Safe Access for residents to Hemel Hempstead Station

Jonathan Barnes

This is nuts. In what universe is it safer to walk down that incredibly narrow path with traffic rushing past you. No reasonable person could come to that conclusion in a safety review

Hannah Prince

We bought the house with the use of the gate in mind and it’s a very dark and dangerous walk back to Roughdown Ave from the train station in the winter nights.

Tatiana Mezzone

My children and my husband commute to London every day . The gate is vital for safe passage especially in winter when it’s dark , cold and wet .

Pru Patel

I use this access on a regular basis.

Joshua Barnett

Local resident on roughdown villas road, use this access 6/7 days a week, alternative route note deemed a sensible solution.

Christine Smith

It keeps us safe at night.

james Mills-Webb

the proposed walking route to access the station is impossible and the actual route requires pedestrians to cross a busy road twice within a hundred metres or so and is dangerous. there is not a shred of evidence that the current access has led to fare evasion. other nearby stations have open access. risk of fare evasion can be managed without exposing customers to risk and inconvenience. they need to think again.

Lisa Adde

This is the most unsafe alternative route to walk. There is no reason as to why this is being stopped. This has been used for years. As a women who uses this I strongly object to this

Trevor Acors

The decision to close the rear entrance is a danger to residents. It was reviewed 25 years ago by residents in consultation with train management and local MP. Nothing has changed.

Lesley Chance

Firstly, was there any public consultation and secondly the ‘proposed’ route is substantially more dangerous including no path and definitely more dangerous for women and girls. This is a lazy and ill thought out proposal and potentially puts people at greater risk.

Emma Rees

Closing this long-standing access point without prior public consultation or a transparent risk assessment is deeply concerning. The alternative route introduces significant safety risks, including unlit woodland paths, busy road crossings, and an extremely narrow footpath under the railway bridge, while increasing traffic congestion at the main station entrance. The existing access must remain open pending a proper review.

Amanda Simmons

I object to the closure of the rear gate at Hemel Hempstead station because this access has been available to local residents for decades. I have never heard of any safety issues related to it. The proposed alternative route would be far more dangerous. Why has there been no consultation? Why have the findings of the safety review not been published? Why have local residents deliberately been kept in the dark about this.

Neil Hall

I use the gate regularly and made it a condition of my house sale that I got a pass from the previous resident. I wanted my 3 children to be able to get on the train without the need for crossing busy roads. To think if there are now accidents involving people and cars where there used to be a simple effective solution that’s been taken away

Mark Hampton

Need for safe passage to the station. Alternative route is dangerous, places with no pavement and crossing busy roads.

Jane Merivale

I am 70 as is my wife - we both use the back station entrance to go to work in London and work in Watford . The alternative suggested route is dangerous and reluctantly we would drive which is environmentally harmful.

Charlotte Bailey

This rear access allows me, a young female, to feel safe on my travel home from work. There are times when i arrive back late at night or in the early hours and I do not feel safe walking through a dark alleyway alone like this is suggesting. Shutting the rear access also means that my travel time will have to be almost doubled, as someone with already busy days, that is not something I can afford.

Mrs M Monem

This is not a safe route especially for females in the dark evenings and the narrow footpath is dangerous as well

Caroline Tuohy

Anyone who thinks that sending people across a busy road twice and along both a narrow pavement and then a woodland footpath is safer than simply leaving the station via a back gate clearly needs to try this out themselves alone at night during the winter months- it seems an incredibly stupid and reckless thing to ask people to do. The gate is only accessible by pass holders already, why can't this remain as is - it's never been an issue previously

Will Atkins

I am a retired person who finds it dangerous walking under the railway bridge which forms part of the alternative route proposed.

C Smith

The alternative route under the bridge presents high risk and danger for all who use it and very unsafe for many. The actual risk of that makes any perceived risk faced by users of the rear access so insignificant and should be disregarded.