Why Are Penn Station and Union Station Such Common Names for Major Train Stations?

Why Are Penn Station and Union Station Such Common Names for Major Train Stations?: A Complete Guide

It is not unusual for anyone who takes a long distance train in the United States or anywhere else to observe a strange trend in the names of railway stations upon arrival. One may be dropped off at a "Penn Station" in New York, Baltimore, or Newark, but when arriving in Washington D.C., Los Angeles, and Chicago, the destination becomes "Union Station." The naming conventions of these two stations play a key role in America's rail transport system, but they are more than just that. The significance of these two station names lies in their origins as well as in the definition of a train station. Knowing the difference between the two becomes a tale worth sharing.

For people who struggle through intricate transit centers in order to take the next train, local transport becomes very important. In such a situation, once one figures out how to get through all those hallways in a big city train station, he or she may book a local car service that will eventually take them to their destination point. In case you arrive at an old-fashioned place like Taxi Hemel Hempstead, you will not be expecting a Penn or Union Station, rather s Hemel will come to your aid. However, coming back to the big city stations again – why do all the cities have the same names for their stations?

The Private Empire of the Pennsylvania Railroad

The popularity of “Penn Station” lies in the grand vision of a particular company, namely the Pennsylvania Railroad (PRR). At the beginning of the 20th century, the PRR became the largest publicly held firm in the world. In order to establish itself as an indisputable leader, the firm resolved to tunnel beneath the Hudson River in Manhattan and create its own entry into the center of New York City. The first Pennsylvania Station was completed in 1910 and boasted magnificent architecture inspired by the Roman Baths of Caracalla. “Penn” in the station’s name is nothing but an abbreviation of “Pennsylvania.”

The name, however, prevailed and became widespread since the Pennsylvania Railroad never had a station in New York City. The company kept growing, creating new stations in such major cities as Baltimore, Newark, and Pittsburgh (although the latter later changed its name). These stations were not simply common meeting points where trains from many different companies converged; they were exclusive and formidable representations of corporate power. If a person walked through the doors of a Penn Station, that meant they had crossed into Pennsylvania Railroad territory. This fact still holds true even now, centuries later, when the Pennsylvania Railroad joined forces with New York Central, resulting in Penn Central and, eventually, Conrail. The stations still belong to Amtrak but continue to bear the original brand name out of sheer tradition.

The Cooperative Spirit of Union Stations

While Penn Station was an example of monopoly, “Union Station” stood for unity. During the late 19th century, the issue that was affecting the rapidly growing cities of America was that of tracks. The reason for this was that different railroad companies constructed their own terminal and did so often right next to each other, leading to hazardous grade crossing situations, as well as being very difficult for passengers to switch between companies. The solution to this problem was the idea of union depots or union stations.

The word “Union” referred to an agreement of interests. Rather than having each railroad—the New York Central, the Baltimore & Ohio, and the Chicago & North Western—construct its own station, they cooperated to construct a single station together. This enabled passengers to change trains without having to trek half a mile through mud puddles in the city’s streets. Examples include Washington, D.C. (1907), Los Angeles (1939), and Chicago (1925), which constructed their own Union Stations. The word suggests that the station was owned by everybody rather than a private interest group. In effect, it was a symbolic handshake between competitors. As a result, the phrase “Union Station” became the universal term for any rail station accommodating more than one railroad, and this explains why “Union Station” is hardly ever owned by a single freight railroad company.

Geographic and Functional Differences Today

But how can one differentiate between the two without the help of a history book? Location and ownership could be some pointers. Penn Stations are mostly located in the Northeast Corridor (a heavily railroaded region from Boston to Washington, D.C.), especially in those cities where the Pennsylvania Railroad once operated services. In case of a Penn Station situated beyond the Northeast, say Kansas City or Atlanta, then it could be either an exception to history or a suburban station using its brand name for prestige.

On the other hand, Union Stations are available all across the country, from sea to shining sea. There are stations located at rail centers where many different rail routes have met throughout history, irrespective of location. In addition, current naming conventions have changed. For instance, in New York, the name “Penn Station” indicates an active but entirely functional underground rail station, while “Grand Central Terminal” (a totally different naming convention) is the name associated with the tourists’ center. In order to determine how one may reach a remote suburb or industrial park from the central rail stations, one must consider efficient ground transportation. As a case in point, a person traveling out of a significant London rail station such as Euston, which provides rail access to Hemel Hempstead, would need a Hemel Hempstead Airport Taxis for his or her onward journey.

The Legacy of Consolidation and Branding

The repetition of such names serves as a lesson in branding and bankruptcy. Union Station won the naming battle, owing to the fact that it was descriptive of a function (railroads coming together). Penn Station won the naming battle because of the massive size of the ambitions of the Pennsylvania Railroad. It is quite remarkable to note that the first Penn Station in New York City was torn down in 1963 for the development of Madison Square Garden, which constituted a form of architectural vandalism and served as the origin of the historic preservation movement.

However, many Union stations have remained standing as preserved historical buildings since they belong to everyone and hence were supported by the public. The term “Union” sounds democratic, while “Penn” sounds personal. However, due to the service that the Pennsylvania Railroad provided for the most populous area in the US, the term “Penn” became a generic term for big-city train stations. This is why people in Baltimore and Newark never considered changing the names of their PRR stations.

Also read: From Union to Federation: How to Redraw the UK’s Internal Borders for a Modern Era

Conclusion: A Tale of Two Architectures

In any case, what connects both names is that the construction of the American rail network was driven by two different forces – the private monopoly represented by Penn and the public co-operative spirit embodied by Union. While one is named after a particular company that dug tunnels beneath waterways, another name celebrates the notion of several train companies working together in order to serve the needs of the city. The next time you will be running through the narrow passages of New York Penn or staring at the beautiful arches of Washington Union Station, remember that there is some economic legacy from the 19th century. While one name embodies the idea of civic cooperation, another reflects corporate tenacity. In any case, both names reflect the historical process which resulted in the laying of tracks underneath your feet. Finally, no matter what a station is called, the final mile is always on local roads.