Public reaction to Frimley Park Hospital site announcement is overwhelmingly negative, comment review suggests

Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust has announced that its proposed location for a new Frimley Park Hospital is part of the land currently occupied by Pine Ridge Golf Club, owned by local charity Frimley Fuel Allotments.

The Trust says the new hospital would require 55 acres out of the wider 265-acre Frimley Fuel Allotments site, approximately one fifth of the total land. It says the proposed location follows an “extensive site selection process” involving eighteen sites within a five-mile radius of the existing hospital. The land has not yet been purchased and the Trust says no final decision has been made.

Frimley Health says the announcement allows further technical work to begin, including assessments of traffic and transport, environmental impact, and how a new hospital would fit into the surrounding area. It has also launched a public engagement document and says public engagement and future formal consultation through the planning process will be important.

However, the public response to the announcement on social media appears to be overwhelmingly against the proposed site.

A review of the visible comments on Frimley Health’s announcement post shows a clear imbalance in sentiment. Out of approximately 185 visible numbered comments and replies reviewed, around 155 to 160 were opposed to the Pine Ridge / Frimley Fuel Allotments location. Around 5 comments were broadly supportive of the proposal or welcomed the hospital being kept nearby. The remaining 20 to 25 comments were neutral, procedural, unclear, simple tags, questions, or side discussions.

That means that, based on the visible comment thread reviewed, roughly 84% to 86% of comments were negative toward the proposed location, around 3 per cent were supportive, and around 11 to 13 per cent were neutral or unclear. If only substantive comments are counted, excluding simple name tags and side replies, the proportion opposed appears even higher.

The dominant concern raised by residents was not opposition to a new hospital. In fact, many commenters explicitly stated that they support investment in a modern replacement for Frimley Park Hospital. The objection is overwhelmingly about the chosen site.

The most common themes were traffic, road access, school safety, loss of green space, impact on wildlife, lack of public transport, and concern that alternative brownfield or industrial locations have not been transparently explained.

Several residents pointed to the existing traffic problems around Old Bisley Road, Upper Chobham Road, Chobham Road and the surrounding school routes. Many questioned how ambulances, staff, patients, visitors, delivery vehicles and construction traffic could be safely added to roads they believe are already struggling, particularly during school drop-off and pick-up times.

One commenter wrote that the area already has thousands of school children travelling to nearby schools and warned that “school run traffic” would be extremely difficult to mitigate. Another said that anyone who has driven the local roads during school hours would understand why the decision appears “baffling and incomprehensible.”

There were repeated calls for Frimley Health to publish the full list of all eighteen sites considered, the criteria used to assess them, and the reasons why each alternative was rejected. This was one of the strongest recurring demands in the thread. Residents do not appear to feel that the phrase “only viable option” is enough without the supporting evidence.

Many commenters also challenged the five-mile search radius, asking why sites such as Watchmoor Park, Blackbushe, Farnborough Gate, industrial land near Matalan, or other brownfield and commercial locations were not selected. Others questioned whether the full infrastructure costs had been properly accounted for, particularly if major road improvements, parking, utilities, drainage and public transport changes would be required.

Environmental concern was another major theme. Residents described Frimley Fuel Allotments as a valued local green space used for walking, dog walking, family time, mental health, nature and recreation. Several comments referred to woodland, wildlife, badgers, bats, birds, trees and the long-term loss of natural habitat. Many argued that destroying green space in the name of healthcare feels contradictory when access to nature is itself linked to public wellbeing.

A smaller number of comments supported the announcement. These generally welcomed the prospect of a new hospital nearby, argued that a replacement hospital is badly needed, or suggested that there is no ideal site in a heavily developed area. One supportive commenter described it as a “fantastic site” with space to build and access to the A331 and M3. Another argued that the impact may be balanced because only part of the wider landholding would be used.

There were also a number of neutral or procedural comments. Some people asked whether Bracknell residents would still be able to use the hospital, whether the hospital had already bought the land, why the hospital was moving, or where further information could be found. A few comments were simple tags or short reactions that did not clearly express a position.

It is also important to note that some comments included accusations of corruption, “backhanders” or vested interests. These were expressions of public suspicion, not evidence. They should not be treated as fact. However, the presence of those comments does show that some residents have a very low level of trust in the process and want far greater transparency.

Overall, the comment thread shows a community response that is not simply negative, but highly focused. The core message from most residents is clear: they want a new hospital, but they do not accept that Frimley Fuel Allotments is the right place for it.

The Trust has asked for respectful discussion and says it wants accurate information and public feedback. Based on this response, the public now appears to be asking for three things in return: full transparency on the site selection process, proper evidence that the local infrastructure can cope, and a serious reconsideration of brownfield or already-developed alternatives.

On the visible evidence of this comment thread, Frimley Health has not yet won public confidence for the Pine Ridge / Frimley Fuel Allotments proposal. The overwhelming balance of local reaction is against the site, not against the principle of a new hospital.

For a decision of this scale, that distinction matters.