General Structural Integrity Report for a Residential Property in Wisconsin

The Concern

The property owner requested a structural engineer report to evaluate the general structural integrity of a single-family residence in Green Bay, Wisconsin. The evaluation was not focused on one isolated crack or component. Instead, StructSolve reviewed several visible conditions that could affect how the home’s structural systems were performing.

The reported scope included readily observable and visible components only. The evaluation did not include destructive testing or opening concealed areas, so the report focused on conditions that could be seen during the site observation.

Why StructSolve Was Contacted

The property presented multiple structural and maintenance-related concerns that required engineering review. StructSolve was asked to provide a report documenting visible conditions and recommended next steps rather than a contractor-only repair opinion.

The visible concerns included out-of-level floors in multiple areas, a stone foundation with deteriorated mortar joints, improvised crawlspace support conditions, possible wood-destroying insect damage to floor framing, drainage concerns, localized exterior skirting displacement, and sag in a porch roof structure. Because these issues involved foundation performance, load transfer, floor framing capacity, and water management, a structural report was appropriate for documenting the findings in a practical way.

What StructSolve Observed

StructSolve documented several exterior observations. A downspout was observed terminating above grade without an extension to direct roof runoff away from the foundation. The report explained that drainage near foundation walls is important because water next to the foundation can contribute to foundation distress over time. The west corner skirting was also displaced outward in a localized area.

The stone foundation showed visible deterioration of mortar joints. Some deteriorated joints had previously been filled with caulking, but open gaps and areas of mortar loss remained. The report indicated that the foundation remained generally serviceable at the time of the evaluation, while still recommending repair of deteriorated mortar joints.

Inside the residence, StructSolve observed floors that were out of level in multiple areas. Multiple layers of flooring were also visible at an accessible location. In the crawlspace or basement area, the floor framing system was supported by improvised supplemental supports, including timbers with stone bases and built-up stone and mortar piers. Several supports were visibly out of plumb.

The report also noted that some supplemental horizontal members were installed in a plank orientation, which significantly reduces their load-carrying capacity. One support column was located beneath a beam but was not in direct contact with the member it was intended to support, which meant it was not effectively transferring load.

StructSolve also documented deterioration of multiple floor joists consistent with wood-destroying insect activity, including conditions that appeared termite-related. A sag was observed in the porch roof structure at the front portion of the residence.

The appendix included floor plan scan figures generated through a 3D scanning application. These plan figures were used for spatial orientation and structural context, but the room labels and dimensions were described as automated scan information rather than final architectural naming or measurement documentation.

Engineering Assessment

StructSolve’s discussion connected the observed floor level irregularities to a likely combination of support and framing conditions. The report indicated that the uneven floors were likely attributable to inadequately designed and improperly installed supplemental support elements, along with deterioration of structural floor framing members from wood-destroying insect activity.

The report also emphasized water management. Maintaining gutters, repairing damaged drainage components, and using downspout extensions or splash blocks can reduce the potential for roof runoff to discharge near the foundation. This recommendation was especially relevant because the home had a stone foundation with visible mortar deterioration and open joints.

The conclusions described the overall structural condition as fair at the time of the evaluation, reflecting significant but repairable deficiencies affecting the floor framing system and foundation maintenance conditions. The report did not document completed repairs, and the public case study should not imply that the work was finished or that the property was certified.

Remedial Actions

StructSolve provided several specific remedial actions. For the floor level and floor framing concerns, the report recommended removing the existing subfloor as necessary to access the framing system and allow proper structural repairs. The existing improvised supplemental supports were recommended for replacement with a professionally installed support system.

That support system was described as needing appropriately sized beams, properly installed support columns, and adequate footings capable of transferring loads to competent bearing soils. Adjustable steel columns were identified as potentially advantageous because they can allow controlled adjustment of the floor framing during repairs. After the structural repairs, the report recommended reconstructing the subfloor with materials of uniform thickness to provide a consistent and stable substrate for finished flooring.

For the suspected wood-destroying insect damage, StructSolve recommended that a qualified wood-destroying insect inspector perform a comprehensive evaluation after subfloor removal and exposure of concealed framing components. The report recommended that identified and flagged framing elements be replaced or sistered as part of the repair process.

For the stone foundation, StructSolve recommended that a qualified masonry contractor repoint open joints, gaps, and areas of mortar loss. For drainage, the report recommended installing a downspout extension at the downspout lacking one so roof runoff would discharge an appropriate distance away from the foundation.

Outcome

The structural report gave the property owner a clearer understanding of the visible conditions affecting the residence. It identified how floor irregularities, improvised supports, insect-related framing deterioration, stone foundation mortar loss, and drainage conditions related to the home’s structural performance and maintenance needs.

The deliverable also provided practical next steps for repair planning. Those steps included professional support replacement, concealed framing evaluation after access was created, replacement or sistering of affected framing, masonry repointing, and improved downspout discharge. The outcome was a documented path for decision-making and contractor coordination, without overstating repair completion or making unsupported approval claims.