Safe Access for residents to Hemel Hempstead Station

Stuart Liddle

The suggested alternative route is unsafe: no lighting down path, unsuitable for pushchairs, busy major road to cross twice, narrow footpath under bridge. This route is dangerous and people will get hurt at some point.

Lauren Whiteman

Closing the back entrance to Hemel station isn’t just inconvenient — it’s unsafe. Without it, we’re forced onto a poorly lit underpass and an isolated path just to reach the main road, then through a tunnel with a dangerously narrow or non‑existent pavement where traffic passes inches away from pedestrians. There has been no consultation which is completely unfair.

Kelly Ravenscroft

Safe, direct and quick access to the train station for residents. Used daily for the work commute.

Natalie H

I strongly oppose the proposal to close the rear gate. I fail to see how the proposed alternative route is genuinely considered safer. If there is evidence to support this, it certainly has not been shared with those that will be most affected. The decision feels as though it’s been made from behind a desk, without proper understanding of how passengers actually use the station every day. If safety is the justification, the decision makers should publish the evidence and risk assessment.

Paul Whiteman

The rear access is very important to rail users and those transmitting through. There had been no consultation with the wider community and I would like to know what safety issues have been found. The rear access had been in place for a significant period of time - with no issues I know of. I’m going to ask our local councillor Hugo Hardy to take this up.

Anne Werbicki

I need this back entrance for weekly access to rail station using a SAFE route. Alternative route is not safe and takes much longer which means I would have to use my car to get to the station. Others on my road would have to do the same, adding to the already congested traffic in the area.

Ptole Walters

Crossing the main road and walking along a very narrow pavement to get to the front of the station presents a significant danger to passengers which is currently avoided by using the back of the station .

Tania Steven-Jennings

We use the gate on a daily basis for London commute

Ashfia Tough

The road is too dangerous to cross without a pass

Joan Higham

What specific safety concerns have resulted in the decision to permanently close the gate? Why is permanent closure considered the only solution? Were alternative measures considered, such as improved fencing, CCTV, enhanced lighting, repairs or revised access controls? Was an Equality Impact Assessment undertaken to consider the effect on disabled passengers, parents with young children, elderly residents and those who rely on walking and public transport? What consultation with residents?

Alfred Smith

The alternative route is not suitable for travel, in the winter months it is unstable and slippery, creating great risk for elderly people and children and many more demographics. The path has no streetlights during the winter, combined with the condition of the path, this is very dangerous. There has been no incidents in the last 35 years so unsure why it is suddenly a problem. Closing the gate permanently could lead to people jumping over the fence which is a great risk or damaging property