Proposed location

Through the work outlined above, a range of potential locations for a new Frimley Park Hospital were explored. A key principle was to remain within five miles of the existing hospital, helping to maintain local access for patients, staff and communities. Each site was assessed against a consistent set of clinical, technical, operational and delivery criteria.

As a result of this work, one site was identified as viable, that can feasibly deliver a modern acute hospital as set out in our criteria, and meet the national timeframes to replace existing NHS hospitals that have RAAC.

In particular, it:

• is close to the existing Frimley Park Hospital, helping to reduce disruption if services were to move there
• provides sufficient space and a suitable layout to support modern Hospital 2.0 design, including efficient services and smooth patient movement
• has fewer physical, planning and infrastructure constraints than other options, with access to utilities and no identified public rights of way
• supports a more straightforward and lower-risk construction approach to building on the existing site.
• offers opportunities to incorporate design features that support patient recovery and staff wellbeing, including access to green space

Importantly, the site also provides a realistic opportunity to deliver a new hospital within programme requirements and national timescales, including the need to replace RAAC-affected buildings.

The Trust has followed a rigorous, structured and fully compliant site selection process in line with HM Treasury Green Book requirements, Cabinet Office guidance and national NHS estate code guidance. Our process has been discussed widely with the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (JHOSC) for the new Frimley Park Hospital, and has also been independently reviewed and assured by the national New Hospital Programme.

We have engaged with local MPs, councillors, planning authorities and system partners throughout this process and will continue to do so as our proposal progresses.

Identifying a proposed location does not mean decisions are final. The Trust has not purchased the land, and an agreement is in place to allow further technical work and engagement to take place. Further planning assessment, regulatory approvals and public engagement are still required, and your feedback will help shape how plans continue to develop.

Every site was assessed against the same set of criteria. To be considered viable, a site had to meet all of the following:

• Size and capacity: 

  • large enough to accommodate a modern acute hospital built to Hospital 2.0 standards, with room to adapt as needs change

• Availability: 

  • able to be acquired within the timescales the programme requires, without reliance on lengthy or uncertain processes

• Deliverability: 

  • capable of being built without construction risks or constraints that would prevent delivery within national timescales

• Location and access: 

  • within five miles of the existing Frimley Park Hospital, with suitable transport access

• Environmental and planning feasibility: 

  • free from environmental, heritage or planning constraints that could not be reasonably mitigated

• Timescales: 

  • able to be delivered ahead of the national requirement to remove RAAC from hospital buildings by 2035 (originally 2030, before the 2025 Mott MacDonald report)

• Value for money: 

  • deliverable at a cost that represents value for the public purse, in line with HM Treasury Green Book requirements

These criteria were informed by what people told us during our early engagement in 2023 and 2024, alongside clinical advice, technical assessment and planning considerations. 

Several sites were assessed in the vicinity of junction 4 of the M3, including sites in Hart, Rushmoor and Surrey Heath.

Two of these sites were directly within the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA) and were ruled out because the environmental impacts could not be suitably mitigated.

Another site did not have a willing seller and was, in any event, too small for a new hospital.

A number of sites were identified in the vicinity of Farnborough Airport, all within Rushmoor Borough.

An aviation safeguarding study was commissioned to understand the impact of development on the airport's protected airspace.

The study concluded that a new hospital in this area would not be feasible, as it would create unacceptable impacts on airspace and airport operations.

In addition to these aviation constraints, all of these sites had their own technical and deliverability challenges.

The option of rebuilding on or next to the existing Frimley Park Hospital site relied on the use of neighbouring Ministry of Defence land for construction and logistical access, over a period of around seven years.

This land includes a Grade II listed building and a registered park and garden, both of which are designated heritage assets.

Development in this area would be likely to have a significant impact on these heritage assets, both during construction and in the long term.

While detailed heritage impact assessment work was not progressed, early discussions and planning considerations indicated that this approach would be unlikely to be supported by the local planning authority, given the scale of impact.

The Ministry of Defence also confirmed that it had no sites available.

A number of other sites were assessed but cannot be named publicly, as their owners entered the process under a non-disclosure agreement. While the Trust is not able to disclose their locations, it is able to set out why each was found not to be a viable option for a new hospital:

One site had the potential to deliver a strong design solution but was located within the designated Green Belt, meaning any development would have required a ‘very special circumstances’ planning case. Of the shortlisted sites it lay furthest from the existing Frimley Park Hospital, and analysis showed it would have had the greatest impact on how patients, particularly the highest users of acute services, would access care. The landowner was also only willing to sell a substantially larger parcel than the hospital required, raising significant value-for-money considerations, and they ultimately chose to withdraw the site from the process.

Another site had a developable area below that needed for a new hospital and was further constrained by flood-risk areas and the need for significant utility diversions. The land was held under fragmented ownership, with parts of the site outside the seller's control and a number of existing tenancies with several years left to run. As a result, the site could not be assembled and delivered within the required timescales.

A third site scored well against several technical measures but was a comparatively confined site held across multiple ownerships and a large number of long-term leases, making land assembly highly complex. External operational safeguarding requirements also imposed height and development restrictions which, combined with the limited developable area, meant a hospital design compliant with the programme's standards could not be accommodated.