It MATTERS in the context of a column that has been "successfully constructed" i.e. Harbour Cay and Champlain Towers South had too much rebar for the size of the column. The limitations in the code are to prevent voids and allow reasonably unobstructed flow of wet concrete so you actually get what you're using in your calculations versus a network of rebar tied together with wires and no concrete besides the skin and toothpaste/mortar stuffed into it after the forms are removed to hide the fact and make it look like a real concrete column.
I have some fairly highly placed folks as former professors, when I asked how one would responsibly fix an overreinforced concrete column, I got a bit of a "we're going to research that shortly" answer. So you're on your own there, buddy.
If you can rule out there are voids in the concrete, provided it's a column, I suppose that's progress. What the CFRP is going to get you, I don't know. You're outside the research, as you clearly understand, so good luck. In-situ load testing?
This kind of flaw in a concrete building is extremely basic and VERY easy to diagnose, so everything, everything else in the design needs a very close look because it screams inexperienced designer, incompetence, bad supervision, etc. etc. etc. So there's the strength at the slab joint, as there are limits on the concrete strengths there, the depth of the slab, punching shear, actual depth of the rebar, stirrup size and spacing, lap lengths, etc.
(KootK - It's funny I found some odd thread recently from 2001 where you said you were relatively new. Here we are 23 years later). Same forum.