Well, while it's hard to transport a 130 meter long windmill blade on a street... the 60 tons of water you'd need to replace it as ballast weight, that's two semi trucks worth. Easy to get to even the most remote sites, you need heavy machinery (and thus, roads) there anyway to build a foundation capable of supporting a 200m high tower.
Fully landing the craft and anchoring it flat before un/loading limits how efficiently it can work to move cargo, especially in all the situations where a zeppelin/blimp is compelling because there's a lack of infrastructure.
Conceptually, you don't need to fully land the craft. If you lower the payload by cable, those cables are your anchor line. Then you adjust buoyancy until you're no longer straining against the cables, cut anchor, and float away.
you don't need to vent it if you can compress it. 1 cubic meter of helium replaced with 1 cubic meter of air raises the weight of the craft by ~1.5 kg. That means we need to be able to reduce our helium volume by 50,000 m^3. If (optimistically) we can pressurize the helium to 2 atmospheres, then we only need a 100,000 m^3 envelope. Which is huge, but half the size of the Hindenburg. Realistically, we'd probably get worse compression than that, but it's within an order of magnitude of feasible.
> If (optimistically) we can pressurize the helium to 2 atmospheres
It's been a long time since my physics classes, but wouldn't the require 4864 megajoules of energy [0] while raising the temperature of the gas from something like 20C -> 113C?
Spreading that energy-use over 15 minutes, maybe 5 megawatts dedicated to compression.
Conceptually, since the airship is tethered to the ground during that compression, the power could be sourced from a ground tether as well. The problem would be the pressure vessel, which is why something like a 200,000 m3 1 atm helium going to 150,000 m3 1.33 atm would be more reasonable.
