As typical for many published water profiles, this one is way off somewhere. If the Ca is correct and we assume its the HCO3 that's off, it means that the HCO3 is at 343 ppm. That is pretty darn high.
The other thing that it could be is that the Ca is reported (as CaCO3) which converts to 42 ppm using the handy Bru'n Water conversion tool. Plugging that in with the other reported values produces an immediate balance. I would tend to lean to this profile, but without some other clues it would be difficult to decipher.
Overall, the ion totals are not too wild if you assume the Ca is 42 ppm. For the other case with Ca at 105 ppm, its a little extreme and this water almost certainly would have been decarbonated by boiling back in the day since the alkalinity is really high. Therefore, the actual calcium content would be about 20 ppm after boiling and decanting. I assumed that the HCO3 was brought down to 80 ppm.
I'd still go with the 42 ppm Ca number and stick with all the other values as is. The SO4/Cl ratio is only slightly bitter of balanced. Of course, I'd recommend that the HCO3 content be adjusted as needed to fit your mash grist.