Blairgowrie Recreation Centre - Delay
Perth and Kinross Council · 17 September 2025
Back to Scrutiny and Performance Committee — 17 September 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Our vision is a Perth and Kinross where everyone can live life well, free from poverty and inequality ___________________________________________________________________ Committee or Board: Scrutiny & Performance Date of Meeting: 17 September 2025 Report Title: Blairgowrie Recreation Centre - Delay Report Number: 25/231 Report Author: Stephen Crawford & Robert Meiklejohn Organisational Lead: Stephen Crawford, Strategic Lead – Property Services 1. Purpose 1.1 The purpose of this report is to: (a) provide an overview of the construction phase of the new Blairgowrie Recreation Centre and in particular to provide the Committee with a detailed explanation for the 34 week delay in certifying practical completion; (b) identify any learning which could inform our approach to quality assurance and the management of future construction projects 1.2 Sections 1. Purpose 2. Recommendations 3. Background/Context 4. Main Issues 5. Conclusion 2. Recommendations It is recommended that the Scrutiny and Performance Committee: 2.1 Scrutinises and comments on the content of the report. 2.2 Notes the measures that were put in place to manage construction quality and quality control; and 2.3 Takes assurance that the building is fit for purpose at practical completion.
Page 2
3. Background/Context 3.1 Project overview 3.1.1 The £36 million Blairgowrie Recreation Centre has been a complex construction projects by its very nature. Building a swimming pool is always challenging and this was also only the second wet leisure centre in the UK to be designed and built to Passivhaus standards. 3.1.2 The project, is a tandem build multi sports facility including wet and dry facilities and external synthetic pitches to increase the internal facilities and leisure / sports offering to Blairgowrie High School and the local community. The building is designed to Passivhaus standards and as part of this standard, quality control on site was/is paramount. Phase 1 commenced on site in May 2023 and the anticipated date for practical completion was late 2024. 3.1.3 The project is being delivered through the Hub East Central Scotland (Hub) delivery framework with Main Tier 1 Contractor: BAM Construction (BAM). Both Hub and BAM have delivered numerous projects across East Central Scotland for the public sector, and it was the same BAM Construction project team that delivered the recent and highly acclaimed Perth Museum Project. 3.1.4 This complex and somewhat novel project (due to the Passivhaus design) has tendered supply chains to deliver best value in the appropriate design and construction services and where possible maximise “social value” in local delivery. 3.2 Project Programme and Delay 3.2.1 The original contract programme for the Blairgowrie Recreation Centre project scheduled Practical Completion (“PC”) for 16 December 2024. 3.2.2 PC marks the formal point at which the works are considered substantially complete and suitable for occupation or use; this may exclude completion of any specialist fit out being completed and remedying of minor defects (known as “snags”/”snagging”) At this stage: • The contractor hands over the site to the client • Responsibility for insurance and maintenance typically transfers • The defects liability period begins • Financial final account processes and retention release mechanisms are triggered 3.2.3 Up until November 2024, the project was progressing in line with the agreed schedule as reported to Committee/ Council in updates. 3.2.4 From November 2024 there were a series of both consequential and non- consequential events which delayed the programme. These are detailed in the Section 4 of this report.
Page 3
3.2.5 As a result of the disruption and the necessary remedial works, PC was ultimately achieved on 11 August 2025, representing a 34-week delay to the original programme. During this delay the contractor continued to complete remedial works / snagging and additional works to the entire building. 3.2.6 This report focuses on the swimming pool only as it is the material reason for the delay in achieving Phase 1 PC. 3.3 Quality Control Processes and Measures 3.3.1 In a construction project such as this, Property Services are the “Intelligent Client”. As Intelligent Client they have the in-house responsibility for the management and delivery of the project. The Cole Report 2017 (the independent inquiry into the construction of Edinburgh schools) made many recommendations for the construction sector to address construction quality. As the intelligent Client, Property Services within PKC have taken many of the lessons learned from this report to shape their approach which is focussed on ensuring compliance and delivering high quality facilities. 3.3.2 To ensure the standards of quality throughout the project, PKC Property Services have established project delivery processes that closely monitor and manage project design through to construction on site. This comprises PKC technical resources managing the design process and when on site, a clerk of works for each technical discipline monitoring construction. This robust approach has delivered a marked improvement on completed project facilities over the last 10 years. 3.3.3 In addition, Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) representatives following the success of the Riverside PS build, used the Blairgowrie Recreation project to evidence nationally PKC’s quality control processes as part of ongoing Construction Quality Improvement Collaborative (CQIC). During construction up until November 2024 testing of installations and plant as installed was ongoing and met quality standards. 3.3.4 Given the lack of in-house specialist knowledge in relation to the design and construction of swimming pools, Devin Consulting were appointed by Hub and PKC to provide specialist pool design appraisal and quality oversight on the pool element of the project. 3.4 Pool Design Specialist 3.4.1 Devin Consulting played a dual role, acting as both pool specialists and external reviewers of specialist sub-contractors during construction. Their involvement included: • Design appraisal of the pool systems • Oversight of installation quality • Participation in regular progress and technical meetings • Coordination of dedicated Quality Control meetings throughout the build process
Page 4
3.5 Scope of Swimming Pool Works 3.5.1 The scope of works for the pool facility included the design and installation of a 25-metre, six-lane swimming pool. The solution proposed by the contractor and design team featured: • A Myrtha tank system with a PVC liner within a stainless steel tank, housed within a concrete substructure • A boom and moveable floor, enabling the pool to be subdivided and the depth adjusted for flexible use for lessons and multiple users at one time • A technical plant room located below finished floor level, housing the boom and floor mechanisms, accessed via a hatch in the pool walkway 4. Main Issues/Chronology of events 4.1 This section details the sequence of events and challenges met during Phase 1 construction from November 2024 which provides context for the delay in achieving practical completion despite the rigorous quality assurance testing and monitoring throughout the build. 4.2 Initial Leak and Early Repairs (November–December 2024) 4.2.1 On 8 November 2024, water ingress was reported in the technical and plant rooms. Initial inspections focused on the boom and ram connection, where nuts were torqued and three pin-sized holes in the liner were repaired. The origin of these holes was unknown. BAM later found overflow from the balance tank as a contributing factor to the water ingress. The pool was refilled and watched, with no immediate recurrence of leaks. 4.2.2 In early December, PKC reported continued water seeping into the lower level technical room. Testing indicated residual water seepage rather than active leakage. On 4 December, a loose panel on the hinged boom caused a tear in the liner, which required the pool to be emptied in order to carry out the repair. Refilling resumed over the Christmas period. 4.3 Flooding and Pipework Failures (January–February 2025) 4.3.1 On 6 January 2025, flooding occurred due to a plant room pump failure, causing the balance tank to overflow. Water was given time to flow out from behind the liner, into the lower level technical room floor and be collected in the sump. In February, water remained seeping and further water hydrostatic testing revealed a leak in the pool recirculation pipework. Pressure testing showed pipework on the east side of the pool did not hold pressure. Excavation into the pool surround uncovered a fractured elbow joint and a further failed seal near the pool shallow end. Repairs were completed, and pressure tests confirmed integrity. This pipework during construction had evidence of passing pressure tests. 4.4 Liner Penetrations and Sealing Issues (March–April 2025)
Page 5
4.4.1 In March, a number of further liner penetrations were found and sealed with resultant residual water pooling into the basement technical room. In April, another liner hole was found near the moveable floor. Myrtha recommended marine sealant for the 72 threaded rods penetrating the liner supporting the moveable floor. BAM began resealing these penetrations. 4.4.2 Further liner damage was discovered during bracket repairs. Welded repairs were completed, and the pool was refilled incrementally. A leak in the shallow end was traced to a lapping detail, which was repaired. 4.5 Leak Detection and Monitoring (May–June 2025) 4.5.1 In May, pooling in the technical room were attributed to residual water. Increased chemical readings later showed a new leak. Vacuum testing revealed a number of very minor penetrations, and Myrtha’s European technical representative advised on remediation. Consideration of replacing the entire liner was undertaken by BAM and Hubco. By June, the pool was filled above the shallow end. Damp patches persisted, but chemical tests showed no pool water presence. Further testing suggested no, and refilling continued. 4.6 Final Issues and Stabilisation (June–July 2025) 4.6.1 Late June saw a non-return valve failure in the plant room, causing the balance tank to overflow. In July, the sump pumps failed. Pumps were repaired, and residual water was extracted. 4.6.2 There were delays caused by linking the building management system to the corporate IT network during the holidays through resources being deployed on other projects (e.g. PHS) or on holiday. 4.6.3 By mid-July, inspections confirmed whilst water ingress in the technical room continued, this was residual water from historic leaks and daily monitoring showed this reducing to a small level. Practical completion was achieved on 11 August monitoring this water seepage in the technical room. 4.7 Commentary 4.7.1 The issues that have been found and ultimately addressed in the swimming pool component of the facility are a combination of: • equipment / component failures (valves, pipework) caused by installation errors or faulty components • Commissioning errors – most significantly, a major cut in the liner in December • Minor unexplained penetrations in the liner
Page 6
4.7.2 These issues have taken time to investigate and/or resolve with the cumulative impact being a significant delay in achieving practical completion. Once remedial works were complete, there remained an issue with residual water between the steel tank and liner which is taking time to seep out. Until this seepage has run its course it is impossible to say with 100% confidence that all faults have been resolved. 4.7.3 In order to protect the Council’s position, practical completion has been achieved but subject to conditions. With small amounts of residual water still seeping into the technical room. Phase 2 of the project (the demolition of the existing Blair Recreation Centre) has been delayed for 6 months to mitigate the risk should it transpire that the seepage is not from residual water but is symptomatic of an ongoing defect. This cost is being borne by HubCo. This additional 6 month period will allow PKC to be confident that the technical issues are addressed, and the pool is operating to the contract specification. Worst case scenario, this provides a contingency should further significant works be required, thus ensuring continuity of service provision. 4.7.5 The delay in practical completions has however meant that the rest of the building has been snagged and issues resolved in advance of occupation; ironically the facility (excluding swimming pool) is the most advanced practical completion of any recent major projects delivered. 4.7.6 The critical path of the project was always centred on the swimming pool. The leak issues only became apparent in November 2024 when the pool was filled for the first time and the plant began to be commissioned / operated. This has been unfortunate as there was no ability within the original Phase 1 Programme to absorb any of the delays. 5. Conclusion 5.1 The new Blairgowrie Recreation Centre (BRC) pool works encountered multiple technical challenges during the final construction phase. These included liner penetrations, pipework failures, and residual water ingress into the pool surrounds and plant areas. 5.2 Addressing these issues required extensive testing, targeted repairs, and close collaboration among key stakeholders — Perth & Kinross Council (PKC), Hub East Central Scotland, BAM Construction and specialist subcontractors Barr and Wray, and Myrtha Pools. 5.3 The majority of defects and snags are resolved prior to handover. The facility has now opened to the public, and the project is showing signs of operational stability. Ongoing monitoring of the minimal water ingress continues as part of post-completion assurance, with additional contractual safeguards agreed at Practical Completion (PC).
Page 7
5.4 In terms of lessons learned, given the current pressures within the construction supply chain and the increasing complexity of builds, PKC Property Services as the Intelligent Client may need to better manage expectation that projects can be delivered 100% to programme and quality at practical completion. More careful consideration needs to be given to agreed project timescales, specific contingency measures may need to be programmed in and the robust approach to quality assurance, testing and monitoring needs to be maintained throughout.