So apparently Lubbock is building a Loop 88 outer loop freeway right now

[TheBox]

I just now learned this, despite this article being 2021, 2 years ago

https://www.lubbockonline.com/story/news/2021/11/03/lubbocks-loop-88-freeway-project-launches-groundbreaking/6269350001/
And here's the map btw:


You can even see construction of it on Google Maps south of Lubbock

I guess Lubbock is taking their future growth into account, sooner than later.
I guess this means Woodrow will be a Lubbock suburb now in the near future.

[The Ghostbuster]

Does Lubbock need an outer loop? I can understand outer loops of Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio. Then again, Lubbock has a population of 263,930, and existing Loop 289 (and the other freeways) may be inadequate for future demands.

[-- US 175 --]

I think I remember seeing a Loop 88 designation in the TxDOT online designations list before.  I'm not sure how long it's been designated.

Here's the listing:  https://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/sl/sl0088.htm

[Bobby5280]

I'm kind of surprised they're able to build any of this. Lubbock has quite a bit of sprawl outside the 289 loop. Segment 3 is currently under construction along FM-1585/130th Street. A fair amount of property had to be acquired and removed near the interchange with US-87. They'll have to clear other existing properties on the other side of the US-87 interchange to build Segment 4 out to the connection with US-84.

It looks like there is a good amount of residential growth happening South of Lubbock in the Woodrow area. Segment 2 would provide a good connection to the Reese Technology Center.

I think it's a bit odd the NW quadrant of this half outer loop doesn't reach East past US-84. A connection into I-27 near the Lubbock airport would be worthwhile. They'll need to at least upgrade FM-2641 into a 4-lane divided street from US-84 over to I-27.

[Stephane Dumas]

I'm kind of surprised they're able to build any of this. Lubbock has quite a bit of sprawl outside the 289 loop. Segment 3 is currently under construction along FM-1585/130th Street. A fair amount of property had to be acquired and removed near the interchange with US-87. They'll have to clear other existing properties on the other side of the US-87 interchange to build Segment 4 out to the connection with US-84.

It looks like there is a good amount of residential growth happening South of Lubbock in the Woodrow area. Segment 2 would provide a good connection to the Reese Technology Center.

I think it's a bit odd the NW quadrant of this half outer loop doesn't reach East past US-84. A connection into I-27 near the Lubbock airport would be worthwhile. They'll need to at least upgrade FM-2641 into a 4-lane divided street from US-84 over to I-27.

Now then you mention it, they didn't toyed with the idea of adding a spur from the NW quadrant going northward to reach US-84 at Shallowater so Loop-88 would also play the role of a Lubbock bypass for US-84.

[The Ghostbuster]

How would building the proposed Loop 88 beltway compare to widening existing Loop 289 to six or eight lanes?

[Bobby5280]

Loop 289 is already 6 lanes or more wide on much of its length, particularly on the South and West sides of Lubbock where more of the commercial and residential growth is happening. The segment of Loop 88 currently in early stages of construction is 3.5 miles South of Loop 289. That's a fairly good distance. And it's the middle of where Lubbock sprawl outside the 289 loop is growing.

[Stephane Dumas]

I saw some land cleaned for Loop-88 ROW on GSV taken on May 2023. https://maps.app.goo.gl/HXVuuoy12Wu6NQDbA

[Urban Prairie Schooner]

Lubbock has very lopsided growth patterns. Is there a reason why the city grows to the southwest (proximity to Texas Tech?)? It's not like the city is surrounded by any sort of major geographic barriers.

[Anthony_JK]

Nothing against Loop 88 at all, but wouldn't expanding the Marsha Sharp Freeway (US 62/82) to upgrade all the way through Lubbock, and adding direct connectors to the interchange with I-27 so that there is a complementary W-E freeway, be more of a buck bang than such an out-of-the-way beltway?

[Henry]

Even I wasn't aware that this was planned!

Nothing against Loop 88 at all, but wouldn't expanding the Marsha Sharp Freeway (US 62/82) to upgrade all the way through Lubbock, and adding direct connectors to the interchange with I-27 so that there is a complementary W-E freeway, be more of a buck bang than such an out-of-the-way beltway?

I'm very inclined to think so.

[Bobby5280]

Nothing against Loop 88 at all, but wouldn't expanding the Marsha Sharp Freeway (US 62/82) to upgrade all the way through Lubbock, and adding direct connectors to the interchange with I-27 so that there is a complementary W-E freeway, be more of a buck bang than such an out-of-the-way beltway?

I believe the motivation for Loop 88 is moving US-84 traffic thru or around Lubbock more effectively. There is quite a lot of heavy truck traffic on US-84 from Lubbock down to Sweetwater and I-20. Some of the NW-bound traffic takes I-27 up to Amarillo and beyond, but there is other traffic taking US-84 farther NW to Clovis.

An expansion of US-62/82 thru central Lubbock (Marsha Sharp Freeway) would have no effect at all on US-84 traffic.

Aside from the US-84 corridor Loop 88 would do more to help efficiently move local traffic in the growing areas South and West outside of the 289 loop.

[TheBox]

Nothing against Loop 88 at all, but wouldn't expanding the Marsha Sharp Freeway (US 62/82) to upgrade all the way through Lubbock, and adding direct connectors to the interchange with I-27 so that there is a complementary W-E freeway, be more of a buck bang than such an out-of-the-way beltway?

I believe the motivation for Loop 88 is moving US-84 traffic thru or around Lubbock more effectively. There is quite a lot of heavy truck traffic on US-84 from Lubbock down to Sweetwater and I-20. Some of the NW-bound traffic takes I-27 up to Amarillo and beyond, but there is other traffic taking US-84 farther NW to Clovis.

An expansion of US-62/82 thru central Lubbock (Marsha Sharp Freeway) would have no effect at all on US-84 traffic.

Aside from the US-84 corridor Loop 88 would do more to help efficiently move local traffic in the growing areas South and West outside of the 289 loop.

Not to mention all the distribution trucks from DFW (Target, Domino's, Little Caesars, Papa John's, McDonalds, Walgreens, CVS, AutoZone, Dollar General, Tyson Foods too I assume, and soon in the future Chick-fil-A) even if they're just a quarter or less of the traffic coming from DFW.
EDIT: Walmart, O'Reilly Auto Parts, Family Dollar, Sysco, McLane, US Foods, and Ben E. Keith are West Texas' only native distribution trucks.

[TheBox]

Some road closures south of the Loop 88 construction site
https://www.everythinglubbock.com/news/local-news/road-closures-south-of-loop-88-starting-next-week-txdot-said/

[Stephane Dumas]

I think it might be worth to post (or repost if it was already mentioned elsewhere in the forum), Loop-88 schematics.
https://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/lubbock/lubbock-loop-88/phase-three.html
One interesting schematic is a "volleyball roundabout" interchange where Loop-88 meet US-62/82.
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/lbb/sl88/060920-segment_2-schematic_6.pdf

[CoreySamson]

One interesting schematic is a "volleyball roundabout" interchange where Loop-88 meet US-62/82.
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/lbb/sl88/060920-segment_2-schematic_6.pdf

That looks very European. I would like to see Texas retrofit their volleyballs with roundabouts like that. Hopefully this becomes a trend in TxDOT design.

[The Ghostbuster]

I guess stack or any other kind of system interchange would likely take up too much space, so they probably went with the volleyball roundabout to save on right-of-way acquisitions.

[Bobby5280]

That volleyball roundabout could be a lower cost interim solution. The roundabout does carve out some extra ROW to keep developers off of the interchange corners. Direct-connect flyover ramps can be added one or more at a time at later dates.

[Stephane Dumas]

That volleyball roundabout could be a lower cost interim solution. The roundabout does carve out some extra ROW to keep developers off of the interchange corners. Direct-connect flyover ramps can be added one or more at a time at later dates.

Speaking of flyovers, the interchange with US-87(future I-27 extension?) will have a ROW for a stack. Doubful they'll built it now or going by various phases when traffic levels warrant it. The eastern terminus at US-84 will be a Y-interchange with planned row who'll allow a possible extension northeast of US-84.
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/lbb/sl88/060920-segment_4-schematic_0.pdf
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/lbb/sl88/060920-segment_4-schematic_7.pdf

[armadillo speedbump]

I believe the motivation for Loop 88 is moving US-84 traffic thru or around Lubbock more effectively. There is quite a lot of heavy truck traffic on US-84 from Lubbock down to Sweetwater and I-20. Some of the NW-bound traffic takes I-27 up to Amarillo and beyond, but there is other traffic taking US-84 farther NW to Clovis.

Doubtful, given how many extra miles and roundabout they made it for 84 through traffic.  Bending the north end eastward for 4.5 miles instead of continuing north adds almost 7 extra miles by itself.

The best path for through 84 traffic is already looping around the north end on 289 and 331, the low demand side of the metro.  2 sets of direct connectors would be a much cheaper solution for through traffic.