Can anyone please enlighten me?
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Does (Myall Lakes MP) Stephen Bromhead's petition for extra lanes or second crossing between Forster and Tuncurry mean just that and therefore not allow for a broader discussion on the merits of alternative proposals which may be more appropriate for the long-term development of our area?
We all agree that the issue of traffic volumes through Tuncurry/Forster needs to be properly planned and addressed.
As a resident living on Manning Street, Tuncurry, I can't imagine how much worse the situation would become if access to the bridge or bridges is duplicated, thus increasing traffic volumes and forever forcing residents of Forster and areas south to travel through Forster and Tuncurry in order to reach any location north of Nabiac.
I would personally prefer to support a proposal that reduced rather than increased traffic utilising Manning and Head Streets.
There is an alternative to the above of course, and that is to propose another route into and out of Forster with direct western access to the Pacific Highway rather than maintain the current access only from the north and to the lesser extent the south.
My question therefore is: Should those that would rather support a proposal to fund the construction of an alternative route directly into Forster rather than a four lane duplication of the existing access, sign Mr Bromhead's petition?