Written by As a professional engineer with decades of experience in high-precision manufacturing and process control, I reviewed the Stantec Consulting Services report dated March 31, 2025, regarding structural deficiencies observed in the Water Tower Road precast screen wall. This post presents a detailed, objective analysis of the report’s content, with specific attention to engineering integrity, material quality, and construction practices.
Key Takeaways
✅ Permacast Materials – High Quality
The materials provided by Permacast show no inherent manufacturing flaws. Based on observations in the report, all defects appear attributable to field handling, poor site storage, or improper installation — not to Permacast’s fabrication.
🏗️ Engineering Design – Sound and Compliant
The original design by Elias Runar Johannsson, P.E., complies with applicable standards and engineering principles. The plan specifies that wall panels rest on a properly constructed concrete foundation 2″ above ground level — a critical point that was ignored during installation.
⚠️ Foundation and Installation – Major Deviations
Improper elevation of foundations led to the use of makeshift “grout pedestals” and unstable support methods. These shortcuts caused settling, displacement, and structural instability. The foundation was not built to the engineering spec — the root cause of the majority of damage observed.
🔧 Improvised Repairs – Unsafe and Non-Compliant
Some repairs were done using undersized clip angles and anchors that violate International Building Code and manufacturer specs. These repairs do not address the root problem and may accelerate deterioration.
📁 Missing Exhibits – Lack of Transparency
The report references detailed repair drawings (Sheet S1A) and other exhibits that are not included. Without them, the HOA cannot fully assess the proposed solutions or cost implications. This raises concerns about withheld information.
Professional Evaluation
In my engineering opinion:
- Primary Cause of Defects: Construction and installation errors — not design or product issues.
- Report Bias: The report subtly shifts blame toward the material supplier despite insufficient evidence.
- Repair Proposal: The suggestion of complete removal and replacement is extreme and misleading. The actual recommendation — foundation rework and stabilization — is more reasonable.
- Action Items for the HOA:
- Request all missing exhibits, especially Sheet S1A.
- Seek full transparency on cost and scope of proposed stabilization.
- Consider commissioning a second independent engineering opinion.
- Do not approve further work or payment until clear, complete engineering documents are provided.
Conclusion
The failures in the Water Tower Road wall are systemic but solvable. They stem from execution, not materials or design. Our responsibility as an HOA is to protect homeowners from unnecessary cost and ensure accountability from contractors and consultants alike.
I remain available to discuss this evaluation further and will support the board in any technical follow-up necessary.
Respectfully,
Gregory B. Snow
BSEE – 40 Years in Semiconductor and Systems Engineering
BRRA Member