Further QueensLink Facts & Figures

Note on sourcing: All figures on this page are QueensLink's own projections from thequeenslink.org and thequeenslink.org/the-plan/. The MTA's 2018 sketch assessment did not conduct environmental, economic, or benefit-cost analysis, these metrics have no MTA equivalent to compare against. For the side-by-side cost and ridership comparison, see the Comparison Table.

↓ Download CSV (members)

QueensLink projects $2.20 back for every dollar invested and 8 to 10 years from study to opening day

Environmental, economic, and timeline projections for the Rockaway Beach Branch M-train extension, all of them QueensLink's own. The MTA's 2018 sketch assessment evaluated none of these metrics, because its scope stopped at engineering and operational feasibility.

Metric	QueensLink Projection	Notes
Environmental & Safety
Annual car trips removed	4.7 millionCars off roads per year	Based on projected mode shift from car to rail. MTA 2018 study did not include a vehicle reduction or emissions analysis.
Annual CO₂ reduction	7,200 tons/yr	QueensLink estimate derived from the 4.7M car trips removed annually.
Crash-related injuries prevented/yr	Up to 74	Based on reduced vehicle traffic in the corridor and Vision Zero injury rates for the affected road network.
Travel time savings	Up to 60% across QueensUp to 40 min/day for affected riders	Borough-wide figure. The MTA study provides run times for specific origin-destination pairs (e.g., 45 min from 34th St to Howard Beach via NYCT) but no aggregate savings estimate.
Queens Blvd service increase	+50%More frequent service along Queens Blvd corridor	QueensLink argues diverting M trains through the RBB unlocks capacity on Queens Blvd. The MTA study found the opposite effect, existing lines would need reduced service to create RBB capacity.
Rockaway Line service increase	Up to +165%	Projected increase in service frequency on the Rockaway peninsula segment of the existing A-train service.
Economic Impact
Return per $1 invested	$2.20	$9B total economic output on a ~$4.1B mid-range capital investment. The MTA study noted qualitative economic benefits, property value increases, quality of life improvements, but conducted no benefit-cost analysis.
Total economic output	$9 billion	QueensLink estimate. Includes construction-period activity and long-run induced economic growth from improved transit access.
Job-years supported	37,000	QueensLink estimate for direct construction employment plus induced job creation.
Rockaway ferry demand (proxy)	167,000+Summer 2024 riders, Rockaway Route	Cited as evidence of strong latent demand for transit to the Rockaways that rail could capture year-round, not a direct economic figure, but used to support the ridership and revenue case.
Timeline & Process
EIS (Environmental Impact Statement)	~2 yearsRequired before any capital plan inclusion	A $500K US DOT Reconnecting Communities grant (2025) funds the planning phase that precedes a full EIS. No EIS has been initiated as of April 2026.
Construction duration	6–8 years	QueensLink estimate, consistent with comparable NYC subway capital projects.
Total delivery timeline	8–10 years totalPotential completion ~2034–2036	Assumes EIS begins promptly and the project is included in a future MTA capital plan. The MTA 2018 study did not specify a construction timeline.
Federal planning grant secured	$500,000US DOT Reconnecting Communities Initiative, 2025	Required precursor to MTA capital plan inclusion and a full EIS. This grant postdates the 2018 MTA study by seven years.

Source: thequeenslink.org (QueensLink, 2021 analysis with 2025 updates) Note: QueensLink is an advocacy organization. None of these projections have been validated through an EIS or an alternatives analysis.

Methodology Notes

Source: All figures on this page come from QueensLink's public materials at thequeenslink.org/faq/ and thequeenslink.org/the-plan/. QueensLink is an advocacy organization; its projections have not been independently validated through an EIS or alternatives analysis.
MTA 2018 study scope: The Phase 1 Sketch Assessment (SYSTRA, September 2018) was scoped as an engineering and operational feasibility study. It explicitly did not conduct environmental impact modeling, benefit-cost analysis, or construction timeline estimation. The absence of MTA figures for these metrics is a reflection of study scope, not an oversight.
Travel time savings: The 60% / 40-min figures are borough-wide aggregates. The MTA study's comparable data point, 45 minutes from 34th St to Howard Beach under the NYCT option, is a specific origin-destination pair, not a system-wide average.
Service increase figures: The +50% Queens Blvd and +165% Rockaway Line claims are QueensLink's projections. The MTA study found that creating RBB capacity would require reducing frequency on the R and M trains, a tradeoff QueensLink does not address in its public materials.