IBX March 2025 Town Hall Report
By John Pegram[1]
The meeting room at the Ridgewood branch of Queens Public Library was filled on Thursday, March 27th for the IBX Town Hall. There was no general Q & A period after the MTA’s presentation. Instead, members of the IBX Project Team had informal discussions with small groups of attendees, standing among the IBX posters, which were scattered about the main library reading room.
The Town Hall appeared to fulfill the MTA’s objectives of engaging with local transit users and learning how the IBX line might be helpful to them. However, the presentation and posters did not reveal much new information. (Many posters appeared to be the same as at town halls last year). For already informed persons, this town hall was mostly a chance to meet with the IBX Project Team and other interested persons, and to learn more about attendees’ complex routes using existing transit lines in Queens. Interestingly, I did not encounter anyone opposed to the IBX project.
The IBX Project Team members answered most of my questions about detailed plans by saying that the subject would be decided in the next stage.
Status
Currently the project is wrapping up the scoping stage, during which the consulting firm WSP has played a major role. I learned that WPS was not permitted to bid for work as the general engineering firm for the next, general engineering stage, which is expected to perform about 30% of the engineering design work for the project during a period of approximately two years. That work will include preparation of the draft and final Environmental Impact Statements, which are required when seeking federal funding.
IBX Finances
There was considerable interest in whether the IBX Project would be adequately financed. The answer appears to be, OK for now, with fingers crossed for the future. In addition to the $52 million from the NY State budget, the project has received a $15 million grant from the US Department of Transportation. I estimate that should carry the project through the next two years. Major funding (I believe for 40-50% of the projected IBX line cost) is included in the MTA’s 2025-2029 Capital Plan, which is now awaiting NY state approval.
IBX Plans
The Team rightly bragged a bit on a poster about the proposed tunnel under All Faiths Cemetery at Metropolitan Avenue (eliminating the need for trains running in the streets of nearby Middle Village) and about moving the Atlantic Avenue IBX station two blocks closer to the Broadway Junction station.
The relative locations of freight and IBX tunnels under the All Faiths Cemetery has not yet been decided. Apparently, the side of the right-of-way to be used for freight approaching the tunnels is being reconsidered, because of freight customer locations along part of the line. I was told that—if the main line of freight tracks must cross IBX tracks, a flyover would be used, not a level crossing. (Perhaps it might be less expensive for the MTA to help freight customers on the “wrong side” move to another location along the line).
The interesting new piece of information I learned about the Atlantic Avenue station is that it might be in an open cut, eliminating the limitations there of the existing tunnel tubes and their thick walls. Apparently, it is not yet clear whether an underground pedestrian passage to the Broadway Junction station will be provided.
Light Rail is still emphasized; however, that term appears to be given a broad interpretation. A IBX Project Team member told me a reason for using light rail was the possibility of buying light railcars “off-the-shelf,” an argument that appeared in earlier IBX reports. On the other hand, he said that the track designs will made to permit use of a wide variety of railcars. Some attendees told me that they believe the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) wants the IBX to be light rail. (The cynic in me asks, is the reason why the MTA’s ridership projections are low—as compared with those of others—is to try to keep that amount at a level suitable for light rail? I hope that use of light rail does not limit capacity.)
No decision has been made on whether to use high-floor or low-floor railcars. (I urge high floor cars for reasons stated in earlier articles[2]).
Cross Harbor Freight Tunnel
My one disappointment at the town hall was the poster about the Port Authority’s Cross Harbor Freight Program (CHFP). When I described it as the Cross Harbor tunnel poster to an IBX Project Team member, he said, “It doesn’t say tunnel, does it?” Well, yes, it does. The word “tunnel” is on the map, as indicated by my red arrow on the poster excerpt below. (As readers of BQ Rail articles know, I declared that Cross Harbor Freight Tunnel proposal dead last year, because no one would give me any evidence that it is alive.[3] I am still encountering obstacles to obtaining any information about the Cross Harbor program activity, if any.)
The poster also was misleading by showing stacked containers on well-type intermodal railcars (below). The Port Authority admitted a few years ago that stacked containers could not be used on the LIRR, because of inadequate bridge and tunnel clearances. Well-type cars also cannot be used where the LIRR has a third rail.
Finally, that poster refers readers to a Port Authority website for further information.[4] As I write this article, that website has not been updated for over seven years.
This article expresses the personal views of the author and does not express the views of his employer, or any client or organization. The author has degrees in law and physics, and has taken several engineering courses. After five years of work as an engineer, he has practiced law primarily in the field of patents for over 50 years, dealing with a wide variety of technologies. He is a life-long railfan and user of public transportation in the United States, Europe and Japan.
As usual a PDF copy of this article is attached.
[1] © John Pegram, 2025.
[2] See, e.g., No Low-Floor Railcars for the Interborough Express.
[3] See No Activity on the Cross Harbor Rail Freight Tunnel
Project and Summer 2024 IBX Update.
[4] https://www.panynj.gov/port/en/our-port/port-development/cross-harbor-freight-program.html
I plan to be at the next town hall and pushing for high-floor IRT-sized ‘light rail’ trains and a seamless transfer to the Jackson Heights station.