This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve
New Jersey–related articles to
Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the
discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion. See also:
WikiProject Trains to do list and the
Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S.
historic sites listed on the
National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
The idea for that category is to include all the commuter terminals that serve people commuting to NYC. In this case, until the
Kearny Connection was built, this was the only terminal for the ex-
Erie-Lackawanna lines (and still is for some). Other railroads had other terminals; there were at least six in Hudson County at one time. These are no less NYC commuter rail terminals than Flatbush, Jamaica and Long Island City. --
SPUI (
talk) 03:24, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hudson-Bergen Light Rail inside?
The article says that the HBLR lines "operate from the south end of the terminal concourse." Do they actually enter the building or do passengers have to go outside to board light rail trains? --
Jfruh18:24, 27 February 2006 (UTC)reply
None of the lines, not even the
New Jersey Transit trains operate within the terminal building. All of the platforms are located outside for all train service, with the PATH train station accessible underground. The description that the HBLR trains "operate from the south end of the terminal concourse" could be reworded, but is fundamentally accurate, as the concourse is a covered area outside of the terminal building.
Alansohn18:43, 27 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the info ... I guess I was mainly wondering whether there was platform to platform transfer abilities ... a lot of mainline-to-light rail transfers really involve leaving one station and crossing a street or something to enter another (as at 30th St. in Philly). --
Jfruh19:04, 27 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Something probably should be written up about the renovations. I'll try to take a picture of the planned reproduction of the clock tower (on some post on Henderson St.)
AND the actual terminal building still includes an unfinished HALL so including info
on how that will be renovated would be useful.
Merge proposal:Hoboken (PATH station) to Hoboken Terminal
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
I support the proposal. The article about the station should discuss all the services that operate there, and PATH is simply one of those services.
Marc Shepherd (
talk)
13:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)reply
A more precisely relevant example would be the 6th Avenue stations of PATH, each of which is part of the general complex of an IND station and thus as deserving of merger as Hoboken. I OPPOSE all such megers, but am open to suggestions as to why all should be merged, or why some should and some shouldn't, neither of which I have seen thus far.
Jim.henderson (
talk)
15:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support for two reasons. firstly, because the same argument could be made regarding the HBLR portion of the terminal, which would be even sillier than this.
The second is because such a merger has been done before, over at the Newark Penn Station article. While the PATH tracks at Newark are more integral to the overall station than they are in Hoboken, the situation is mostly similar.
oknazevad (
talk)
13:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hudson Place
Hudson Place is an integral part of the terminal. It is here that the bus terminal, taxi stands, and only vehicular drop-off/pickup point for the enitre complex are located, above the PATH station, which like the bus station and ferry slips are not actually part of the station building or train sheds. Inclusion of this street, which acts as its entrance plaza merits inclusion in the article. Thoughts? And a question: what is the actual name of the building? Was it indeed officially re-named when NJT took over operations?
Djflem (
talk)
17:39, 26 September 2009 (UTC)reply
I disagree that it's an integral part of the station complex. It's just the road the station sits next to. While surely the fact that the road is adjacent to the station means it matters to people trying to get there, that aspect is covered by the terminal's address being displayed in the station info box.
I also disagree with the characterization of the ferry slips as not actually part of the station building. The historic ferry slips, which are currently undergoing rehabilitation for reactivation are fully part of the terminal, and have been since it opened in 1907. The current, temporary ones are attatched to a building that was also built as part of the original terminal, originally used as an immigration and customs house. Both are fully part of the terminal, and have been since it opened.
The only parts that are not original are the bus terminal, which replaced the original trolley terminal that dates to the opening, and the HBLR portion, which was built on former freight docks. They were built on existing terminal property.
And that pretty much sums up my reasoning. The property line is the fence that separates the road from the bus terminal area. Hudson place is outside and off Hoboken Terminal property, therefore it's legally not part of the terminal, and doesn't belong on this page. (P.S., The PATH station is below the bus terminal, not Hudson Place. One makes a right off of the stairs when coming from the Hudson Place entrances.)
To answer your other question, Hoboken Terminal is certainly the official name of the place. I think it dates to the Erie-Lackawanna merger, but it certainly has been in use since at least the Conrail days.
oknazevad (
talk)
01:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)reply
Could someone in the area PLEASE add some good interior and exterior photos? The platform covers were novel when built. The clock tower - once present, then gone for decades, now rebuilt - adds an iconic landmark to the NJ side of the river. A night photo of the illuminated LACKAWANNA would be nice... — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
74.104.102.32 (
talk)
02:43, 29 September 2011 (UTC)reply
DL&W from Hoboken to Chicago?
I feel like should know this already, but one line has me stumped;
Long distance trains to
Chicago and
Buffalo were permanently discontinued on January 5, 1970.
Until the Erie Lack consolidation, when the combined service went to Dearborn Street Station, which the Erie already used (the combined service used the Erie through Ohio and Indiana).
oknazevad (
talk)
22:52, 17 March 2012 (UTC)reply
File:Hoboken Ferry Terminal 2011.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
If the image is
non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no
fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
Somewhat true. NJT owns the line all the way to the yard in Spring Valley, but the three Rockland County stations it stops at are under Metro-North control and the MTA does help fund it (particularly the expresses that go straight from Secaucus to Pearl River). But I don't know if it needs to be listed twice in the infobox, and if I were to choose only one place, it'd be under NJT as the vast majority of stations are in New Jersey, and counterbalancing the NY expresses some trains short turn at New Bridge Landing, making them New Jersey only. Plus there is the track ownership issue. In contrast to the Port Jervis Line, which is fully leased to Metro-North between Suffern and Port Jervis, setting it off from the NJT-owned trackage it connects to and and giving rise to its separate name, the PVlL is wholly owned by NJT and operates under only one name. Anybody with a third opinion here?
User:DanTD,
User:Epicgenius, others?
oknazevad (
talk)
04:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)reply
My understanding has always been that the whole Pascack Valley Line is New Jersey Transit, and Metro-North just leases the stations in Rockland County, while the NJT Main Line and Bergen County Line end in Suffern, whereas the Port Jervis Line begins in Suffern, although they use a few NJT stations on the Main Line south of the border. Bottom line; The only Metro-North line at Hoboken is the Port Jervis Line. ---------
User:DanTD (
talk)
04:41, 21 February 2014 (UTC)reply
Are NJT platforms accessible?
I understand that the rest of Hoboken is wheelchair accessible, but aren't the NJT platforms low-level, making them incompatible? If that bit is inaccessible, then it should be noted.
Sportsguy17 (
T •
C)
18:11, 31 July 2015 (UTC)reply
They have portable lifts to allow wheelchair users to board the trains. It's operated by a station attendant upon request. It's not the fastest method, but it does work, and I believe fulfills the legal requirements for being considered accessible.
oknazevad (
talk)
20:18, 31 July 2015 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on
Hoboken Terminal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I have just modified one external link on
Hoboken Terminal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
@
Jibreel23: There are several self-published sources here that would need to be replaced, including
this and
this. Also, the history section is lacking, with almost nothing on the 19th century. You have done good work on the article, but I don't think it is ready to be nominated to be a Good Article. cc:@
Epicgenius,
Mitchazenia, and
Pi.1415926535:Kew Gardens 613 (
talk)
16:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)reply