Updated January 29, 2013 at 1:45pm: Metrolinx’ response has been added at the end of this article.
A discussion has been running in the comment thread on another article about one of the photos used on the Metrolinx site. The first of four photos in a rotating display is shown below.
This is clearly an Intermediate Capacity Transit System line (ICTS), and it has been identified by readers as part of the Kuala Lumpur system.
A strange choice considering that Metrolinx does not plan to build any ICTS in Toronto, or so they claim. At one point, it was clear that Metrolinx had no interest in LRT, and my advocacy of it at an early public speech by the former Chair Rob MacIsacc was not well-received. Simply “extending” the SRT to the airport was the preferred technology choice until the City of Toronto put its foot down with the Transit City LRT plan.
Why does Metrolinx use an ICTS photo to illustrate their home page when this is not supposed to be part of their plans? (The other three photos showcase GO, Presto and the ARL.)
I asked about this last week and am still awaiting an answer. Meanwhile the photo remains up on the site.
Metrolinx responds:
The image in question is stock photography from a website known as Shutterstock. While the image may resemble the Skytrain, it has been chosen through a creative selection process.
It should be noted that the image was also selected according to Metrolinx brand standards. Photography plays an important role in Metrolinx print and communication materials, which includes our website. Our images represent speed and action, giving the viewer a powerful sense of perpetual motion and transformation.
When shooting or selecting photography, we always try to add a touch of green, or at least, select and/or use colours that will complement the primary colour palette and add to the unique flavour of Metrolinx.
In particular, the image in question was chosen for its interesting perspective on city life, and has been blurred for use on the Metrolinx website as an artistic representation of rapid transit.
We plan on changing the images on our website soon to in order to keep it fresh, and avoid the appearance of a static site.
Well, that’s the longest “Ooops” I have read in some time. The shot does not “resemble” Skytrain, it is the same technology in use in another city, Kuala Lumpur.
Steve Munro 
Call me a cynic but.. the Metrolinx homepage hosts large images of current projects labelled GO, Presto & the Union Pearson. The hazy first image is unfortunately not labelled, but the above ground station and track looks a lot more like the linear induction tech we’re supposedly dumping than LRT.
Looking at the mock downtown-ish image, the squat historic building at the elevated station immediately reminded me of the Harbourfront building across from Metrolinx.
Steve: I have sent a query to Metrolinx asking about this image.
LikeLike
Looks like the ICTS system (Kelana Jaya Line) in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Presumably taken from a stock photo. It is very similar to the SkyTrain in Vancouver.
LikeLike
The Metrolinx picture is definitely from Kuala Lumpur’s Kelana Jaya line. It was probably taken on a northbound train approaching Pasar Seni (Literally “Market Art”, properly “Art Market”) station at the south end of the “city” area. This picture shows a clearer view of the building that Roger Brook described. It’s also interesting that the other building closer to the foreground (just ahead of the train) was the old bus station & parking garage. It has now been torn down for construction of the Kuala Lumpur MRT Line 1.
LikeLike
Thanks Moaz, Metrolinx’s homepage is definitely Seni Pasar station on the Kelana Jaya line. Handy having someone who lived in Kuala Lumpur.
Consider that:
The Province has been pushing Bombardier’s proprietary ART tech for decades, most recently for a combined SRT/Eglinton line.
The current LRT (SRT replacement) design is 100% grade separated at the expense once again of the Malvern extension.
The Eglinton LRT has also gradually added grade separated sections while cutting back length. Affordable surface operation is down from 24 kms in 2007 to 7 kms currently.
Metrolinx’s biggest projects supposedly use true LRT vehicles and yet it now headlines its front page with a photo of a technology (in faraway K.L.) it’s (supposedly) eliminating, followed by other smaller projects popular with the Province – Union/Pearson link, Presto card & GO expansion.
Pictures are particularly important given that Metrolinx unhelpfully refers to both true LRT and linear induction ART as Light Rail Transit (LRT). Given the record it’s hard to believe this was an accident and appears to signal that Metrolinx hasn’t given up on linear induction.
Steve: I am still awaiting a reply on this from Metrolinx. Last Wednesday (Jan 23) they were going to “get back to me”.
LikeLike
My, aren’t we behind the times. Maybe they’re still hungover from the Christmas and holidays?
Over on their website for the December 12, 2012 presentations they have this note:
Still waiting past 15 business days for the reports. They should take a couple of Aspirin and try again in the morning to produce those reports.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t read too much into it on that page. It’s one of the top matches for “transit moving fast” on stock photography websites.
What is more interesting is that the image is also used on this page.
LikeLike
Maybe the next provincial election will bring yet another change to Eglinton plans. Maybe not but I really wouldn’t be surprised if it did. Even as much as I would have preferred a full subway, I’m just glad that something’s going to be undergound under Eglinton regardless of what it is. Let’s just hope we don’t get another repeat of when the illustrious Mike Harris was elected Premier.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t take it too seriously. This is the agency that, when they first launched, had pictures of all sorts of urban areas in the GTA … but it turned out they had photos of places like Newmarket and Markham in England!
It’s blurred to death … they probably figure it looks close enough like elevated LRT …
Steve: Still, it shows how much (or little) the Communications folks in Metrolinx know about their own plans, and the degree of review for accuracy the website gets.
LikeLike
Roger Brook said:
It’s not just Metrolinx though. The KeIana Jaya line is referred to as “LRT” in Malaysia and so is the KL Monorail (it was originally marketed as “LRT Sistem 3” on the first set of magnetic tickets.
The first line built in Kuala Lumpur was the STAR (Sistem Transit Aliran Ringan, literally “System Transit Rail Light” or “Light Rail Transit System” in proper syntax)…although today “LRT’ usually refers to “Light Rapid” as opposed to “Light Rail.”
The distinction is important for 2 reasons.
First, companies have been able to sell these ‘mini-metro’ systems all around the world by selling a confusingly-named product that looks good to people living in cities with high density and huge traffic congestion problems.
Second, it allows an opportunity to ‘upsell’ from ‘L’RT to ‘M’RT (“mass-rapid transit”).
In the case of Kuala Lumpur, their first “M”RT line (under construction now) was originally an “L”RT line proposed by the company that owns & operates the other LRT lines. Then, a well-connected company involved in tunneling made an unsolicited proposal to the government to build a 3 line “M”RT network, starting by converting the proposed “L”RT line to an “M”RT.
The irony is that the “M”RT will actually have lower line capacity than the two other LRT lines that currently run in Kuala Lumpur — which just goes to show you that promotion and confusion can do a lot in the world of public transport infrastructure investments.
What does that all mean? That there is no way to ‘sell’ public transit other than building it and making it work effectively. Toronto used to do that in the past, but doesn’t seem to be interested anymore.
Cheers, Moaz
LikeLike
Rod Taylor said:
Yes, perhaps we should cut them some slack — Obviously they couldn’t find any operating examples of fast-moving transit anywhere in the GTA!
LikeLike
I’m no conspiracy theorist. I think the simplist answer is that through some stock photo archive or Google image seach someone at Metrolinx’s Communication unit through the photo looked cool and/or evoked the right “message” they are trying to convey – that public mass transit can be fast, efficient, the way of the future etc…
Metrolinx’s Communications folks may not have talked to their Policy folks about the implications or expectations being put out there about what kind of system they are actually building.
BTW, I think it is facinating the image is still up there. I think that alone is a good gauge for the kind of institutional speed in which Metrolinx operates. If it takes you weeks to change a simple photo on your front page, how long does it take you to make a decision on something that matters?
LikeLike
Also in Singapore the “LRT” lines are a grade separated system connecting the MRT (metro) to apartment complexes, and resemble the people mover systems commonly found at airports. The term “LRT” is really ambiguous and really should be abandoned, the term “tram” is much clearer.
LikeLike
On the subject of photos, I would invite everyone to send Andy Byford and Karen Stintz photos of the hideous, botched re-tiling work taking place at Dufferin station, photos of which are floating around Urbantoronto and other places.
LikeLike
It took a week to formulate the Metrolinx response but the prose was well worth the wait. Let’s hope the creative types at Metrolinx don’t replace the photo of Skytrain.. I mean a photo that “may resemble the Skytrain”, with this.
They won’t even have to “add a touch of green.”
Steve: Another great example of private enterprise trying to take Queen’s Park for a ride on developing dubious technology. Just imagine GO being forced to buy into such nonsense.
LikeLike
Andy, you’ve got a point about LRT being ambiguous but transit is so full of ambiguous terms it’s pathetic.
Steve: This is typical of a political situation where someone wants to sell something by calling it what it is not. Automated guideway systems have come to be called “Light Rapid Transit” because that’s a brand people who developed them wanted to appropriate for their own use. In fact, the single defining characteristic of “LRT”, its ability to run where necessary or appropriate in a shared right-of-way, is singularly absent from such systems. But the public never really understood “LRT” and the snake oil salesmen exploited this to their advantage.
The original “LRT” line for Scarborough was replaced by “Advanced LRT” even though “mini metro” would have been more appropriate.
LikeLike
It’s obvious that Metrolinx could not use photos of any existing TTC vehicles or track. (i.e. they don’t operate those ones). Since there is no Metrolinx rapid transit yet built, it is reasonable that they rely on stock photos.
Like on this page too:
Otherwise, to have renders on all of their pages would seen a bit too “pie in the sky”.
Steve: When Albert Einstein was concocting the Special Theory of Relativity, he imagined what would happen on a tram traveling near the speed of light. The idea that there isn’t a representative tramway/LRT somewhere in the world rather than a thinly disguised Skytrain shot (so thin is the disguise that the location was spotted almost immediately by readers) is laziness, pure and simple. Surely there is a tram shot somewhere that could be doctored to give the mistaken impression of speed, just as we have with all of Metrolinx’ project schedule announcements.
LikeLike
So accuracy is high on Metrolinx’s priorities, eh?
Finding an image of LRT from the same perspective as their ICTS photo is easy. All they have to do is take a picture standing on the Spadina LRT, and apply effects to blur the surroundings. This isn’t very hard to do, and it would go a long way in improving Metrolinx’s accuracy.
LikeLike
This example is the type of picture Metrolinx should be using to promote LRT.
LikeLike