Sensational-Adelaide.com

I have to admit that I don't know a lot about the salt pans site or the requirements of airports, Shuz, but why is the present airport site so unsuitable now or in the future as an airport?

stumpjumper wrote:I have to admit that I don't know a lot about the salt pans site or the requirements of airports, Shuz, but why is the present airport site so unsuitable now or in the future as an airport?

two words: Height restrictions

I assume you mean in relation to the CBD - but isn't around 90m (30 stories, the Santos building) firstly about the limit the city geotechnics will take, and secondly, even if the land would take more than 30 storeys, is there demand even for more 30 storey buildings? No more have been proposed or built since the State Bank/Santos building. In other words, is the aviation related height restriction a real issue?

stumpjumper wrote:I assume you mean in relation to the CBD - but isn't around 90m (30 stories, the Santos building) firstly about the limit the city geotechnics will take, and secondly, even if the land would take more than 30 storeys, is there demand even for more 30 storey buildings? No more have been proposed or built since the State Bank/Santos building. In other words, is the aviation related height restriction a real issue?

Honestely i couldnt give a shit, I just knew what shuz meant.

I would prefer to densify the cbd myelf

Fair enough. I was trying to get to the facts, that's all.

I'd like to see more density in areas of the CBD too, but I'm wondering if we have to move a very conveniently located airport to achieve it. Our inner city airport is one plus we have against Sydney and Melbourne.

The southern part of the square mile looks like suburbia. lets get some height there first i think

The Dry Creek area north of the expressway as i understand is not suitable to any development what so ever, an airport would threaten wildlife habitat and a harbour would be bad for the dolphins and the fishing industry. Building homes would be unattractable as its not close to public transport and you would have the risk of salt damp, its swamp land which would sink and the Adelaide Airport is ideal where it is at the moment as its close to public transport and the city. If Adelaide is to build another airport the land at Edinburgh between West Avenue and the Gawler Central Line is owned by the government, its close to public transport, its close to the commercial hubs of Elizabeth & Salisbury, it could also be quite secure especially with the defence hub nearby.

Let's establish a list of Pros and Cons of relocating the airport to Dry Creek.

Pros
- Still within close proximity to the Adelaide CBD (as the crow flies) 12.0kms as compared to 5.8kms from existing airport terminal. For further comparision, Melbourne's Tullamarine is 18.9kms, Brisbane Airport is 13.0kms, Perth Airport 10.1kms.

Measurements calculated from centre of airport terminal, to centre of CBD. Adelaide - 400m north of Hansen Road interchange to Victoria Square. Melbourne; from T2 (International Terminal entrance) to intersection of Bourke/Elizabeth Streets. Brisbane; centre of terminal to intersection of Elizabeth/Edward Streets. Perth; from Qantas terminal dome to Hay/William Streets intersection.

- Adjacent to three high-speed travel corridors constituting of Port River Expressway, Northern Connector and South Road Superway assisting travel convienience in and out of the airport precinct.

- Adjacent to Gawler Rail Line, with sufficient land for a branch line to provide direct train services between the airport and the Adelaide Railway Station. A hypothetical route of 13.3kms, with electric trains capable of operating at 160kph would see such a journey completed in under 5 minutes, literally.

(Spur from Gawler line at Kilburn station, via watercourse 500m west of Gawler train line, grade separation at Salisbury Highway, and terminus at same reference point of terminal as above)

- Surplus land provision to accommodate a third and (maybe) fourth runway when needed in future.

- Runway alignments (and therefore flight paths) accomodating to prevailing wind conditions at Dry Creek would be directed away from the Adelaide CBD. Consequently, height restrictions would be abolished outright.

- Existing airport could continue to be operational right up until the opening date of the new one, or work in a transitional period of operation. Either way, there is no disruption to the service output of the existing airport during the construction period of the new one (as it's in a different location for starters!)

- Release of existing airport land as housing would alleviate sprawl, provide urban infill, provide potential as a TOD development with light rail corridors, release of new open space areas in the western suburbs to counteract loss of Cheltenham Racecourse. Reconnect important transport links - Richmond/West Beach Roads and Morphett Road. A developer's dream.

Cons

- Honestly, I don't know what the construction cost of such a venture would be. If Perth Airport's upgrade is $2.4b, I'd estimate $8b-$12b for a new airport alone.

- Environmental consequence. Someone mentioned bird migration and mosquito breeding grounds?

- South gets screwed over again. Anyone south of Darlington would scream bloody murder, obviously and whinge like no tomorrow.

Okay, I'll get real when I'm not so exhausted from typing. Come back to me after your analysis.

Shuz wrote:- Honestly, I don't know what the construction cost of such a venture would be. If Perth Airport's upgrade is $2.4b, I'd estimate $8b-$12b for a new airport alone.

Some context: The SA govt's entire revenue was estimated to be $13.4b for 2008-09 in the MYBR, and that was before the GFC.

Serious fantasy land Shuz.

Are you serious? Wow, learn a new thing everyday.

That's not a lot, really. And when you factor in big-budget schemes like they have recently - although I know they're spaced out over a number of years, but still...

But as you said, it is Federal land, so wouldn't the Feds cover the cost?

Shuz wrote:Let's establish a list of Pros and Cons of relocating the airport to Dry Creek.

Pros
- Still within close proximity to the Adelaide CBD (as the crow flies) 12.0kms as compared to 5.8kms from existing airport terminal. For further comparision, Melbourne's Tullamarine is 18.9kms, Brisbane Airport is 13.0kms, Perth Airport 10.1kms.

Sorry, if you're discussing the pros and cons of relocating it, more than doubling the distance to the CBD is a con. If you want to spin less than tripling the distance as a pro, you're going to have to find another alternative site to compare it with!

Also I notice Sydney Airport is conspicuously absent from your comparison!

Measurements calculated from centre of airport terminal, to centre of CBD. Adelaide - 400m north of Hansen Road interchange to Victoria Square. Melbourne; from T2 (International Terminal entrance) to intersection of Bourke/Elizabeth Streets. Brisbane; centre of terminal to intersection of Elizabeth/Edward Streets. Perth; from Qantas terminal dome to Hay/William Streets intersection.

- Adjacent to three high-speed travel corridors constituting of Port River Expressway, Northern Connector and South Road Superway assisting travel convienience in and out of the airport precinct.

That would be balanced by the con of greatly increased congestion on those corridors.

- Adjacent to Gawler Rail Line, with sufficient land for a branch line to provide direct train services between the airport and the Adelaide Railway Station. A hypothetical route of 13.3kms, with electric trains capable of operating at 160kph would see such a journey completed in under 5 minutes, literally.

No it wouldn't - there's a significant difference between average speed and maximum speed.

(Spur from Gawler line at Kilburn station, via watercourse 500m west of Gawler train line, grade separation at Salisbury Highway, and terminus at same reference point of terminal as above)

There's also the issue of train pathing - if you want to share the tracks then you have to fit in around existing services.

- Surplus land provision to accommodate a third and (maybe) fourth runway when needed in future.

Where do you imagine people would want to go? 'Tis not as if our existing runway's heavily utilized.

- Runway alignments (and therefore flight paths) accomodating to prevailing wind conditions at Dry Creek would be directed away from the Adelaide CBD. Consequently, height restrictions would be abolished outright.

...Except that most of the height restrictions are imposed by the council and have nothing to do with the airport.

- Existing airport could continue to be operational right up until the opening date of the new one, or work in a transitional period of operation. Either way, there is no disruption to the service output of the existing airport during the construction period of the new one (as it's in a different location for starters!)

As not moving the airport wouldn't disrupt the service either, and nor would moving it to somewhere completely different, that should be a neutral rather than a pro.

- Release of existing airport land as housing would alleviate sprawl, provide urban infill, provide potential as a TOD development with light rail corridors, release of new open space areas in the western suburbs to counteract loss of Cheltenham Racecourse. Reconnect important transport links - Richmond/West Beach Roads and Morphett Road. A developer's dream.

And a City developers nightmare, as the value of the land would fall.

As for reconnecting important transport links, I don't think West Beach Road could really count as important - it's really just a collector road, and doesn't serve many businesses. Morphett Road is different, but the roads N of the airport wouldn't allow it to continue further.

Cons

- Honestly, I don't know what the construction cost of such a venture would be. If Perth Airport's upgrade is $2.4b, I'd estimate $8b-$12b for a new airport alone.

Possibly - though considering the terrain, it could be more.

- Environmental consequence. Someone mentioned bird migration and mosquito breeding grounds?

Dismissing the Greenfields wetlands as mosquito breeding grounds shows you don't understand the issue at all. FWIW they were designed and constructed to various depths to ensure that they'd never completely dry out, so that fish would eat the mosquito larvae. And they're important for bird breeding as well as bird migration. And they're crucial for preventing pollution entering the Port River.

- South gets screwed over again. Anyone south of Darlington would scream bloody murder, obviously and whinge like no tomorrow.

And rightly so! But the biggest protests would probably come from the northern suburbs residents who suddenly find themselves blighted by aircraft noise.

Okay, I'll get real when I'm not so exhausted from typing. Come back to me after your analysis.

OK, do you see why it's a non starter yet?