Laredo Outer Loop

[Chris]

There is a feasibility study for a ~45 mile outer loop of Laredo underway. It would link the 255 Toll Road to a new international bridge to Mexico at Rio Bravo.

TXDOT: https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/laredo/011620.html

[The Ghostbuster]

Make this outer loop an extension of TX-255. I doubt the area needs any more Interstate designations.

[sprjus4]

Make this outer loop an extension of TX-255. I doubt the area needs any more Interstate designations.

Nobody ever said it was going to be an interstate.

Besides, if the whole loop is completed, and all 4-lanes, it could reasonably become an I-x35.

[Bobby5280]

I don't know. i think that kind of corridor idea is kind of pushing the limits of credibility, especially if it's something meant to be built out as a superhighway. IMHO they should concentrate on building out Loop 20 all the way to completion. That includes the Southern extension down to US-83 in Rio Bravo.

This outer loop idea also hinges partially on the choice whether the Ports to Plains Corridor, if fully built-out will follow near the Rio Grade between Eagle Pass and Laredo (along or near Eagle Pass Road), or bow out to go through Carrizo Springs via an upgraded US-83. I'm rooting more for a direct path via Eagle Pass Road. Get there and bolt to Del Rio and then go North toward San Angelo.

[hotdogPi]

Make this outer loop an extension of TX-255. I doubt the area needs any more Interstate designations.

The area doesn't have too many Interstate designations. It would be the same as any other place where there are 2 2dis and a 3di.

Compare Laredo with the Iowa side of the Omaha metro area. Nuevo Laredo + Laredo has a similar population to Omaha + nearby Iowa, and that part of Iowa has I-29, I-80, I-480, I-680, and I-880.

[formulanone]

After a two-week visit to Laredo for work last April, I can confidently say there's a whole lot of very slow truck traffic. They were working on the Loop 20 areas near I-69W/I-35 and it looked recently started.

I presume it's more of a bypass for those trucks headed towards the I-2 corridor and the southern reaches of the Rio Grande Valley, or for another proposed border crossing, because it's too far out of the city proper to have any meaningful commuter impact for many years. I saw very few trucks on TX 255, though many along the FM 1472 routing closer to the border, towards I-69W.

[Bobby5280]

Laredo has over 250,000 residents. Around 400,000 people live on the other side of the Rio Grande. Combine that with all the commercial traffic using the 4 border crossing points in the Laredo. It's a good formula for a whole lot of traffic. It's surprising it has taken TX DOT this long to get any significant work done on Loop 20.

Laredo needs other highway improvements within the city. I think US-83 needs to be upgraded to a limited access freeway as far North into Laredo as possible. Obviously it's impossible to get it as far as the downtown area, but a freeway upgrade could easily reach La Pita Mangana Road. Upgrades North of there would likely require an elevated freeway built above the existing Zapata Highway. A US-83 freeway could reach Palo Blanco Street and the Cigarroa Recreation Center.

[rte66man]

Is the I69W western bridge and border crossing already overloaded/ Not sure I see the need for a 3rd crossing.

[Bobby5280]

I'm not suggesting Laredo needs another border crossing. What I am suggesting is Laredo needs other serious improvements to its own street and highway network. Completing Loop 20 will be good, but it's not really enough.

The I-69W border crossing and TX-255 crossing farther North will be able to handle much of the commercial traffic load. The main border crossing in Downtown Laredo, a few blocks from the South terminus of I-35, still draws a lot of traffic itself. The Convent Ave crossing is a nearby alternative. If a motorist is in Central Laredo, near downtown, he has only one efficient way to get out of there: I-35. If you want to head East to leave downtown there's a good bit of stoplight hell to endure to get out past Loop 20.

It would be nice if there was at least one or more short East-West freeways linking I-35 to Loop 20, or farther South linking Loop 20 with an upgraded US-83 freeway. Unfortunately it doesn't look feasible to do any upgrades along (or above) any of the major East-West surface streets in Laredo, such as Saunders St (Bus US-59), or US-83 going East out of downtown before turning South on the Zapata Highway.

What makes matters worse for street traffic in Laredo is the street grid is a tight yet outdated design. Every major street has lots of driveways and other crap emptying out onto the main thoroughfare. You have to go to the newer (more affluent) parts of Laredo (mostly North) to see any hints of modern urban/suburban street design at work. Naturally the first parts of Loop 20 being upgraded to Interstate quality are happening in that part of town.

[kphoger]

Other than a handful of grandfathered-in carriers, US truckers cannot carry a load into Mexico and Mexican truckers cannot carry a load into the USA.  Rather, each drops the trailer off in a drayage yard on one side of the border, then a dedicated drayage trucker picks it up and takes it across the border to another drayage yard, where it's picked up again for the rest of its journey.

Commercial traffic will cross the border at Colombia or any other far-out POE in large numbers only if the prohibition of cross-border trucking were lifted.  Heck, TX-255 and the Colombia POE were constructed with the anticipation that truckers would be allowed to carry long-haul loads directly between Monterrey and San Antonio (and that the Mexican side of the bypass would connect to it, and that all commercial traffic would be required to use it).  However, other than a brief trial program with a short list of carriers a few years ago, that expectation never became reality.  With the completion of now-I-69W and the World Trade Bridge–which connects directly to the actual bypass on the Mexican side–TX-255 is just a huge detour that truckers have no reason to make because they have to head back into the city anyway to drop their trailers off in drayage yards, which are located in town.  Now that tolls have been removed from TX-255, I see no reason why traffic counts would increase at that crossing.  Any new crossing point on the other side of town will likely be seen as similarly useless:  why head way outside of town to cross the border, just to head back into town again on the other side?

[rte66man]

I'm not suggesting Laredo needs another border crossing.

Never said you did. I was referring to the OP.

[Scott5114]

I doubt the area needs any more Interstate designations.

I-69L!!

[kphoger]

Is the 'L' for LOL?

[Scott5114]

No, it's for Laredo.

The L in Laredo, however, is for LOL.

[kphoger]

LOL

[sparker]

From the map shown in the OP, it appears that aside from the 255 connection, US 83 heading NW from I-35 is in the mix as a potential terminal point for any loop consideration -- which, if configured that way, would make the loop an effective extension of the oft-revisited Port-to-Plains concept/project.   But development of the P-to-P down to its original Laredo terminus is about the only reason an additional loop outside present Loop 20 should even get consideration -- it would serve as a "shunt" for additional cross-border traffic that might come down from west Texas and points beyond, even to the extent of passing such traffic on to the projected I-2 down to Hidalgo and Brownsville.   But if the P-to-P isn't forthcoming in the foreseeable future, building out Loop 20 (as Bobby suggests) would almost definitely suffice as a local/regional traffic distributor.                                                                                                                               

[MaxConcrete]

In this month's TxDOT minute order there is a large amount of right-of-way acquisition for the inner loop from Bayside Blvd to the existing I-69W near I-35. (The inner loop is separate from the outer loop, but I didn't think this ROW purchase warranted a separate thread.)

The parcels appear to cover most of the needed right-of-way on this section. As you can see in Google maps, the east side of the corridor is clear of buildings, and is now being purchased. The Holiday Inn Express near Lakeview will lose some of its parking lot. This acquisition is a favorable indicator for construction moving forward.

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2022/0223/5.pdf
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Starr+County,+TX/@27.5848245,-99.4490722,11225m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x866447e9514ca183:0x5cbff8774a548e9d!8m2!3d26.6215167!4d-98.7481167?hl=en

[Bobby5280]

At first I thought you were referring to the Outer Loop Project instead improvements on Loop 20. Widening Loop 20 into a freeway down to the intersection with Bayside Blvd should be relatively easy. Yeah, the Holiday Inn Express parking lot is the only thing that might get a shave. Other than that, some entrances to a couple neighborhoods and developments will need to be re-done.

South of Bayside Blvd the Loop 20 project gets a little more interesting. Loop 20 makes a tight squeeze between the United ISD Food Production Center on the East side of the road and Diamond Distribution on the West side. There are other properties closely flanking the highway. A new freeway might have to be elevated for short stretches through that section. I'm not sure how Loop 20 can be upgraded into a freeway passing by Casa Blanca Country Club. If they can solve those issues and get the freeway upgraded down to the other existing freeway segment starting at Saunders Street then the rest of the Loop 20 upgrade project would be pretty simple.

[edwaleni]

In this month's TxDOT minute order there is a large amount of right-of-way acquisition for the loop from Bayside Blvd to the existing I-69W near I-35.

The parcels appear to cover most of the needed right-of-way on this section. As you can see in Google maps, the east side of the corridor is clear of buildings, and is now being purchased. The Holiday Inn Express near Lakeview will lose some of its parking lot. This acquisition is a favorable indicator for construction moving forward.

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2022/0223/5.pdf
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Starr+County,+TX/@27.5848245,-99.4490722,11225m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x866447e9514ca183:0x5cbff8774a548e9d!8m2!3d26.6215167!4d-98.7481167?hl=en

I thought the Laredo East Bypass was all part of the future I-2/US-83/TX-20 to reach the airport from the east and go all the way to I-35.

[The Ghostbuster]

The Loop 20 Inner Loop should be completed before they even begin to consider an outer loop for Laredo. Is the outer loop still an active proposal?

[Bobby5280]

I don't know if the Outer Loop proposal is undergoing serious, realistic planning. Given the desolate nature of land along the proposed path TX DOT could build the initial 2-lane concept just to get the ROW secured: just one 2-lane frontage road with a bunch of land off to its side. The road wouldn't even need to be Interstate grade.

[ethanhopkin14]

Other than a handful of grandfathered-in carriers, US truckers cannot carry a load into Mexico and Mexican truckers cannot carry a load into the USA.  Rather, each drops the trailer off in a drayage yard on one side of the border, then a dedicated drayage trucker picks it up and takes it across the border to another drayage yard, where it's picked up again for the rest of its journey.

Commercial traffic will cross the border at Colombia or any other far-out POE in large numbers only if the prohibition of cross-border trucking were lifted.  Heck, TX-255 and the Colombia POE were constructed with the anticipation that truckers would be allowed to carry long-haul loads directly between Monterrey and San Antonio (and that the Mexican side of the bypass would connect to it, and that all commercial traffic would be required to use it).  However, other than a brief trial program with a short list of carriers a few years ago, that expectation never became reality.  With the completion of now-I-69W and the World Trade Bridge–which connects directly to the actual bypass on the Mexican side–TX-255 is just a huge detour that truckers have no reason to make because they have to head back into the city anyway to drop their trailers off in drayage yards, which are located in town.  Now that tolls have been removed from TX-255, I see no reason why traffic counts would increase at that crossing.  Any new crossing point on the other side of town will likely be seen as similarly useless:  why head way outside of town to cross the border, just to head back into town again on the other side?

Serious question.  What about all the trucks and busses I have seen with a Texas License Plate and a Tamaulipas or Nuevo Leon license plate? What's the legality there?

[kphoger]

Other than a handful of grandfathered-in carriers, US truckers cannot carry a load into Mexico and Mexican truckers cannot carry a load into the USA.  Rather, each drops the trailer off in a drayage yard on one side of the border, then a dedicated drayage trucker picks it up and takes it across the border to another drayage yard, where it's picked up again for the rest of its journey.

Commercial traffic will cross the border at Colombia or any other far-out POE in large numbers only if the prohibition of cross-border trucking were lifted.  Heck, TX-255 and the Colombia POE were constructed with the anticipation that truckers would be allowed to carry long-haul loads directly between Monterrey and San Antonio (and that the Mexican side of the bypass would connect to it, and that all commercial traffic would be required to use it).  However, other than a brief trial program with a short list of carriers a few years ago, that expectation never became reality.  With the completion of now-I-69W and the World Trade Bridge–which connects directly to the actual bypass on the Mexican side–TX-255 is just a huge detour that truckers have no reason to make because they have to head back into the city anyway to drop their trailers off in drayage yards, which are located in town.  Now that tolls have been removed from TX-255, I see no reason why traffic counts would increase at that crossing.  Any new crossing point on the other side of town will likely be seen as similarly useless:  why head way outside of town to cross the border, just to head back into town again on the other side?

Serious question.  What about all the trucks and busses I have seen with a Texas License Plate and a Tamaulipas or Nuevo Leon license plate? What's the legality there?

(No, I'm not back.  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.)

Trucks:  I assume those are the grandfathered carriers to which I referred.  AIUI, their legal status goes back decades, predating the short-lived (2011-2014) pilot program.  I don't remember offhand if the carriers picked for the pilot program were allowed to continue cross-border long hauls or not after the pilot program was axed, but the old grandfathered carriers never stopped.  If you want to look up a specific carrier, then I'd start here.

Buses:  Different deal.  Several bus lines have legality in both countries–Greyhound included.  You can take Greyhound directly from Austin to Monterrey if you want, although the Monterrey station is out in the industrial outskirts and requires a trip on the metro to get to the main bus station in town.

[jgb191]

Loop 20 is all that is needed really.  Laredo has no suburbs so no need for an outer loop.

[The Ghostbuster]

Since Laredo doesn't have suburbs, maybe they should start building some. Then we can worry about if Laredo will need an outer bypass.