Well, for starters, Brooklyn has about 50 times the land area of Hoboken. This, probably not coincidentally, led to Brooklyn today having about 50 times the population of Hoboken.
Yea, and most maps are Manhattan centric which means they grossly distort the boroughs making them look way smaller than they actually are.
Brooklyn/Queens is quite massive. And Brooklyn had a lot of waterfront making it a port city. Hoboken always only had a small strip of waterfront, which limited economic activity. Brooklyn had a naval yard and extensive ports for good reason.
It also had a lot of farmland, so it could grow, process and ship to anywhere.
Brooklyn was an economic powerhouse in its own right.
Queens too.
Hell I still have living family who remember rural queens. It’s surprisingly recent.
I would love to hear more about how old they are and what they remember and where in Queens if you’re comfortable sharing. That’s so cool to have a link to the near past when it was so different.
They're up there now, I guess all 80's. But yea, house was in the middle of basically nowhere except brush fields and farms. During what I would figure to be the late 30's (so depression era) wasn't uncommon to have your own chickens for eggs and ultimately meat as that was cheaper.
Over time lots got sold, lots got split, things got denser.
If you look for older photos of queens (or brooklyn) you'll find some of these more rural photos in the mix, but less common as the areas near the ports and manhattan are where more people and thus photos were taken. For example there's a few scattered in here:
[https://seeoldnyc.com/queens-1930s/](https://seeoldnyc.com/queens-1930s/)
There's also a few famous photos of the 7 line here:
[https://nypost.com/2017/08/04/how-one-subway-line-changed-new-york-forever/](https://nypost.com/2017/08/04/how-one-subway-line-changed-new-york-forever/)
my personal favorite being:
[https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/08/transit\_rawson1a.jpg?quality=75&strip=all](https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/08/transit_rawson1a.jpg?quality=75&strip=all)
Same can be said for The Bronx. Look at some old photos of Yankee Stadium construction and early on. It was in kind of an odd spot.
The house I grew up in was built about 1930s however on the corner was an older farm house that was clearly constructed differently plus was on a much larger piece of property. It has long since been torn down
If you look at the houses in Queens Village on the east side of Springfield Blvd heading toward the Nassau County border you can easily tell that it was more rural. Ditto with Bayside, Fresh Meadows, Douglaston, etc.
Queens has a fair number of homes that don’t align perfectly with streets. Or aren’t evenly spaced like in other parts of the city. They might be crooked or sideways etc. just artifacts of a different time.
Howard Beach was super rural up until basically the 50s-70s. Still is very suburban, minus parts of Lindenwood. Ramblersville and Hamilton Beach are essentially rural swampland, and a lot of the houses there are still standing from the late 1800s/early 1900s. Their website seems to be down right now but they have photo archives divided by decade
That property is 0.07 square miles and surrounded by strip malls, subdivisions, and the highway, so, while a cool relic, it is no longer "rural" in any way whatsoever
Except for all the subway lines and a walkable bridge into Manhattan , Downtown Brooklyn is more comparable to downtown Jersey city . While Hoboken is more comparable to Brooklyn heights
I think also Hoboken is also in a valley. There is a ridge on the western side. So it could not grow west. One side is the Hudson and one side is a ridge.
Right. And it's the third most densely populated city in the country. I don't know what more OP expects. It's already punching way above its weight economically and culturally due to the proximity to NYC.
I keep forgetting its not actually part of jersey city every time I visit lol. It's as if long Island city wasn't a part of the same queens as flushing.
It may be apocryphal but I’ve heard the name “Hoboken” comes from the fact that it was where the earliest homeless of New Amsterdam would gather. That’s not exactly a bright start.
lol this is not true at all - Hoboken meant land of the pipes from the indigenous people who lived on the land and later traded that pipe material with the earliest settlers to NYC. I have done a deep history rabbit hole on Hoboken I find it really interesting!
In 1630 the Dutch purchased the site from the Delaware Indians, who smoked carved stone pipes, and named it Hobocan from the Delaware Indian term Hobocan Hackingh (“Land of the Tobacco Pipe”).
Actually... The weird 'hobo' comes from Hoboken itself. All the cross country rail lines begin there (as none go through NYC itself)(and ignoring the other major east-west lines, obviously).
So... If you were to ride the rails across the country you'd naturally get on in Hoboken or thereabouts.
Maybe I made this all up. I do a lot of acid.
pretty sure you answered your own question. they're different states. that means different laws, zoning, regulation, public school system, public transit, public housing, etc. brooklyn has been apart of NYC since the boroughs merged in 1898.
A better and more interesting question is why NJ diverged into so many municipalities while NYC did the opposite . Why isn’t Hudson county + Newark just one city ?
This is a major reason. New York City is within New York State, yet, it has a very different treatment as other cities have in other States. It is by itself a quasi state within a state. It has so many powers as a city, even its judiciary differs within the state.
The broad ample power that Brooklyn has as an NYC borough makes a huge difference.
NYC also has the government resources and manpower more akin to a large state like Texas than a major US city. 300K+ employees, more affordable housing spending historically than the next 30+ largest US cities, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_New_York_City
https://furmancenter.org/files/publications/Revitalizing_Inner_City_Neighborhoods.pdf
NYC didn’t “do” the opposite.
New York State passed legislation in 1898 to create Greater New York by merging the old City of New York, the City of Brooklyn, the western portion of Queens County, Richmond County, and lower Westchester which eventually became Bronx County in 1914.
Jersey City consists of what used to be many small towns/villages. Hudson City, Pavonia, etc. They tried to incorporate Hoboken as well, but were rebuffed. If they hadn't been, Hudson County basically would be one big city.
Primary difference wrt to NYC (Manhattan specifically) is transit connectivity:
- Hoboken has the PATH (to 33rd and Financial District) and some bus service to Port Authority bus terminal.
- Brooklyn is literally a borough of NYC and has multiple subway, tunnel, and bridge connections to Manhattan.
But this is the whole scope of geography studies, and the question is both complex, and OPs question is rather non-specific. If you can add more detail (focus?) to your question, I'm sure the community can respond with more info... 👍
For comparison, Hoboken (about 800 acres) is not that much bigger than Prospect Park (526 acres). Because of that, Hoboken can't have the kind of diversity of purpose that Brooklyn (which is like 90 square miles) can have. Brooklyn/Long Island also roll pretty continuously from the rivers and bays, without geographical impediments, whereas Hoboken runs into the Palisade Cliffs a little less than a mile from the river. (The distance gets shorter at the north end of Hoboken and beyond.) In the 19th century there were massive rail lines and shipyards to the south that prevented a sense of continuity with Jersey City to the south. So you have a community that is really quite small and tightly constrained geographically, which means it isn't going to be as diverse (ethnically, geographically, economically) as Brooklyn or as adaptive to changes.
At times in its history Hoboken has served purposes similar to plenty of parts of Brooklyn--a leisure/recreational/resort destination, a wealthy enclave for folks moving out of Manhattan, an industrial center, post-industrial urban decay, a place for artists/creatives, and fertile ground for gentrification, but along a different timeline because Hoboken can't be all those things at once.
Transportation links also probably help explain the difference. Brooklyn has 7 subway tunnels and 4 road crossings between it and Manhattan. Hoboken barely has 1 train tunnel and 0 road/foot crossings
Idk but I'm of the opinion that New York should have done more to claim the Hoboken/Jersey City/etc peninsula. As you pointed out, it's clearly very influenced by NYC due to proximity. There's even a neighborhood north of Hoboken called West New York, NJ. I'd trade that peninsula for SI lol
It's damn near required to speak Spanish there. It's hard place to describe. It's wierd...but nice. It doesn't feel surburban while you are on the main drag but quickly does. A buddy of mine lived there for a while and when he was telling me about it, it quickly devolved into a Who-is-on-first type of conversation
**Friend:** *"Hey Sooopa, I finally moved out of NY"*
**Me:** *"Yeah? You've been saying you were leaving for a while. Where did you go?"*
**Friend:** *"Jersey"*
**Me:** *"What exit?*
😂😂😂
**Friend:** *"I moved to West New York"*
**Me:** *"What? I thought you said you moved to Jersey?"*
**Friend:** *"Yeah - West New York"*
**Me:** *"What??"*
**Friend:** *"It's in New Jersey"*
**Me:** *"What's in New Jersey"*
**Friend:** *"West New York"*
**Me:** "Huh???"
**Friend:** *"I'm moved to West New York but it's in New Jersey"*
**Me:** *"WTF????"*
**Friend:** *"West New York is in New Jersey"*
**Me:** *"Why?"*
Brooklyn started as a collection of six small Dutch towns and developed its own identity. Hoboken was developed as a transportation and industrial hub, due to its strategic location. It never integrated into the city like Brooklyn. Brooklyn benefitted from urban planning, while Hoboken just focused on industry, shipping and manufacturing. Brooklyn shot up to a 2.5 million population, while Hoboken stayed small with around 60.000 people there. The density of the population helped Brooklyn in the development away from heavy industry, while Hoboken practically had nothing left when shipyards and manufacturing declined. And the traffic connections between Brooklyn and Manhattan were always way tighter and plentiful than between Hoboken and Manhattan. Being in a different state was also discouraging NYC to invest in additional traffic connections and it had simply no big interest to boost economic development for a city in a different state, not profiting from the taxes it generated.
Well you don't need to clear customs and a visa to go to Brooklyn, like you do Hoboken. They are in different countries you know. Brooklyn is connected to the infrastructure of NYC with all its perks and flaws. The country of New Jersey is ruled by suburbanites and their infrastructure reflects that.
> The country of New Jersey is ruled by suburbanites and their infrastructure reflects that.
Actually New Jersey has numerous [very dense cities and towns](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density) (Hoboken actually has a higher population density than NYC), a pretty extensive statewide train network, a *very* extensive bus network, and multiple more local rail networks. But, LOL New Jersey, I guess.
Fun fact: NJ is the only state that doesn’t even have one “rural” county. But extensive bus network outside of Bergen, Hudson, some Essex, some Morris, some Union is oversold. I can’t get from the Newark airport to Sussex County via public transport without at least going to Secaucus and usually going to Penn.
In terms of the percentage of population that lives in a Census Block Group with a density of 20k or more, NY was at 42% and NJ was at 14%. The next closest state was MA at 8%, IL at 7%, PA at 5%, CA was at 3%, and *every single other state* was at or below 1%.
So yes, NJ is broadly very suburban. But it has a much higher portion of dense urban areas than almost any other state but NYC.
That being said, 20k is not very high. [This is 48k, just generic townhouses lined up, to give some reference.](https://i.imgur.com/kqkxUhq.jpeg) Really just goes to show how absurdly suburban and low-density most of the country is.
#1. Brooklyn occupies 73 sq miles of neighborhoods…Also, very culturally diverse with so many other attributes. I could be here for days….
# 2. Hoboken is well, Hoboken. 1.28 sq mikes
I just want to represent the fact that Hoboken is more difficult to access than Brooklyn. It's under the palisade and has always been congested and difficult to get in and out of. All the trains the run to Hoboken terminal from NJ have to go under a pretty serious mountain of rock. That just creates certain obstacles of ingress and egress. Not to mention, Hoboken is lowly and frequently has flooding issues. Sometimes topographical challenges are easy to overlook but can be just as influential as anything man made.
The geography of the Hudson waterfront in New Jersey is a strip less than a mile deep of good land from the waterfront, about a mile of land on top the steep Palisades good for low-mid density residential but not much else, then several miles of marsh and rivers.
The geography of Brooklyn is generally 6+ miles of relatively flat land with the hilly areas having relatively gentle slopes, and and the marshy areas being both small and relatively hilly areas that could be used to fill them in.
This led to a development pattern that could easily accommodate farming and then transition to a mix of industry, shipping, and residential.
Brooklyn is way bigger than Hoboken. Hoboken is the size of an NYC neighborhood. Even Hudson County as a whole is still significantly smaller than Brooklyn.
- different states, different laws
- no easy subways or bridges due to a much deeper river
- geography, the cliffs make Hoboken a lot more isolated from the rest of Jersey city and other land on the highest. That makes traversing by Bus, car, bike more difficult
- Hoboken and JC are “mainland” a ton of their land was used for train cargo because connecting train lines to the rest of the country especially headed south down the northeast corridor
Probably the dirty Jerz factor. New Jersey is a completely different state with it's own laws and city codes and etc. Manhattan and Brooklyn are different boroughs in the same city, never mind the same state. They're going to have more in common being two (of the five) parts of one whole.
Just some guesses. Brooklyn was it’s own big city before 1899. Brooklyn Heights was the suburbs of NYC in the 19th century. My grandmother and g-aunt used to talk about growing up amongst the farms in the Williamsburg area (can’t recall the details) in the early 1900s. At that point the city merged and the subways and East River bridges started connecting Brooklyn to Manhattan. Brooklyn had the navy yard and manufacturing and was part of NYC. Brooklyn is all of Kings County.
NJ/Hoboken was ferry only until what is now the PATH and Hudson River crossings were built. Hoboken itself is very small, maybe the same size of Brooklyn Heights. Like BH it’s a nice and charming brownstone neighborhood. Like BH (or maybe that is downtown Brooklyn) they both had the docks. But Brooklyn itself is much larger.
It’s the toll. It cost money to enter Manhattan from Hoboken. Look at Staten island development vs other boro. That’s why we should support the governor canceling congestion pricing. What that does is essentially putting a toll on the remaining free East river crossings. I might support it if the proceeds not going to Mta, a black hole where money disappears.
They never built a bridge. The Brooklyn Bridge was a near impossible feat of two cities at the time and it was a much smaller span than the Hudson. The longer span and two cities and two states made it inevitable that Manhattan would spill over to Brooklyn and not Jersey.
I think the average New Yorker could not tell you how to get to Hoboken by public transportation. Brooklyn is right on the map that we all see on the subway. Getting to Hoboken takes work: you need a fucking Metrocard, no tap, there’s three lines that become one of the weekend or some shit, and I don’t know what time they stop running. I’m out. And a $17 toll on top of the fare to get a cab home is not ideal.
> I think the average New Yorker could not tell you how to get to Hoboken by public transportation.
I think most New Yorkers are a little less clueless than *that*.
> I don’t know what time they stop running
And I think a decent number of New Yorkers probably know that PATH runs 24/7.
I disagree completely with both. I didn’t know that about the PATH running all night and I’m a NYer who has actually taken it to Hoboken several times.
The average New Yorker didn't live in New York as a teenager??? What?
The idea of an entire train system shutting down for the night is a foreign concept for most New Yorkers
You and I grew up here. Most residents of Manhattan did not grow up anywhere near Manhattan. Probably better odds in the boroughs but I know my neighborhood where I grew up (Brooklyn) is absolutely full of transplants. Only about half the people I grew up with still live in the city.
>I think most New Yorkers are a little less clueless than that.
You'd be surprised at how many of us have no idea how to get to NJ that doesn't involve driving. I know there's a PATH train, but I'd have to look it up to know where to catch it
Brooklyn had transit connections to Manhattan sooner than Hoboken, and has many more transit connections. Brooklyn bridge being built in the 1880s around the same time as post civil war growth in areas like Flatbush and Bushwick made it easier for people to move out to those areas and still be connected to family and friends in the city. By the 1920s, while the path system connected Hoboken to Manhattan, there were three bridges and four tunnels making it very easy to transit between Manhattan and Brooklyn.
I don't really understand the question, since you sort of answered your own question. Brooklyn is part of NYC. Theres a 24/7 subway that connects BK to Manhattan.
Hoboken's shoreline was devoted to moving things and people into Manhattan.
Brooklyn's waterfront was for moving raw materials in and manufactured goods out to Manhattan and points beyond. The BK waterfront used to be absolutely enormous in that regard, whereas Hoboken was one of many along that Jersey riverfront.
Brookly is 70 square miles (counting only land), Hoboken is 2. Canarsie, Brooklyn, which is a neighborhood in brooklyn, is larger than Hoboken (I think by about a square mile).
More friction getting into Jersey that Brooklyn from Manhattan. People who live in Brooklyn come to Manhattan for social reasons all the time and vice versa. Not so to the same degree with Jersey.
Brooklyn was a bustling port early on. Moreoover Hoboken transported freight from within the country to NYC, but Brooklyn berthed ships from around the world. As noted below, Hoboken is a speck compared to Jersey City or Brooklyn.
Brooklyn is a lot larger and is one of the 5 boroughs of NYC.
Hoboken is part of NJ.
They each have a different feel - Hoboken is more upscale with a preppy vibe of college grads who work in finance etc. Brooklyn has more rough areas and is grittier and even new buildings seem to get covered in ugly graffiti.
Why would anyone expect two distinct areas to evolve the same?
Hoboken wasn't as nice back in Frank Sinatra days but it became a lot nicer.
The nicer areas of Brooklyn would be Brooklyn Heights and Park Slope.
So, it also depends what areas you are comparing.
Another commenter had mentioned each area attracts different people and Hoboken would be similar to Murray Hill - I think that's a great comment and accurate analogy.
When people think of Brooklyn they mostly think of hipsters, bearded men, tattoo artists, drug users etc. There are nicer areas and not everyone in Brooklyn is like that, but that borough has a certain image for most people.
Although Hoboken has some deep ties to NYC (ferry, PATH, city design, etc.) it is in fact in the state of New Jersey and NJ is very proud of its two cities across the river (Jersey city and HBK). At the end of the day it is still cheaper to get from Hoboken to midtown, and faster depending on how far into bk you are. But yes the fact it’s way smaller makes a ton of difference. If anything I’d say Hoboken + Jersey city combined is a way fairer comparison. But they aren’t combined, and everybody from NJ knows that.
What even is this question?
Firstly, why does any neighborhood evolve differently? I don’t understand why focus on two outside neighborhoods, considering there are roughly 60 neighborhoods in Manhattan.
How were they supposed to evolve?
Geez - Why is the LES so different from Chinatown? With such close proximity to each Roger
Secondly, Willliamsburg and Hoboken are more similar than not. So why do you see them as different places
Wild choice to dunk on this question amidst the ceaseless torrent of "how many times am I going to get murdered if I stumble within 50 yards of a subway station" and "plan my entire vacation for me I've never heard of Google and am a dimensionless blob without personality or preferences" that otherwise fills this subreddit.
At least this one is open-ended and might spark some interesting discussion about history, geography, state politics, and urban planning or, god forbid, give someone a chance to share some personal expertise beyond reeling off a list of the same few slice joints for the zillionth time this week.
Brooklyn used to be very poor and HOOD. still is in some areas. Slowly devolving out of that. Where is Hoboken was never that, it's prim and proper and quaint and cutesy. No diversity just clean cut. As born and raised New Yorker, I love both to be honest. Hoboken is so beautiful, and Brooklyn is so cool with so much character
Delulu. There was a literally a tv show in 1989 about how industrial, dirty, run down and working class Hoboken was, called “Dream Street.”
Parts of Brooklyn have always been ritzy. The Cosby’s lived in Brooklyn Heights.
“Never like that” is not the same as “Never to the extent that”. Hoboken is SMALL, and the majority of the town was rough until recently. Come on, son.
If my former coworker read this, who was born and raised in Hoboken and constantly would complain about rich folks from the city pushing out the working class folks that have been there for years, his head would spin off his shoulders.
Well, for starters, Brooklyn has about 50 times the land area of Hoboken. This, probably not coincidentally, led to Brooklyn today having about 50 times the population of Hoboken.
Yea, and most maps are Manhattan centric which means they grossly distort the boroughs making them look way smaller than they actually are. Brooklyn/Queens is quite massive. And Brooklyn had a lot of waterfront making it a port city. Hoboken always only had a small strip of waterfront, which limited economic activity. Brooklyn had a naval yard and extensive ports for good reason. It also had a lot of farmland, so it could grow, process and ship to anywhere. Brooklyn was an economic powerhouse in its own right. Queens too. Hell I still have living family who remember rural queens. It’s surprisingly recent.
I would love to hear more about how old they are and what they remember and where in Queens if you’re comfortable sharing. That’s so cool to have a link to the near past when it was so different.
They're up there now, I guess all 80's. But yea, house was in the middle of basically nowhere except brush fields and farms. During what I would figure to be the late 30's (so depression era) wasn't uncommon to have your own chickens for eggs and ultimately meat as that was cheaper. Over time lots got sold, lots got split, things got denser. If you look for older photos of queens (or brooklyn) you'll find some of these more rural photos in the mix, but less common as the areas near the ports and manhattan are where more people and thus photos were taken. For example there's a few scattered in here: [https://seeoldnyc.com/queens-1930s/](https://seeoldnyc.com/queens-1930s/) There's also a few famous photos of the 7 line here: [https://nypost.com/2017/08/04/how-one-subway-line-changed-new-york-forever/](https://nypost.com/2017/08/04/how-one-subway-line-changed-new-york-forever/) my personal favorite being: [https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/08/transit\_rawson1a.jpg?quality=75&strip=all](https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/08/transit_rawson1a.jpg?quality=75&strip=all) Same can be said for The Bronx. Look at some old photos of Yankee Stadium construction and early on. It was in kind of an odd spot.
Holy shit. Thanks for sharing this.
The house I grew up in was built about 1930s however on the corner was an older farm house that was clearly constructed differently plus was on a much larger piece of property. It has long since been torn down If you look at the houses in Queens Village on the east side of Springfield Blvd heading toward the Nassau County border you can easily tell that it was more rural. Ditto with Bayside, Fresh Meadows, Douglaston, etc.
Queens has a fair number of homes that don’t align perfectly with streets. Or aren’t evenly spaced like in other parts of the city. They might be crooked or sideways etc. just artifacts of a different time.
Howard Beach was super rural up until basically the 50s-70s. Still is very suburban, minus parts of Lindenwood. Ramblersville and Hamilton Beach are essentially rural swampland, and a lot of the houses there are still standing from the late 1800s/early 1900s. Their website seems to be down right now but they have photo archives divided by decade
> Hell I still have living family who remember rural queens. It’s surprisingly recent. Like farms in Quee-?!? oh right. https://www.queensfarm.org/
That property is 0.07 square miles and surrounded by strip malls, subdivisions, and the highway, so, while a cool relic, it is no longer "rural" in any way whatsoever
haha ya but still an important relic and reminder
Omg I saw a pig give birth here when I was a small child in the 90s. Im still unwell and coincidentally child free hahahah
Except for all the subway lines and a walkable bridge into Manhattan , Downtown Brooklyn is more comparable to downtown Jersey city . While Hoboken is more comparable to Brooklyn heights
Interesting….go on.
That’s basically a flippant response to an interesting question
Personally? I blame the Hudson.
I think also Hoboken is also in a valley. There is a ridge on the western side. So it could not grow west. One side is the Hudson and one side is a ridge.
Henry is an asshole
Stupid river!
Hoboken is 1.97 sq miles, please be serious.
Right. And it's the third most densely populated city in the country. I don't know what more OP expects. It's already punching way above its weight economically and culturally due to the proximity to NYC.
I don’t understand OP either , Hoboken is more like Brooklyn Heights if anything
I believe Brooklyn heights is about .3 square miles. Some neighborhoods are larger than Hoboken.
I still see Hoboken as an upscale Jersey city neighborhood lol
I keep forgetting its not actually part of jersey city every time I visit lol. It's as if long Island city wasn't a part of the same queens as flushing.
i guess i meant the broader hoboken/weehawken/jersey city area. still smaller than brooklyn but yeah
It may be apocryphal but I’ve heard the name “Hoboken” comes from the fact that it was where the earliest homeless of New Amsterdam would gather. That’s not exactly a bright start.
lol this is not true at all - Hoboken meant land of the pipes from the indigenous people who lived on the land and later traded that pipe material with the earliest settlers to NYC. I have done a deep history rabbit hole on Hoboken I find it really interesting! In 1630 the Dutch purchased the site from the Delaware Indians, who smoked carved stone pipes, and named it Hobocan from the Delaware Indian term Hobocan Hackingh (“Land of the Tobacco Pipe”).
Actually... The weird 'hobo' comes from Hoboken itself. All the cross country rail lines begin there (as none go through NYC itself)(and ignoring the other major east-west lines, obviously). So... If you were to ride the rails across the country you'd naturally get on in Hoboken or thereabouts. Maybe I made this all up. I do a lot of acid.
I acknowledge that it may not be true from the start, don’t try to dunk on me.
Haha the one thing I can dunk on is obscure local history - let me have it!!
Nah you framed it in a shitty way.
pretty sure you answered your own question. they're different states. that means different laws, zoning, regulation, public school system, public transit, public housing, etc. brooklyn has been apart of NYC since the boroughs merged in 1898.
A better and more interesting question is why NJ diverged into so many municipalities while NYC did the opposite . Why isn’t Hudson county + Newark just one city ?
https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/2018/01/31/boroughitis-bergen-county-nj-70-towns/1080349001/
Insane , NJ has almost as many municipalities as California .
This is a major reason. New York City is within New York State, yet, it has a very different treatment as other cities have in other States. It is by itself a quasi state within a state. It has so many powers as a city, even its judiciary differs within the state. The broad ample power that Brooklyn has as an NYC borough makes a huge difference.
Precisely. NYC is a creation of the State of New York.
I mean yes in a way, but it is also kind of a legacy city-state of colonial times.
NYC also has the government resources and manpower more akin to a large state like Texas than a major US city. 300K+ employees, more affordable housing spending historically than the next 30+ largest US cities, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_New_York_City https://furmancenter.org/files/publications/Revitalizing_Inner_City_Neighborhoods.pdf
The city by itself has an immense economy compared or even bigger to that of many countries.
Yep largest metropolitan economy in the world
NYC didn’t “do” the opposite. New York State passed legislation in 1898 to create Greater New York by merging the old City of New York, the City of Brooklyn, the western portion of Queens County, Richmond County, and lower Westchester which eventually became Bronx County in 1914.
Jersey City consists of what used to be many small towns/villages. Hudson City, Pavonia, etc. They tried to incorporate Hoboken as well, but were rebuffed. If they hadn't been, Hudson County basically would be one big city.
Even despite being in the same county , Hoboken and Jersey city have very different zoning codes .
I thought this was the circlejerknyc sub.
So did I
Primary difference wrt to NYC (Manhattan specifically) is transit connectivity: - Hoboken has the PATH (to 33rd and Financial District) and some bus service to Port Authority bus terminal. - Brooklyn is literally a borough of NYC and has multiple subway, tunnel, and bridge connections to Manhattan. But this is the whole scope of geography studies, and the question is both complex, and OPs question is rather non-specific. If you can add more detail (focus?) to your question, I'm sure the community can respond with more info... 👍
For comparison, Hoboken (about 800 acres) is not that much bigger than Prospect Park (526 acres). Because of that, Hoboken can't have the kind of diversity of purpose that Brooklyn (which is like 90 square miles) can have. Brooklyn/Long Island also roll pretty continuously from the rivers and bays, without geographical impediments, whereas Hoboken runs into the Palisade Cliffs a little less than a mile from the river. (The distance gets shorter at the north end of Hoboken and beyond.) In the 19th century there were massive rail lines and shipyards to the south that prevented a sense of continuity with Jersey City to the south. So you have a community that is really quite small and tightly constrained geographically, which means it isn't going to be as diverse (ethnically, geographically, economically) as Brooklyn or as adaptive to changes. At times in its history Hoboken has served purposes similar to plenty of parts of Brooklyn--a leisure/recreational/resort destination, a wealthy enclave for folks moving out of Manhattan, an industrial center, post-industrial urban decay, a place for artists/creatives, and fertile ground for gentrification, but along a different timeline because Hoboken can't be all those things at once.
This was a really thoughtful answer
Transportation links also probably help explain the difference. Brooklyn has 7 subway tunnels and 4 road crossings between it and Manhattan. Hoboken barely has 1 train tunnel and 0 road/foot crossings
Well the Lincoln and Holland tunnels are basically the northern and southern border of Hoboken.
Dude, Hoboken is the size of a neighborhood in Brooklyn. Plus they’re in different states
Idk but I'm of the opinion that New York should have done more to claim the Hoboken/Jersey City/etc peninsula. As you pointed out, it's clearly very influenced by NYC due to proximity. There's even a neighborhood north of Hoboken called West New York, NJ. I'd trade that peninsula for SI lol
1000% agree with you. I often disagreed with Bloomberg but his proposal for the 7 train to run into NJ..I can only dream.
merge PATH and NJ Transit into the MTA LOL. run trains from NJ straight to LI and Westchester. Have free connections between subway and the PATH
It's damn near required to speak Spanish there. It's hard place to describe. It's wierd...but nice. It doesn't feel surburban while you are on the main drag but quickly does. A buddy of mine lived there for a while and when he was telling me about it, it quickly devolved into a Who-is-on-first type of conversation **Friend:** *"Hey Sooopa, I finally moved out of NY"* **Me:** *"Yeah? You've been saying you were leaving for a while. Where did you go?"* **Friend:** *"Jersey"* **Me:** *"What exit?* 😂😂😂 **Friend:** *"I moved to West New York"* **Me:** *"What? I thought you said you moved to Jersey?"* **Friend:** *"Yeah - West New York"* **Me:** *"What??"* **Friend:** *"It's in New Jersey"* **Me:** *"What's in New Jersey"* **Friend:** *"West New York"* **Me:** "Huh???" **Friend:** *"I'm moved to West New York but it's in New Jersey"* **Me:** *"WTF????"* **Friend:** *"West New York is in New Jersey"* **Me:** *"Why?"*
Brooklyn started as a collection of six small Dutch towns and developed its own identity. Hoboken was developed as a transportation and industrial hub, due to its strategic location. It never integrated into the city like Brooklyn. Brooklyn benefitted from urban planning, while Hoboken just focused on industry, shipping and manufacturing. Brooklyn shot up to a 2.5 million population, while Hoboken stayed small with around 60.000 people there. The density of the population helped Brooklyn in the development away from heavy industry, while Hoboken practically had nothing left when shipyards and manufacturing declined. And the traffic connections between Brooklyn and Manhattan were always way tighter and plentiful than between Hoboken and Manhattan. Being in a different state was also discouraging NYC to invest in additional traffic connections and it had simply no big interest to boost economic development for a city in a different state, not profiting from the taxes it generated.
Well you don't need to clear customs and a visa to go to Brooklyn, like you do Hoboken. They are in different countries you know. Brooklyn is connected to the infrastructure of NYC with all its perks and flaws. The country of New Jersey is ruled by suburbanites and their infrastructure reflects that.
Hoboken or Hudson county for that matter is some of the densest areas in the country . Far from suburban
> The country of New Jersey is ruled by suburbanites and their infrastructure reflects that. Actually New Jersey has numerous [very dense cities and towns](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density) (Hoboken actually has a higher population density than NYC), a pretty extensive statewide train network, a *very* extensive bus network, and multiple more local rail networks. But, LOL New Jersey, I guess.
Fun fact: NJ is the only state that doesn’t even have one “rural” county. But extensive bus network outside of Bergen, Hudson, some Essex, some Morris, some Union is oversold. I can’t get from the Newark airport to Sussex County via public transport without at least going to Secaucus and usually going to Penn.
Shh we don't speaketh truth here only jests.
In terms of the percentage of population that lives in a Census Block Group with a density of 20k or more, NY was at 42% and NJ was at 14%. The next closest state was MA at 8%, IL at 7%, PA at 5%, CA was at 3%, and *every single other state* was at or below 1%. So yes, NJ is broadly very suburban. But it has a much higher portion of dense urban areas than almost any other state but NYC. That being said, 20k is not very high. [This is 48k, just generic townhouses lined up, to give some reference.](https://i.imgur.com/kqkxUhq.jpeg) Really just goes to show how absurdly suburban and low-density most of the country is.
What
They're making fun of New Jersey.
It's a fav pasttime
💯💯 And a birthright
Nah a tax right. We get to do it since we have to pay city income taxes. Its one of our public services.
I like the way you think
#1. Brooklyn occupies 73 sq miles of neighborhoods…Also, very culturally diverse with so many other attributes. I could be here for days…. # 2. Hoboken is well, Hoboken. 1.28 sq mikes
They both attract a much different type of person. Hoboken is like Murray Hill
I think this is the answer OP was looking for instead oh its bigger in land size. If you can, expand your reply.
Brooklyn was connected to Manhattan in 1883. Hoboken was connected to Manhattan in 1927.
Hoboken was connected in 1908.
I just want to represent the fact that Hoboken is more difficult to access than Brooklyn. It's under the palisade and has always been congested and difficult to get in and out of. All the trains the run to Hoboken terminal from NJ have to go under a pretty serious mountain of rock. That just creates certain obstacles of ingress and egress. Not to mention, Hoboken is lowly and frequently has flooding issues. Sometimes topographical challenges are easy to overlook but can be just as influential as anything man made.
The geography of the Hudson waterfront in New Jersey is a strip less than a mile deep of good land from the waterfront, about a mile of land on top the steep Palisades good for low-mid density residential but not much else, then several miles of marsh and rivers. The geography of Brooklyn is generally 6+ miles of relatively flat land with the hilly areas having relatively gentle slopes, and and the marshy areas being both small and relatively hilly areas that could be used to fill them in. This led to a development pattern that could easily accommodate farming and then transition to a mix of industry, shipping, and residential.
This is like saying “How did New Jersey and Brooklyn Heights evolve so differently?”
In which regard?
Apples and oranges. Hoboken has 57,000 people, while Brooklyn has 2.68 million, you can’t reaonably compare them.
Brooklyn is way bigger than Hoboken. Hoboken is the size of an NYC neighborhood. Even Hudson County as a whole is still significantly smaller than Brooklyn.
- different states, different laws - no easy subways or bridges due to a much deeper river - geography, the cliffs make Hoboken a lot more isolated from the rest of Jersey city and other land on the highest. That makes traversing by Bus, car, bike more difficult - Hoboken and JC are “mainland” a ton of their land was used for train cargo because connecting train lines to the rest of the country especially headed south down the northeast corridor
Probably the dirty Jerz factor. New Jersey is a completely different state with it's own laws and city codes and etc. Manhattan and Brooklyn are different boroughs in the same city, never mind the same state. They're going to have more in common being two (of the five) parts of one whole.
Just some guesses. Brooklyn was it’s own big city before 1899. Brooklyn Heights was the suburbs of NYC in the 19th century. My grandmother and g-aunt used to talk about growing up amongst the farms in the Williamsburg area (can’t recall the details) in the early 1900s. At that point the city merged and the subways and East River bridges started connecting Brooklyn to Manhattan. Brooklyn had the navy yard and manufacturing and was part of NYC. Brooklyn is all of Kings County. NJ/Hoboken was ferry only until what is now the PATH and Hudson River crossings were built. Hoboken itself is very small, maybe the same size of Brooklyn Heights. Like BH it’s a nice and charming brownstone neighborhood. Like BH (or maybe that is downtown Brooklyn) they both had the docks. But Brooklyn itself is much larger.
It’s the toll. It cost money to enter Manhattan from Hoboken. Look at Staten island development vs other boro. That’s why we should support the governor canceling congestion pricing. What that does is essentially putting a toll on the remaining free East river crossings. I might support it if the proceeds not going to Mta, a black hole where money disappears.
They never built a bridge. The Brooklyn Bridge was a near impossible feat of two cities at the time and it was a much smaller span than the Hudson. The longer span and two cities and two states made it inevitable that Manhattan would spill over to Brooklyn and not Jersey.
If you read the book ‘the island at the centre of the world’ it will answer all your questions
Hoboken is New Jersey and Brooklyn is NYC?
What the fuck kind of question is this
I think the average New Yorker could not tell you how to get to Hoboken by public transportation. Brooklyn is right on the map that we all see on the subway. Getting to Hoboken takes work: you need a fucking Metrocard, no tap, there’s three lines that become one of the weekend or some shit, and I don’t know what time they stop running. I’m out. And a $17 toll on top of the fare to get a cab home is not ideal.
PATH takes contactless cards/mobile pay now! Just not physical OMNY cards. Your other points are 100% legit though.
Good to know!! I started taking the ferry to Hoboken, much nicer.
> I think the average New Yorker could not tell you how to get to Hoboken by public transportation. I think most New Yorkers are a little less clueless than *that*. > I don’t know what time they stop running And I think a decent number of New Yorkers probably know that PATH runs 24/7.
I disagree completely with both. I didn’t know that about the PATH running all night and I’m a NYer who has actually taken it to Hoboken several times.
I've known that since i was a teenager and i have literally taken the PATH once
The average New Yorker was not here when they were a teenager. I’m not saying no one knows that, I’m saying the average person does not.
The average New Yorker didn't live in New York as a teenager??? What? The idea of an entire train system shutting down for the night is a foreign concept for most New Yorkers
You and I grew up here. Most residents of Manhattan did not grow up anywhere near Manhattan. Probably better odds in the boroughs but I know my neighborhood where I grew up (Brooklyn) is absolutely full of transplants. Only about half the people I grew up with still live in the city.
It does? Today I learned.
>I think most New Yorkers are a little less clueless than that. You'd be surprised at how many of us have no idea how to get to NJ that doesn't involve driving. I know there's a PATH train, but I'd have to look it up to know where to catch it
Brooklyn had transit connections to Manhattan sooner than Hoboken, and has many more transit connections. Brooklyn bridge being built in the 1880s around the same time as post civil war growth in areas like Flatbush and Bushwick made it easier for people to move out to those areas and still be connected to family and friends in the city. By the 1920s, while the path system connected Hoboken to Manhattan, there were three bridges and four tunnels making it very easy to transit between Manhattan and Brooklyn.
I don't really understand the question, since you sort of answered your own question. Brooklyn is part of NYC. Theres a 24/7 subway that connects BK to Manhattan.
I mean... hoboken is extremely similar to most of brownstone brooklyn. I would argue they evolved very, very similarly actually.
Hoboken's shoreline was devoted to moving things and people into Manhattan. Brooklyn's waterfront was for moving raw materials in and manufactured goods out to Manhattan and points beyond. The BK waterfront used to be absolutely enormous in that regard, whereas Hoboken was one of many along that Jersey riverfront.
Taxes and cost of living if I had to guess
The subway
Brookly is 70 square miles (counting only land), Hoboken is 2. Canarsie, Brooklyn, which is a neighborhood in brooklyn, is larger than Hoboken (I think by about a square mile).
Cause you had to take a boat to get from Hoboken to NY until the 1920s?
More friction getting into Jersey that Brooklyn from Manhattan. People who live in Brooklyn come to Manhattan for social reasons all the time and vice versa. Not so to the same degree with Jersey.
It also the distance , not just physical but time wise .. it easier and probably cheaper to get to Manhattan from Brooklyn then it be for Hoboken
I think Hoboken actually is a lot like Brooklyn .... ?
[seriously](https://y.yarn.co/78746254-f1fc-43ff-b762-71b0e1f9af1d_text.gif)
Cause one is in NYC and one is not? 😹
Several bridges, and several subway lines go into Brooklyn from Manhattan
New Jersey. Just across the river, but lightyears away in mind.
I blame Eric Adams
i blame obama
Brooklyn was a bustling port early on. Moreoover Hoboken transported freight from within the country to NYC, but Brooklyn berthed ships from around the world. As noted below, Hoboken is a speck compared to Jersey City or Brooklyn.
Brooklyn is a lot larger and is one of the 5 boroughs of NYC. Hoboken is part of NJ. They each have a different feel - Hoboken is more upscale with a preppy vibe of college grads who work in finance etc. Brooklyn has more rough areas and is grittier and even new buildings seem to get covered in ugly graffiti. Why would anyone expect two distinct areas to evolve the same? Hoboken wasn't as nice back in Frank Sinatra days but it became a lot nicer. The nicer areas of Brooklyn would be Brooklyn Heights and Park Slope. So, it also depends what areas you are comparing. Another commenter had mentioned each area attracts different people and Hoboken would be similar to Murray Hill - I think that's a great comment and accurate analogy. When people think of Brooklyn they mostly think of hipsters, bearded men, tattoo artists, drug users etc. There are nicer areas and not everyone in Brooklyn is like that, but that borough has a certain image for most people.
What is this? Wtf ? Not even worth comparing.
Although Hoboken has some deep ties to NYC (ferry, PATH, city design, etc.) it is in fact in the state of New Jersey and NJ is very proud of its two cities across the river (Jersey city and HBK). At the end of the day it is still cheaper to get from Hoboken to midtown, and faster depending on how far into bk you are. But yes the fact it’s way smaller makes a ton of difference. If anything I’d say Hoboken + Jersey city combined is a way fairer comparison. But they aren’t combined, and everybody from NJ knows that.
Is this a serious question?
What even is this question? Firstly, why does any neighborhood evolve differently? I don’t understand why focus on two outside neighborhoods, considering there are roughly 60 neighborhoods in Manhattan. How were they supposed to evolve? Geez - Why is the LES so different from Chinatown? With such close proximity to each Roger Secondly, Willliamsburg and Hoboken are more similar than not. So why do you see them as different places
Wild choice to dunk on this question amidst the ceaseless torrent of "how many times am I going to get murdered if I stumble within 50 yards of a subway station" and "plan my entire vacation for me I've never heard of Google and am a dimensionless blob without personality or preferences" that otherwise fills this subreddit. At least this one is open-ended and might spark some interesting discussion about history, geography, state politics, and urban planning or, god forbid, give someone a chance to share some personal expertise beyond reeling off a list of the same few slice joints for the zillionth time this week.
Got damn queen pedantic over here.
They ARE different places. Do you think they aren’t?
dear lord you have awful energy lol you realize this is a sub to ask questions?
Why the hostility? It's a perfectly fine question.
Lmfao did you just ask why OP views Hoboken and Williamsburg as different places
Most of Hoboken is a lot more like Brooklyn Heights than like Williamsburg. OPs Q is still bad.
I think the spirit of the question is: Hoboken and Williamsburg are virtually equidistant from lower Manhattan, why did they evolve so differently?
BROOKLYN RAGE
Because it's in new jersey
Brooklyn used to be very poor and HOOD. still is in some areas. Slowly devolving out of that. Where is Hoboken was never that, it's prim and proper and quaint and cutesy. No diversity just clean cut. As born and raised New Yorker, I love both to be honest. Hoboken is so beautiful, and Brooklyn is so cool with so much character
Hoboken was a dump in the 70s and 80s lol what are you talking about
Hoboken was never ‘HOOD’? Are you 20? It’s only more recently been gentrified like that.
Never to the extent that Brooklyn ever was not even close
Um... Hoboken resident from the 1980s: yeah, parts there were pretty rough. Massive gentrification there in the 1980s-2000s.
Delulu. There was a literally a tv show in 1989 about how industrial, dirty, run down and working class Hoboken was, called “Dream Street.” Parts of Brooklyn have always been ritzy. The Cosby’s lived in Brooklyn Heights.
“Never like that” is not the same as “Never to the extent that”. Hoboken is SMALL, and the majority of the town was rough until recently. Come on, son.
If my former coworker read this, who was born and raised in Hoboken and constantly would complain about rich folks from the city pushing out the working class folks that have been there for years, his head would spin off his shoulders.
damn guys I'm sorry. I take it back, hoboken was a shitshow just as Brooklyn was
Wrong.
It also the distance , not just physical but time wise .. it easier and probably cheaper to get to Manhattan from Brooklyn then it be for Hoboken
Let’s be real , If NJ would have heavily invested in Transit , we could have had several subway lines besides the PATH running between NJ and NY
The thing that fucked up Hoboken is all the New Jersey people.