Why Some Structural Reviews Cannot Be Completed Remotely

Remote review is useful for screening, document checks, and coordination. However, some structural reviews cannot be completed remotely because the engineer must verify conditions that are not visible in drawings, photos, or videos.

In Ontario projects, including Toronto, Newmarket, Vaughan, Markham, Barrie, Hamilton, and smaller towns, structural review must be based on reliable information. Where information is incomplete, an on-site structural review may be required before an opinion, letter, or sealed design can be completed.

Remote Structural Review Depends on Reliable Existing Information

A remote structural review may be appropriate when drawings are complete, photos are clear, dimensions are confirmed, and the structural system is visible. It can help during planning or when assessing a limited issue.

Photos show only exposed surfaces. They do not confirm hidden framing, bearing conditions, deterioration, reinforcement, or undocumented alterations. If the review depends on these items, remote review alone may not be inspection-ready.

Parsways may use remote information to determine the next step, but not to replace field verification when it cannot be confirmed.

Concealed Conditions Affect Structural Decisions

Concealed conditions are a main reason a structural engineer site review is needed. Walls, ceilings, finishes, insulation, cladding, and fire-rated assemblies can hide the actual load path.

Common concealed conditions include:

• Hidden beams or lintels

• Unknown joist direction

• Covered foundation cracks

• Deteriorated steel or wood

• Missing bearing points

These conditions can affect strength, serviceability, and code compliance. Under the Ontario Building Code, structural work must address loads, support conditions, and stability. Relevant CSA standards may include CSA O86, CSA S16, CSA A23.3, CSA S304, and CSA S136.

Missing Dimensions Create Unreliable Conclusions

Remote review becomes unreliable when dimensions are missing or inconsistent. A structural element may look acceptable in a photo, but its span, spacing, depth, connection, or bearing length may control the design.

Important dimensions often include:

• Beam span and support length

• Joist size and spacing

• Opening width and height

• Slab thickness

In Ontario renovations and tenant improvements, older drawings may not match the built condition. This is common in commercial units, houses, industrial bays, and mixed-use buildings.

Inaccessible Framing Limits Visual Confirmation

Some framing cannot be reviewed properly without access, including roof framing above ceilings, floor framing below finished floors, beams inside bulkheads, and foundation elements behind finishes.

A video call may help identify general layout, but it cannot confirm hidden connections, fasteners, reinforcement, or moisture damage. In Mississauga, Oshawa, Kitchener, Kingston, or Peterborough, inspectors may request professional confirmation where site conditions affect the approved scope.

Selective Openings May Be Required

Some projects require selective openings before the structural review can be completed. This does not always mean major demolition. It may involve removing drywall, ceiling tile, flooring, or cladding.

Selective review may be needed to confirm:

• Beam size and material

• Joist bearing condition

• Reinforcement location

• Wall composition

• Damage behind finishes

The opening should be planned so the engineer can observe the condition and the contractor can repair finishes.

Code Compliance Requires Engineering Judgment

A structural review in Ontario is not only a visual comment. It may need to support OBC compliance, permit submissions, construction changes, or inspector responses. Where the existing structure is uncertain, the engineer cannot assume capacity without verification.

CSA S478 also supports structured investigation of existing buildings and building elements where degradation, repair, or maintenance may affect performance.

Information to Prepare Before Review

To make review more efficient, provide:

• Existing drawings, if available

• Clear photos from multiple angles

• Measured dimensions

• Permit or inspector comments

• Scope of proposed work

• Access locations for exposed framing

Good information can reduce delays, but it does not remove the need for site review where structural conditions remain concealed.

Conclusion

Some structural reviews cannot be completed remotely because engineering decisions depend on verified site conditions. Concealed framing, missing dimensions, inaccessible load paths, and selective openings can affect whether a review is complete, accurate, and acceptable for Ontario construction or permit purposes.

At Parsways Inc., we provide structural review services for Ontario projects where remote screening, on-site verification, and engineering documentation must work together. Our approach is to review the available information, identify what cannot be confirmed remotely, and complete the required assessment in a clear and inspection-ready format.