisition prices, and escalating maintenance needs.

Strategic Implications for State Growth

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has credited the state’s growth to favorable tax policy and business climate. However, continued unmanaged growth could create burdens that are costlier to address retroactively. A proactive strategy involving diversified transportation investments—including rail—may be essential to mitigate long-term consequences (Texas Governor’s Office).

Failure to meet the region’s infrastructure needs, particularly for transportation, may compel some businesses to look outside the Texas Triangle for more stable and efficient operational environments. As congestion increases and mobility deteriorates, the attractiveness of the Triangle for commercial investment and relocation could diminish. Maintaining Texas’s economic competitiveness will require not just investment but collaboration across sectors.

Texas must bring together all residents, businesses, and other stakeholders—spanning political ideologies, industries, and communities—to develop a comprehensive and inclusive plan for infrastructure growth. Without this collective planning, the region risks being overtaken by other areas of the country that present more coordinated and forward-thinking environments, weakening both the business and quality-of-life foundations of the Texas Triangle.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has credited the state’s growth to favorable tax policy and business climate. However, continued unmanaged growth could create burdens that are costlier to address retroactively. A proactive strategy involving diversified transportation investments—including rail—may be essential to mitigate long-term consequences (Texas Governor’s Office).

Conclusion

The Texas Triangle is experiencing rapid demographic and economic expansion. With over 22.5 million residents in 2025 and forecasts pointing to over 31 million by 2040, the need for adaptive infrastructure planning is urgent. The region already sees over 130,000 intercity travelers daily, faces mounting traffic fatalities, and is grappling with deteriorating air quality and rising road maintenance costs.

Although high-speed rail between DFW and Houston may face hurdles such as landowner resistance and funding disparities, the socioeconomic and environmental data suggest a viable long-term role for rail. Ridership demand, regional wealth distribution, and existing infrastructure strain align to present a clear opportunity. When considered alongside roadway fatalities, maintenance costs, and public funding inconsistencies, high-speed rail appears not as a luxury, but as a practical and timely component of a balanced regional mobility strategy.

While this paper refrains from asserting a final recommendation, it invites policymakers, stakeholders, and the public to weigh these interlinked considerations. Sustainable solutions will depend on forward-looking investments that match Texas’s trajectory with scalable, resilient infrastructure.

By: A. Arroyo

Engineer  |  Texas Urban Planning Agency

© 2025, All Rights Reserved, Texas Urban Planning Agency.  All persons and entities are permitted to use this document and its contents, provided that: (1) proper attribution is given to the Texas Urban Planning Agency; (2) any applicable web links are included in connection with such use; (3) written notice of such use is submitted to and received by the Texas Urban Planning Agency prior to distribution or publication; (4) the user discloses the nature and scope of the intended use; and (5) the user provides the Texas Urban Planning Agency with a copy of the final work incorporating or referencing this document.  This document and its contents are the property of Texas Urban planning Agency.  The free use of this document does not grant, imply, or transfer any license to the user to sublicense, sell, assign, or otherwise convey rights to this document or any derivative thereof to any third party.