City to airport tramline

[fishinajar]

...And a tram down Keswick drain would be a waste of money...

...The light rail down the Keswick drain would not be a waste of money. It would be a direct route from the city to the airport with a station on the line north-south in the area of Mile End. You can add two more stops at Marion and South Roads if you wish. There's also an option this could be taken underground into the city at the West Parklands. If kept to the bare minimum without the underground section, it would not cost any more than laying tracks down a narrow and highly trafficked road as Henley Beach. It would also be built much quicker...

Is there a concept/thread you guys are referring too?

How would such a line enter the city other than under, through or over West Tce cemetery?

My personal preference would still be for a line via Henley Beach Road for a multitude of reasons. A much nicer entrance for interstate/national visitors for one.

From the terminal/hotel you'd follow the northern boundary of the airport leading onto the drain, following the drain all the way to James Congdon Drive, where you would head north east towards Sir Donald Bradman Drive, then you would go right, up over the bridge and straight into Grote Street and connect to the existing tram line running through Victoria Square.
The more sensible option is to go down Henley Beach Road all the way to Henley Beach, and a short run off at Airport Drive to the airport. That way it services a popular beach, and several eateries/pubs along the route, which could also help spur an increase in further businesses of that type.
What's along the drain route? Nothing.
A stop at Marion Road, are you going to have a park and ride facility? Where are you going to build it? What's there to justify a stop there? The council depot?
Similarly with a stop on south road along the drain route..what's there to justify a stop there? Nothing.
It literally would be a line with mostly nothing either end of the airport and city. It's a good idea though for a direct 'express' route, as at least half of it would be without having to stop at intersections.

Agreed.
Surely if the line was to go back north and use Sir Don bridge, it might as well run the entirety of the road rather than deviating along a drain "welcome to Adelaide".
An extra few minutes at traffic lights, seriously compare what would be a 10-15 min ride to interstate/national. Henley Beach is the far superior option of any for the airport and west. Main street environment, good growth corridor and would provide a second (and much shorter) tram ride to an alternative beach than Glenelg.

[rubberman]

I suggest that the question is whether the line is meant to serve the airport primarily. If so, then the drain, suitably prettied up provides the quickest connection to the city.

Therefore: does the traffic from the airport economically justify a dedicated line (like Sydney's airport link), yes or no? If yes, build it down the drain on its own merit, independent of and additional to other tram lines. If not, then build the line down Henley Beach Road as per the plan.

Then ask the question: does the traffic from the airport justify a spur line from Henley Beach Road, yes or no? If yes, build the spur on its economic merit. If no, then decide whether other considerations trump economics. You'd have to note that access to the airport in Adelaide is pretty good, so if the case for an airport spur was not good, why not put that money towards extending the tram system somewhere else? Eg a spur of the same length to Bowden, or somewhere similar.

[fishinajar]

I suggest that the question is whether the line is meant to serve the airport primarily. If so, then the drain, suitably prettied up provides the quickest connection to the city.

Therefore: does the traffic from the airport economically justify a dedicated line (like Sydney's airport link), yes or no? If yes, build it down the drain on its own merit, independent of and additional to other tram lines. If not, then build the line down Henley Beach Road as per the plan.

Then ask the question: does the traffic from the airport justify a spur line from Henley Beach Road, yes or no? If yes, build the spur on its economic merit. If no, then decide whether other considerations trump economics. You'd have to note that access to the airport in Adelaide is pretty good, so if the case for an airport spur was not good, why not put that money towards extending the tram system somewhere else? Eg a spur of the same length to Bowden, or somewhere similar.

Yes, but the two purposes stack. A dedicated line could be built in the future if the combined demand eventually overwhelmed the Henley Beach Rd line (unlikely for some time). Even then Sir Don would make a better second line than a dedicated separated line. The airport is so close already, a dedicated line for time saving would just be a waste of duel opportunities.

[SRW]

If loads for the airport to city get particularly large is there not also an opportunity to run trams express through the HBRd corridor?

[Aidan]

The drain (or as it's properly called, Keswick Creek) wouldn't provide the quickest connection to the City. Just reaching it would be far from easy, and then there's the problem of the roads that cross it.

But supposing it were, that wouldn't make it the best route. Firstly, service frequency is more important than speed over such a short distance. Secondly a street based route would be a big boost for suburban development. Thirdly it will be a long time before two rail links to the airport are justified, so it makes sense to go with the one that brings the greatest benefit first even if a faster option could be justified without it.

Eventually our airport could be served by multiple tramways as well as freeways and underground rail. But in the short term, a line via Sir Donald Bradman Drive is the best option. Shorter than HBR, and easier to connect with the existinng line.

BTW the Sydney Airport line has two intermediate stations, at Green Square and Mascot. There's quite a strong argument that they should've built a third between them at Doody Street.

[fishinajar]

...Firstly, service frequency is more important than speed over such a short distance

Agreed

...in the short term, a line via Sir Donald Bradman Drive is the best option. Shorter than HBR, and easier to connect with the existinng line...

Agree to disagree
HBRd is negligibly longer, serves a "main street" precinct with higher transit corridor development potential, and provides a first step to an overall HBRd line to Henley Beach.
Also as you said Aidan, frequency is king. The HBRd corridor would provide more of its own demand immediately, justifying more frequency. It would also likely result in quicker and more significant development, justifying increasing the frequency of services again/admittedly possibly through the branching of the line to Henley Beach and not to the airport itself.

[Norman]

SDBD would be a good corridor and may provide a slightly faster route, but HBR beats it narrowly on an economic basis of infill and main street activity. This was supported in the WestLink MCA.

[ynotsfables]

If it does go down Sir Donald Bradman Drive, it may be a good catalyst for streetscape development as well to enhance an attractive entry to the city. Henley Beach Road would also be good, however that road seems to be evolving nicely on its own. As for efficiency and frequency and further development SDBD would be a good option in my opinion.

[Nathan]

I think there's pros to either route, but to me it's ultimately down to where it would best feed into the CBD. Should it come in via Currie St (and therefore use Henley Beach Rd) or Grote St past the markets and joining up at Victoria Square (and use Sir Donald Bradman Dr). Which would better serve airport passengers? Which would be less prone to delays (obviously important when we're talking going to the airport)?

[fishinajar]

If it does go down Sir Donald Bradman Drive, [it may be] a good catalyst for streetscape development as well to enhance an attractive entry to the city. Henley Beach Road would also be good, however that road [seems to be evolving nicely on its own]. As for efficiency and frequency and further development SDBD would be a good option in my opinion.

I get you ynots', we can either a) support and encourage HBRd which is already moving along on its own, or b) support and encourage SDBD which is not taking off as such yet.
In the Adelaide context I think option A is best. It is safer. HBRd would do even better with a tramline. Dir Don might just still fail to get up, and with the added competition a few blocks over, HBRd might then not do much better. How much main street activity can the inner western suburbs support atm?
Sir Don Drive west of Airport Rd has limited development potential in comparison to HBRd also. I've also personally never liked the idea of an Airport/West Beach spur, the Airport Rd spur from HB would seem to have some purpose in itself. MO

Efficiency:
Don't forget to consider where the line is going in the city exactly. Unless the city loop ends up going east-west across Grote-Wakefield, then an airport line would likely loop up to North Terrace. Yes SDBD might get you to West Tce quicker, but the time difference to Nth Tce would be what? 1-2mins on a 15min journey?

[rubberman]

The drain (or as it's properly called, Keswick Creek) wouldn't provide the quickest connection to the City. Just reaching it would be far from easy, and then there's the problem of the roads that cross it.

But supposing it were, that wouldn't make it the best route. Firstly, service frequency is more important than speed over such a short distance. Secondly a street based route would be a big boost for suburban development. Thirdly it will be a long time before two rail links to the airport are justified, so it makes sense to go with the one that brings the greatest benefit first even if a faster option could be justified without it.

Eventually our airport could be served by multiple tramways as well as freeways and underground rail. But in the short term, a line via Sir Donald Bradman Drive is the best option. Shorter than HBR, and easier to connect with the existinng line.

BTW the Sydney Airport line has two intermediate stations, at Green Square and Mascot. There's quite a strong argument that they should've built a third between them at Doody Street.

Yes, but the point of doing an economic and operational study is to prove or disprove all or any of that. If a rigorous study confirms that, so be it.

However, at the moment, it's a bunch of people saying "the drain!", or "No! No! Henley BeachRoad,", or "No! No! SDBD!". That will end up with the route being selected via those that shout the loudest.

Let's see some hard analysis. If the drain route is the best, or HBR, or SDBD, whichever, so be it.

[fishinajar]

The drain (or as it's properly called, Keswick Creek) wouldn't provide the quickest connection to the City. Just reaching it would be far from easy, and then there's the problem of the roads that cross it.

But supposing it were, that wouldn't make it the best route. Firstly, service frequency is more important than speed over such a short distance. Secondly a street based route would be a big boost for suburban development. Thirdly it will be a long time before two rail links to the airport are justified, so it makes sense to go with the one that brings the greatest benefit first even if a faster option could be justified without it.

Eventually our airport could be served by multiple tramways as well as freeways and underground rail. But in the short term, a line via Sir Donald Bradman Drive is the best option. Shorter than HBR, and easier to connect with the existinng line.

BTW the Sydney Airport line has two intermediate stations, at Green Square and Mascot. There's quite a strong argument that they should've built a third between them at Doody Street.

Yes, but the point of doing an economic and operational study is to prove or disprove all or any of that. If a rigorous study confirms that, so be it.

However, at the moment, it's a bunch of people saying "the drain!", or "No! No! Henley BeachRoad,", or "No! No! SDBD!". That will end up with the route being selected via those that shout the loudest.

Let's see some hard analysis. If the drain route is the best, or HBR, or SDBD, whichever, so be it.

SDBD would be a good corridor and may provide a slightly faster route, but HBR beats it narrowly on an economic basis of infill and main street activity. [This was supported in the WestLink MCA].

What Norman said.
Also...I wasn't shouting

[rubberman]

What Norman said.
Also...I wasn't shouting

Then those who do shout will probably win in the absence of a decent economic and operational study.

[monotonehell]

monorail

[[Shuz]]

A tram line down Keswick Creek is just never going to happen, so why waste air even discussing it?

Seriously, enough with the Mitsubishi pills guys.