Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report Published: What the Evidence Shows
When Frimley Health announced Pine Ridge Golf Club, including land at Frimley Fuel Allotments (FFA), as the proposed location for the new Frimley Park Hospital, Surrey Heath Conservatives called for calm, proper public engagement and rigorous scrutiny of the evidence.
The proposed location has understandably generated significant public debate and concern among local residents, particularly those living close to Frimley Fuel Allotments (FFA) and those worried about the wider impact on Surrey Heath.
When the proposed site was first announced, we said that identifying a preferred location was only the beginning of the process, not the end of it. We argued that residents deserved to understand why this site had been proposed, how alternative sites had been assessed and what the implications would be for traffic, access, the environment and local communities.
The publication of the Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report follows sustained calls for greater transparency, enabling residents to examine the evidence behind the NHS's preferred site for themselves.
Read our original analysis:
New Frimley Park Hospital: Proposed Site Announcement
The Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report has now been published, providing much greater detail about how the NHS reached its preferred site.
We encourage everyone with an interest in the future of Frimley Park Hospital and Frimley Fuel Allotments (FFA) to read the published evidence for themselves before reaching conclusions.
Read the full NHS Site Selection Report:
Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report (PDF)
Our Position on the New Frimley Park Hospital Remains Consistent
Our position has not changed because it has always been based on the available evidence rather than speculation. As more information has been published, including the Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report, we have continued to assess it objectively and update our understanding accordingly.
The publication of the Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report does not turn Surrey Heath Conservatives into supporters of development on the Frimley Fuel Allotments (FFA) site.
Nor does it remove the legitimate concerns of residents living near the proposed hospital.
The need for a replacement Frimley Park Hospital is no longer in question. The existing hospital faces significant operational constraints because of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC), increasing maintenance challenges and sustained pressure on capacity. Delivering a modern replacement hospital before the Government's 2035 deadline is therefore essential.
What the published NHS evidence does provide is a much fuller explanation of how the preferred site was selected. It deserves to be considered objectively and in its entirety, rather than through selective extracts or political interpretation.
Our position remains unchanged:
- Surrey Heath urgently needs a modern replacement hospital.
- The NHS must justify its proposed site with evidence.
- Residents' concerns must be taken seriously.
- Traffic and environmental impacts must be fully tested.
- The process must remain transparent and open to scrutiny.
- Public debate should be informed by the full evidence, not selective interpretation.
The Early Site Assessment Was Not the Final Hospital Site Decision
Much attention has focused on an early comparison of four priority sites.
In that assessment, Frimley Fuel Allotments (FFA) ranked third, scoring 30 points. Two unidentified sites scored 40 and 37 points.
Those figures are correct and deserve attention. FFA also ranked poorly at that stage for ecology and air quality and only third for transport.
However, the Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report makes clear that this was not the final decision. It was an intermediate technical assessment used to determine which sites should proceed to more detailed legal, planning, design and land ownership investigations.
Presenting that one table on page 45 of the report as the entire decision-making process creates a misleading picture.
Why Other Hospital Sites Were Rejected
The published Site Selection Report explains that the two sites initially ranked above Frimley Fuel Allotments were later rejected because of significant legal, planning, ownership and design constraints.
One was affected by aviation safeguarding, complex ownership, restricted developable space, long leases and difficulties meeting the national Hospital 2.0 design requirements.
The other was affected by Green Belt policy, greater impacts on patient travel and the eventual withdrawal of the landowner from the process.
These issues were identified during later stages of due diligence and explain why the original technical ranking did not determine the final outcome.
How the NHS Weighted the Site Selection Criteria
The NHS Site Selection Report also publishes the weighting applied to the assessment.
The highest weightings were given to programme delivery, hospital design, transport and proximity to the existing hospital.
Residents may reasonably debate whether different factors should have carried greater weight. That is entirely legitimate.
Applying those published weightings did not move Frimley Fuel Allotments (FFA) from third to first place. The higher-ranked sites were removed only after more detailed investigation exposed significant delivery risks.
Why Pine Ridge Golf Club Became the Preferred Site
One of the most significant parts of the Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report is the later reassessment of the wider shortlist.
Previously rejected sites, including the existing hospital, Cody Technology Park and other alternatives, were reconsidered alongside FFA.
Following that wider review, Pine Ridge Golf Club, including land at Frimley Fuel Allotments (FFA), ranked first in both the weighted and unweighted assessments.
The published NHS evidence also describes sensitivity testing using different assumptions and alternative weighting models. Under those tests, the preferred site continued to rank highest.
That does not prove every judgement was correct, but it does demonstrate that the decision was based on a much broader assessment than the early four-site comparison alone.
The New Hospital Is Part of a Wider Transformation
The programme is about more than replacing an ageing hospital building. It also reflects wider changes in how healthcare is delivered across the Frimley Health area.
The new hospital is intended to focus on emergency, acute and specialist services, including A&E, maternity, paediatrics and complex care. At the same time, more outpatient appointments, diagnostics, planned care and community services will continue to be provided closer to home across existing sites, helping improve access and reduce unnecessary travel for many patients.
Traffic, Environmental and Planning Questions Still Need Answers
The Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report answers important questions about the site-selection process. It does not answer every question about developing the proposed site.
The NHS has confirmed that detailed transport modelling, ecological surveys, ground investigations and other technical studies will now be undertaken as the project moves into its next phase. Those studies will form an important part of the planning process and will help determine whether the proposed site can be developed successfully.
Traffic remains one of the biggest concerns for local residents. The NHS must demonstrate how surrounding roads, emergency access, parking, public transport and construction traffic can be managed successfully.
Environmental issues also remain critical. Although the proposed hospital footprint avoids the Special Protection Area, its buffer zone and designated SANG land, the Environmental Impact Assessment has not yet been completed.
Residents are entitled to expect robust evidence on woodland, biodiversity, air quality, drainage and wider environmental impacts before any planning application is determined.
What the Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report Does and Does Not Prove
The published Site Selection Report provides a far more detailed explanation of how Frimley Fuel Allotments (FFA) emerged as the preferred location than was previously available.
It does not support simplistic claims that no proper assessment took place or that the early technical ranking was simply ignored.
Equally, it does not establish that planning permission should automatically follow or that every concern about traffic, infrastructure and the environment has been resolved.
Those important tests still lie ahead.
Our View: Evidence Must Come Before Politics
The publication of the Frimley Park Hospital Site Selection Report is an important step towards greater transparency. It explains much more clearly how the NHS reached its preferred site than was previously available, while also highlighting the significant work still required on transport, environmental mitigation and planning.
As the project moves into the next phase, the NHS should maintain meaningful and continuous engagement with residents, businesses and community organisations. Consultation should not be viewed as a single event but as an ongoing conversation as further evidence becomes available and the planning process progresses.
Surrey Heath Conservatives will continue to examine the evidence objectively, challenge where challenge is justified and support decisions that are demonstrably in the best interests of patients and our community. Residents deserve nothing less.
This approach is entirely consistent with the position we set out when the proposed site was first announced. We support the urgent delivery of a modern replacement hospital, but we also believe that major decisions affecting Surrey Heath must be supported by evidence, tested through proper public scrutiny and subject to a robust planning process. That remains our position today.
