MTA Discloses Some Details of IBX Proposal

The MTA has quietly posted a link (https://new.mta.info/document/114891) on its Interborough Express website, including parts of Appendix Volume 1 for its January 2023 Interborough Express “Planning & Environmental Linkages Study report (PEL Report). The contents are indicated by the main Table of Contents, reproduced below:

The Appendices appear to be competent, technical studies, although incomplete. This article briefly summarizes points that seem most significant on first impression. Future articles will discuss several of these points in more detail.

Cost Estimates Are Omitted

The MTA has omitted the Capital Cost Estimates, and the Operations and Maintenance Costs Estimates from the posted appendices. This omission is disappointing because cost estimates are critical in evaluating the MTA’s proposals. I am continuing to press the MTA for their disclosure.

Ridership Projections

There is very little in the posted appendices about the MTA’s IBX ridership projections. In particular, there is no analysis or explanation of the approximately 30% increase from the MTA’s Interim Report’s projected weekday Light Rail ridership of 87,800 in 2040 to its PEL Report’s projected 115,000 ridership in 2045.

Analysis of one appendix table, in the discussion of platform staircase capacity, reveals that the projected morning peak ridership would require three Light Rail Vehicles (LRVs) of the type suggested in the report and appendices, rather than two, as was suggested by the reference in the main report to Light Rail “trains that can fit up to 360 people”

Railcars of the type suggested are each about 90 feet long, so a three-car train would be 270 feet long. That is also the proposed LRV station platform length. Therefore, under the present proposal, there would be no capacity expand ridership beyond that of three-car LRV trains, other than more frequent trains than the projected five minute headway in each direction. In contrast, the subway-like Conventional Rail alternative would have 540-foot long platforms, suitable for trains of up to ten cars.

Street-Running LRVs

In light of the fact the Light Rail mode was selected in the PEL Report, it is surprising that there is no analysis in the posted appendices of the feasibility and impact of running LRVs for 2/3 mile in the streets of Middle Village The PEL Report itself only says, “operation in the street may affect streetscape conditions, which will be studied in future project phases.” In contrast, the appendices contain nearly 500 pages of data and analysis that led to the decision to avoid 24 grade crossings and street-running at Roosevelt Avenue, which would have been required for the version of the Light Rail alternative considered in the January 2022 Interim Report and rejected in the January 2023 PEL Report.

The appendices reveal that LRVs will be more of an obstacle in the streets than previously indicated. As mentioned above, the required three-car Light Rail train would be 270 feet long. That is approximately the same length as five, 53-foot long tractor-trailer trucks, nose-to-tail.

Subway-type Railcars

The main PEL Report says little about railcars for the Conventional Rail alternative, other than to suggest that some sort of specialized railcar would be required. In appendices, however, we find the question and answer, “Would the alternative’s vehicle operate in the existing tunnels? … Yes – Would require a narrow vehicle no wider than 9.0 feet. Available in both FRA (PATH P5) and Non-FRA (NYCT Division A) vehicles.” In other words, the MTA’s consultants knew that no new, significantly modified or specialized Conventional Rail vehicle would be required.

All Faiths Cemetery Tunnel

As discussed in some of my earlier articles, one of the principal reasons given by the MTA for selection of the Light Rail mode for the IBX line was avoiding the need for a new, deep and long tunnel under All Faiths Cemetery at Metropolitan Avenue. The PEL Report said, “The tunnel must be designed and constructed to be deep enough to avoid any surface or subsurface disturbance to the cemetery and its structures.”

The PEL Report suggested that a new long tunnel would be necessary for subway-like Conventional Rail operations. The cost of the long tunnel appears from the main PEL Report to have been estimated at around 2.9 billion dollars, the difference between estimated capital costs for the Light Rail and Conventional Rail modes. That much higher cost of Conventional Rail was given as a reason for choosing the Light Raul mode.

The appendices posted in July 2023 reveal that the MTA’s consultants also considered a shorter tunnel under All Faiths Cemetery at Metropolitan Avenue in Middle Village, Queens, in similar detail to the much longer, deeper tunnel.  There is no analysis of “any surface or subsurface disturbance ” issues. Although no specific cost estimates were disclosed, it appears that the shorter tunnel would only cost around 5-10% of the cost of the longer tunnel, because it would be much shorter, less deep and built in a less expensive way.

I will discuss details of the shorter tunnel proposal in a future article.