Road traffic congestion into Melbourne Airport

[Melburnian1]

Recently on a non school holiday Sunday morning I was surprised to see traffic banked up approaching MEL airport. It was almost back to Mickleham Road on the Tullamarine Freeway.

I had thought that this was only a problem on Monday morning (and from what a taxi driver told me, Tuesday morning) and Friday arvo.

How do AFF members find this - is it unusual to be delayed approaching teh airport by road, or is it relatively common during early morning on some weekdays and perhaps (to my surprise) on weekends? Is it affecting the SkyBuses or do they just use an emergency or parking lane to zip past motorists?

What about those who park at the airport - are you sometimes having to park in the far reaches of the long term car park and does the shuttle bus then take a while to get to the T3, T2 and T1?

Does any of this result in you having an opinion about the need or not for a railway to Melbourne Airport or high speed trains between MEL, SYD and BNE, or are you just so used to your car that an eventual railway just isn't important for you or other Melburnians or visitors?

 

[nlagalle]

I catch a flight every week and i can say the traffic is bad every morning i go at the moment. I usually fly out on a Wednesday and that can be as bad a Monday.

If i am travelling for work I would not be catching a train out there from home. Personal travel i would like a rail link.

 

[nlagalle]

I should also add they are doing road works at the off ramp for the airport which is having an impact.

 

[opusman]

When traffic's really bad the SkyBus usually comes off the freeway early and uses Melrose Drive.

 

[Melburnian1]

nlagalle, when you say the 'traffic is bad', how many minutes are you delayed compared with your expectation? Just five minutes, 15 or worse? I am trying to quantify the effect of any delays.

opusman, I too have observed SkyBus diverting via Melrose Drive, typically meaning that the trip from Southern Cross takes about 26 to 28 minutes not 20.

In the other direction, my slowest trip on a SkyBus took longer than 45 minutes during a morning weekday peak hour. However I know two others who have recorded jo9urney times into Melbourne city of more than 50 minutes on SkyBus, but no one I know claims that it's taken an hour or more.

 

[VHOEJ]

Sounds like Sydney on the weekends - the traffic going into the INTL terminal between 6am and about 10am backs up so badly in both directions it can add an extra 30 minutes to your trip (to go about 1km).

But at least if there are roadworks, there is at least a plausiable explanation and it won't go on forever.

 

[ReLoad]

Today's traffic jam went back to essendon airport. Took about 20 mins from there to get to the terminal.

Lots of people using the emergency lanes as extra lanes, not cool.

 

[DGW]

Today's traffic jam went back to essendon airport. Took about 20 mins from there to get to the terminal.

I'm finding that traffic back to Essendon is the norm now on Monday mornings. I used to be able to leave Doncaster/Templestowe at 0520 and be parked in the multi level long term car park by about 0555 but there's little chance of doing that on a Monday now, hence I now try to start my trips out of Melbourne on a Tuesday to ease the pain slightly.

 

[drewbles]

When traffic's really bad the SkyBus usually comes off the freeway early and uses Melrose Drive.

Was about to say I do this sometimes. The back entrance to the airport flows well, but as soon as you're past the long term car park and you're turning right on the round-about, the left turn into the airport itself can be terrible with the give way sign and a backlog of people trying to get up the ramp.

A couple of years ago I was in a mad dash on a Sunday evening to catch a flight. The traffic jam was back to Essendon airport pretty much as others have mentioned.

There was an accident at the traffic lights at the base of the ramp up to the terminal, and it was effectively blocked. People were running with luggage in tow down the side of the freeway in an attempt to make their flights (I managed to make mine; just!).

 

[lovestotravel]

Lots of people using the emergency lanes as extra lanes, not cool.

Yep very not cool!

That being said they should make the emergency lanes actual road/travel lanes as for 99% of the time they would be used

As for traffic congestion it is getting worse and worse and I don't see how the roadworks will really change much, you still have the same number of cars trying to drop people off at the terminal.

 

[docjames]

I'd have thought that given the sizeable verges, the "emergency" lane could be used as traffic flow by making it a proper lane, and installing overhead lane guidance (eg. Westgate, Ring Road, Tunnels etc) and then close that lane in the event of an accident / emergency. Given the amount of traffic to from the airport, the cost (lane re-alignment, overhead gantrys, monitoring etc) would be worth it.


Or they could just do what every other sensible city in the world does, and have rail-based transport from CBD to airport.

 

[ReLoad]

I'd have thought that given the sizeable verges, the "emergency" lane could be used as traffic flow by making it a proper lane, and installing overhead lane guidance (eg. Westgate, Ring Road, Tunnels etc) and then close that lane in the event of an accident / emergency. Given the amount of traffic to from the airport, the cost (lane re-alignment, overhead gantrys, monitoring etc) would be worth it.


Or they could just do what every other sensible city in the world does, and have rail-based transport from CBD to airport.

Can you please stop bringing logic into the discussion. Common sense clearly doesn't apply when it comes to public transport in Victoria.

 

[docjames]

Can you please stop bringing logic into the discussion. Common sense clearly doesn't apply when it comes to public transport in Victoria.

Or anything the government is involved in really....

Since the rail solution isn't going to happen for a long time, I think campaigning for active lane management will maximize the lane use of existing roads at a reasonable cost.

 

[EvanC]

Was about to say I do this sometimes. The back entrance to the airport flows well, but as soon as you're past the long term car park and you're turning right on the round-about, the left turn into the airport itself can be terrible with the give way sign and a backlog of people trying to get up the ramp.

If you're getting dropped off and don't mind the walk, it can often be better to go down APAC Drive, Francis Briggs Road, and Service Road to T4, then walk up to the main terminals from there (not inconvenient if flying VA).

 

[Melburnian1]

In a 2010 thread, one AFF contributor suggested that he or she kept on driving past Tulla Airport towards Sunbury, did a U turn at Oaklands Road and was at QF parking in next to no time. Another mentioned using Keilor Park Drive.

If passenger numbers at the airport keep increasing - some years it might be six per cent, other years down to one or two per cent - is it fair comment that no road based solution is going to solve the problem?

Isn't the real problem at the multiple entry points into Melbourne Airport, because when vehicles come off the Tulla Freeway it's mandatory to reduce speed (unless of course there was already congestion on the Freeway)?

The airport has introduced an extra entry point, but this isn't really solving the problem. It's also going to build a further elevated road above the semi-circular departures level existing road, but again, that seems a band aid solution.

The airlines are likely to still have the same peak periods, so spreading arrivals and departures a bit more is no answer.

 

[tuapekastar]

In a 2010 thread, one AFF contributor suggested that he or she kept on driving past Tulla Airport towards Sunbury, did a U turn at Oaklands Road and was at QF parking in next to no time. Another mentioned using Keilor Park Drive.

.

I meant to post this morning. Driving to Sunbury up the Tulla this morning around 0815 and the traffic was extremely slow from about 1 km from the main airport turnoff and I had similar thoughts re doing a u turn past the airport and entering via the Sunbury side (had I actually been going to the airport).

I was actually gobsmacked at how much traffic there was for early Sunday.

 

[nlagalle]

In a 2010 thread, one AFF contributor suggested that he or she kept on driving past Tulla Airport towards Sunbury, did a U turn at Oaklands Road and was at QF parking in next to no time. Another mentioned using Keilor Park Drive.

If passenger numbers at the airport keep increasing - some years it might be six per cent, other years down to one or two per cent - is it fair comment that no road based solution is going to solve the problem?

Isn't the real problem at the multiple entry points into Melbourne Airport, because when vehicles come off the Tulla Freeway it's mandatory to reduce speed (unless of course there was already congestion on the Freeway)?

The airport has introduced an extra entry point, but this isn't really solving the problem. It's also going to build a further elevated road above the semi-circular departures level existing road, but again, that seems a band aid solution.

The airlines are likely to still have the same peak periods, so spreading arrivals and departures a bit more is no answer.

There are already plans to have a better Arrivals drop off.

Personally if they got rid of the pedestrian crossings that would go a long way to improve it. That is a huge stopper.

 

[adam15]

The effective removal of the emergency lane will result in a compulsory reduction in speed limit to 80kms per hour such as occurred to the south eastern arterial with the arrival of citylink. All this will do is buy some time. As I experienced on my last trip: 1 car and a Taxi can currently block probably 80% of passUltimately I think a rail link should be funded primarily by Melbourne airport corporation as it will be the only one to commercially benefit form improved accessibility. But why why would they do this when they make so much from parking? The answer I think is that competition is the only way we will see this problem resolved satisfactorily and Avalon is the only current candidate.

 

[nlagalle]

The effective removal of the emergency lane will result in a compulsory reduction in speed limit to 80kms per hour such as occurred to the south eastern arterial with the arrival of citylink. All this will do is buy some time. As I experienced on my last trip: 1 car and a Taxi can currently block probably 80% of passUltimately I think a rail link should be funded primarily by Melbourne airport corporation as it will be the only one to commercially benefit form improved accessibility. But why why would they do this when they make so much from parking? The answer I think is that competition is the only way we will see this problem resolved satisfactorily and Avalon is the only current candidate.

The rail link will only partially solve the problem. When I am traveling for work (90% of my travels lately) I will never take public transport to the airport, ever. Many people are the same. And if you look at the traffic when I arrive at the airport, it's all the same, business travelers. Better throughput around the airport will help. Btw the 80km limit won't have any effect, and wasn't put there for that reason.

 

[Melburnian1]

nlagalle, you are correct in that 'many people will never take public transport to the airport, ever.'

However, if I recall correctly, when the Sydney Airport rail link was built, it started very slowly, with perhaps five per cent of passengers and staff overall using it, or even below.

It then built up to a 10 per cent share, and is now at either 16 or 20 per cent depending on who you believe.

If 15 to 20 per cent of Melbourne Airport's passengers and say five per cent of its staff used a rail line (bearing in mind that not all staff work at the airport: they may be in import/ export processing some considerable distance from the passenger terminals), this would make a huge difference.

So depending on how often trains ran and their operating hours, you might well be surprised at what a positive difference a rail line would make.

The way things are going, if it isn't built, the airport may be rather hard to get into and out of in five years' time for more of each day than is presently the case.