Engineers find several damaged roof and wall elements at Youth & Family Center after Aug. 3 fire; limited structural frame damage reported

Martin & Martin Engineering and Garland DBS presented a structural analysis of the Youth & Family Center’s ice rink following an Aug. 3 fire, reporting damage primarily to roof decking, parapet walls and exterior stucco, while the primary steel moment frames and lateral bracing showed no observable structural damage.

Greg (Martin & Martin) told the council their Oct. 1 site visit documented roughly 5,300 square feet of damaged roofing over the northeast portion of the rink. He said water used to fight the blaze had also infiltrated the building envelope, leaving efflorescence staining and cracking in exterior stucco pilasters and water staining in a northeast maintenance closet and the slab adjacent to the chiller crawl space.

The engineering team recommended restricting roof access until repairs are made and replacing the damaged roof panels and the affected parapet and stucco assemblies. On the underlying z‑shaped purlins, the engineers reported no clear visual signs of permanent deformation, but they recommended metallurgical testing of the most damaged purlin before deciding whether to reuse the members. Greg said that if the purlin testing shows no material degradation the purlins could be repainted and reused; if not, the damaged purlins should be replaced.

Engineers also recommended removal and replacement of damaged parapet assemblies and stucco where water intrusion and cracking were visible. They urged a qualified technician to inspect the ice chiller and refrigeration equipment; the report noted debris and water had fallen through fastener openings and into the chiller crawl space.

Assistant manager Mark Flores told council he has a contractor ready to provide quotes for temporary repairs to make the roof watertight through winter and for longer‑term repairs next year. Flores said a temporary fix could be scheduled within weeks, weather and material lead times permitting, while a full roof replacement would be a more complex project likely to take longer. He said staff would forward any cost estimates to council when available.

Council asked staff to pursue temporary waterproofing immediately to prevent further damage, to seek the metallurgical testing the engineers recommended, and to return with cost options for temporary remediation and full repairs or possible repurposing of the building into a multi‑use facility.