
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
$100M Rail Terminal in Montgomery; less CMV on the Interstate?
Posted on 9/22/26 at 3:25 pm
Posted on 9/22/26 at 3:25 pm
Will the $100M rail terminal in Montgomery help reduce CMV traffic on the interstate? I’m hopeful that it does. Anything to remove 80,000 lbs CMVs driven by illegal immigrants out of the left lane is a win. But seriously, this seems like a great to reduce truck traffic.
LINK
LINK
Posted on 9/22/26 at 3:29 pm to Gimme back that fish
I used to take the light rail from the burbs to downtown for work and back every day. It was pretty nice.
The crowd on the train during rush hour times was mostly professionals but throughout the day and at night time there were a lot of vagrants and suspicious characters as well.
The crowd on the train during rush hour times was mostly professionals but throughout the day and at night time there were a lot of vagrants and suspicious characters as well.
This post was edited on 9/22/26 at 6:14 pm
Posted on 9/22/26 at 3:37 pm to Gimme back that fish
An easier and cheaper alternative is to have dedicated truck lanes, separated by medians.
This post was edited on 9/22/26 at 3:59 pm
Posted on 9/22/26 at 4:05 pm to Gimme back that fish
Depends on what we are comparing it to. The OP listed $100 million just for a terminal.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 4:08 pm to Gimme back that fish
quote:
this seems like a great to reduce truck traffic
Sounds great, doesnt work. "The last mile" is extremely difficult and expensive to double handle. Every time we try to change logistics on a project, rail is the most expensive. We dont see cost savings using rail so we dont use it. OTR wins everytime.
Thats where drones for the last mile is interesting but we are quickly headed towards crowded dangerous airspace due to UAV and crowded roads with autonomous road vehicles.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 4:10 pm to Gimme back that fish
This will increase truck traffic around Montgomery. By A lot.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 4:39 pm to AutoYes_Clown
“The last mile” challenge really needs to be figured out. A unit train of 100+ shipping containers from point A to B is 100 less CMVs on the interstate, until the “last mile.”
The trucking industry is getting exposed right now and it’s a result of today’s society expecting items delivered the next day. That’s another topic though.
The trucking industry is getting exposed right now and it’s a result of today’s society expecting items delivered the next day. That’s another topic though.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 6:15 pm to Gimme back that fish
quote:
“The last mile” challenge really needs to be figured out. A unit train of 100+ shipping containers from point A to B is 100 less CMVs on the interstate, until the “last mile.”
I wish Houma wouldn't have abandoned its rail line from Schriever to East Houma back in the 1990's. They physically removed the rail line and eventually took down the rail bridge that crossed the Intracoastal and moved it to Texas I believe.
There is even a rail spur in Lafourche Parish that goes from Raceland to Valentine, but it is some what abandoned. The track is still there but no one uses it as Valentine Paper mill is no more, and it is just the chemical plant that would still have any use for it. I find it funny Bollinger doesn't use the rail line for shipments at the Lockport yard since the yard goes almost to the tracks.
A rail line would really need to be built to access Port Fourchon, but the number of water crossing bridges needed for construction would make the project unaffordable.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 7:00 pm to Gimme back that fish
Probably a good thing.


Posted on 9/22/26 at 7:21 pm to Gimme back that fish
It will help with traffic on 65 between Mobile and Montgomery, but that's about it. Eventually 85 is going to have to be widened to 3 lanes each way between Mobile and the AL/GA line or, ideally, the Kia plant. Until then trucks servicing Kia are going to keep 85 super busy.
Georgia just built a new intermodal yard in Hall County Northeast of Atlanta that connects to Savannah (and maybe Brunswick) so the ports can ship containers there without having to truck through Atlanta. State DOT is also building truck only lanes on 75 between Atlanta and Macon. I think the state has finally realized that they have to shift commercial traffic out of Atlanta when possible.
Georgia just built a new intermodal yard in Hall County Northeast of Atlanta that connects to Savannah (and maybe Brunswick) so the ports can ship containers there without having to truck through Atlanta. State DOT is also building truck only lanes on 75 between Atlanta and Macon. I think the state has finally realized that they have to shift commercial traffic out of Atlanta when possible.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 7:40 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Depends on what we are comparing it to. The OP listed $100 million just for a terminal.
No way you’re building 170 miles of truckway for $100 million
Posted on 9/22/26 at 9:59 pm to PJinAtl
quote:real genius idea to have three major interstates meet in one spot in the middle of a major city. Excellent foresight.
I think the state has finally realized that they have to shift commercial traffic out of Atlanta when possible.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 10:06 pm to Horsemeat
quote:
real genius idea to have three major interstates meet in one spot in the middle of a major city. Excellent foresight
When the Interstates were built in the 50s/60s the thought that freight would be hauled through the city as much, if not more, via truck than train was unthinkable.
Also, I don't think the highway planners foresaw the rise of the suburb to suburb commute. If people weren't using 285 to go from Gwinnett County to Sandy Springs or from Marietta to the airport and back and allowed it to be the bypass that it was planned to be the truck traffic might be bearable.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 4:48 pm to PJinAtl
If they were to build a U-shaped bypass from 75 between Chattanooga and Atlanta, have it go south to 20 but west of the loop, down to 85, then cut back across to 75, you'd solve a solid chunk of the truck traffic in that city. Have it cut back up to 20 then 85 to the east of town and 99% of truckers would take that bypass instead of the loop.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 4:57 pm to Tarps99
quote:
A rail line would really need to be built to access Port Fourchon,
Why would rail need to access Port Fourchon? It's too shallow of a draft for any container ship, which is why the LOOP is located 16 miles offshore.
Posted on 9/23/26 at 5:09 pm to Horsemeat
quote:
If they were to build a U-shaped bypass from 75 between Chattanooga and Atlanta, have it go south to 20 but west of the loop, down to 85, then cut back across to 75, you'd solve a solid chunk of the truck traffic in that city. Have it cut back up to 20 then 85 to the east of town and 99% of truckers would take that bypass instead of the loop.
What you are describing is what was called the "outer loop" or "outer perimeter" in the 90s/early 2000s.
A bunch of NIMBYs who lived out in the country pitched a fit because they didn't want an interstate level highway in their area and it never got off the ground. By now the land would be way too expensive to buy up to build it.

Popular
Back to top
6











