Safe Access for residents to Hemel Hempstead Station
191 Comments
G
Graeme Patrick
2 months ago
We need to know how the existing route can be less safe than the proposed new one
N
Neil Burton
2 months ago
I oppose the closure as it is far safer and we have paid to use this route. I don’t believe the breach of contract is lawful either.
G
George Ball
2 months ago
This gate significantly improves my quality of life
P
Pauline Hughes
2 months ago
Safer access without crossing over the A41 twice and narrow footpath. Risk of getting splashed with water after raining from traffic in road flooding. got that a lot when commuted before had back door access.
S
Sacha Roberts
2 months ago
Access to station for commuting and will be very dangerous to have to cross that road twice to get to the station
S
Supporter
2 months ago
Safety for local & elderly residents
M
Mark Stephens
2 months ago
Ease safe access, avoidance of driving using car
Please advise details of the safety concerns whose safety
Please explain the issue thankyou
K
Kelly Chqpman
2 months ago
Need access to commute into London, no consultation provided before decision made to how it will affect people who use this.
N
Norman Cook
2 months ago
This action is unfortunately due to woke health and safety decision working against the wishes of users.
J
Joanne Cash
2 months ago
The alternative suggested route is unsafe & time consuming (taking longer than the suggested 9mins with traffic)
C
Colim Willetts
2 months ago
Access to local residents
D
D Jones
2 months ago
It is essential for all the people who live "on the wrong side of the tracks".
M
Melanie English
2 months ago
The alternative route to the station is unsafe for our children to walk.
M
Michael Thirkettle
2 months ago
With a disabled son and mobility issues the additional walk down an alley and then under the main road bridge is dangerous, poor surface and could lead to injury. Especially walking under the bridge with traffic proximity. If he falls (which he often does) he could now fall into traffic which we would hold the rail company liable. This rear access is a major safety feature for getting to the station for all residents and users from the south side of London Road. The same applies for the elderly
P
Philip Hughes
2 months ago
Closing the rear entrance to the station is a nightmare for locals.
It basically means driving to the station or getting a taxi instead of a short walk.
Ridiculous!
P
PeaShooter Harding
2 months ago
For work
S
Supporter
2 months ago
Safety and access reasons. Alternative very dangerous.
L
Layla Gemmell
2 months ago
Limiting access without consultation to those using it. What are the reasons for closure, how many people affected, is the proposed route actually safer?
S
Stuart Child
2 months ago
We are supposed to be encouraging more use of public transport, not making as difficult as possible to access it.
We need to know how the existing route can be less safe than the proposed new one
I oppose the closure as it is far safer and we have paid to use this route. I don’t believe the breach of contract is lawful either.
This gate significantly improves my quality of life
Safer access without crossing over the A41 twice and narrow footpath. Risk of getting splashed with water after raining from traffic in road flooding. got that a lot when commuted before had back door access.
Access to station for commuting and will be very dangerous to have to cross that road twice to get to the station
Safety for local & elderly residents
Ease safe access, avoidance of driving using car Please advise details of the safety concerns whose safety Please explain the issue thankyou
Need access to commute into London, no consultation provided before decision made to how it will affect people who use this.
This action is unfortunately due to woke health and safety decision working against the wishes of users.
The alternative suggested route is unsafe & time consuming (taking longer than the suggested 9mins with traffic)
Access to local residents
It is essential for all the people who live "on the wrong side of the tracks".
The alternative route to the station is unsafe for our children to walk.
With a disabled son and mobility issues the additional walk down an alley and then under the main road bridge is dangerous, poor surface and could lead to injury. Especially walking under the bridge with traffic proximity. If he falls (which he often does) he could now fall into traffic which we would hold the rail company liable. This rear access is a major safety feature for getting to the station for all residents and users from the south side of London Road. The same applies for the elderly
Closing the rear entrance to the station is a nightmare for locals. It basically means driving to the station or getting a taxi instead of a short walk. Ridiculous!
For work
Safety and access reasons. Alternative very dangerous.
Limiting access without consultation to those using it. What are the reasons for closure, how many people affected, is the proposed route actually safer?
We are supposed to be encouraging more use of public transport, not making as difficult as possible to access it.
Closing the south side makes no sense.