Authored by Craig M. Dudas, RS, Senior Practice Leader, Construction Advisory.
Published May 13, 2026.
Case Study Overview
How a specialist due diligence assessment of newly installed elevator systems uncovered critical maintenance gaps and code deficiencies before they became liability exposure for a Florida condominium association
|
SERVICE LINE |
SECTOR |
LOCATION |
SYSTEM |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Vertical Transportation Due Diligence |
Condominium Association |
St. Petersburg, Florida |
2 MRL Traction Elevators |
|
23 |
500 FPM |
6 |
0 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Floors Served |
Rated Speed |
Code Deficiencies Found |
Deficiencies Disclosed Pre-Assessment |
The Situation: New Equipment, Unresolved Risks
New construction does not automatically mean trouble-free. When a condominium association takes over a newly completed high-rise, the elevators may be factory-fresh and aesthetically perfect while still carrying a set of unresolved code deficiencies, undocumented maintenance gaps, and performance questions that will fall entirely on the association to address once the developer exits.
That was the situation facing a condominium association in a recently completed Florida high-rise tower. The building was equipped with two newly installed traction passenger elevators serving 23 floors, designed as machine room-less (MRL) systems with gearless drive machines located inside the hoistway and a dedicated control space at the roof level. The equipment was installed in 2025 by a global elevator manufacturer and represented current industry technology.
“New equipment is not the same as compliant equipment. Installation marks the beginning of the maintenance obligation, not the end of scrutiny.” – Craig M. Dudas, RS, Rimkus Senior Practice Leader, Construction Advisory
The association needed an independent, qualified third-party evaluation of the elevator systems to answer three questions before accepting full responsibility for them: Are the systems installed and performing correctly? Are they in code compliance? And is the maintenance program adequate to protect the association going forward?
The Assessment: Comprehensive, Instrument-Based Evaluation
The Rimkus Built Environment Solutions team engaged Vertical Assessment Associates, a specialist elevator consulting firm, to conduct a full due diligence assessment of both elevator systems. The scope covered every major dimension of elevator performance and compliance.
Scope of the Elevator Due Diligence Assessment
- Equipment condition: controllers, gearless traction machines, suspension belts, door operators, governors, fixtures, entrances, cabs, and pit/overhead components
- Performance testing: car speed, floor-to-floor time, ride quality (start/acceleration/deceleration/stop g-forces and jerk measurements), door opening and closing speed and force
- Code compliance review against ASME A17.1, 2016 Edition (effective in Florida 1/1/2021) and Chapter 399 of the Florida Statutes ( “The Elevator Safety Act”)
- ADA accessibility compliance: hall buttons, lanterns, Braille signage, door timing, floor leveling, car controls, and emergency communications
- Maintenance program review: Maintenance Task Records (MTR), fireman service verification logs, test tags, and housekeeping condition
- Component life expectancy analysis: estimated useful life and remaining life for all major components
The assessment was conducted using instruments including a digital tachometer/accelerometer for speed verification and a specialized accelerometer for g-force and jerk measurement, calibrated to accepted industry tolerances for traction elevator systems.
What the Assessment Found: Performance Versus Compliance
The two elevators presented a clear bifurcation in findings: performance was satisfactory, but compliance and maintenance documentation were not.
Performance: Good. Both elevators operated within code tolerances on every measured performance metric. Car speeds held within the required 5% of the 500 FPM rated speed. Floor-to-floor travel times were consistent between the two cars. Ride quality g-forces fell within optimal ranges for start, acceleration, deceleration, and stop. Door closing force remained below the 30 lbf (pounds-force) code maximum. Control space temperature, humidity, and lighting all met manufacturer and code requirements. ADA compliance was confirmed across all applicable criteria.
|
Car Speed |
500 FPM rated; 496-500 FPM measured (within 5% tolerance) |
|
Floor-to-Floor Time |
35.7-35.8 seconds (both cars, both directions) |
|
Ride Jerk |
4.2-6.0 (optimal is 15.0 or less) |
|
Door Closing Force |
20-21 lbf (code maximum is 30 lbf) |
|
Control Space Temp. |
77.1 degrees F (maximum allowed: 100 degrees F) |
|
ADA Compliance |
Confirmed across all applicable criteria |
Compliance and Maintenance: Six Deficiencies Identified. Against the backdrop of acceptable performance, the assessment identified six specific code and safety deficiencies, none of which had been disclosed or remediated prior to the assessment.
Code and Safety Deficiencies Identified
- Maintenance Task Records (MTR) blank since date of installation in November 2024 – no documented evidence of any maintenance activity
- Fireman service operation verification, required monthly by code, recorded only once (May 2025 final inspection) in the control room logs
- Category 1 test overdue: last completed November 2024; based on code requirements, testing was due again November 2025 and no test tags were present
- Missing machine room door sign required by code
- Car numbering non-compliant: ASME A17.1 Section 3010.1.3a requires cars numbered left to right, including state serial numbers
- Mismatched position indicator: red indicator at lobby instead of blue, on order for two months with no resolution
The Maintenance Gap: A Systematic, Not Incidental, Problem
The most consequential finding was not any individual deficiency, but the pattern behind them. The Maintenance Control Program (MCP) document provided by the elevator manufacturer and posted in the control space explicitly requires that Maintenance Task Records be completed and initialed after each maintenance visit. The records were entirely blank from November 2024 onward.
This is not a paperwork formality. Maintenance records serve multiple purposes: they document that required preventive maintenance has actually been performed, they track reported problems and their resolution, and they provide the evidence base needed to manage warranty claims and respond to inspection inquiries. Without them, the association has no ability to verify that the maintenance contract is being honored.
The fireman service verification gap compounds this concern. Monthly testing of fireman service operation is a code requirement, and identifying failures in this function requires technical knowledge beyond what building staff typically possess. With only one verification on record in the control room, the association had no assurance that this critical life-safety function was being maintained reliably.
“Maintenance records are not bureaucratic overhead. They are the only way an association can verify that what it is paying for is actually being delivered.” – Craig M. Dudas, RS, Rimkus Senior Practice Leader, Construction Advisory
The assessment recommended initiating a structured third-party monitoring program at routine intervals to provide ongoing independent verification that maintenance quality is being sustained, independent of the self-reporting of the maintenance contractor.
Component Life Expectancy: Planning Ahead
In addition to current condition and compliance findings, the assessment provided a forward-looking component life expectancy analysis for each major elevator system element. This information is directly relevant to reserve study planning and capital expenditure forecasting.
|
Controllers |
15-20 year average life; 15-20 years remaining. Schematics present on-site. |
|
Gearless Traction Machines |
30-40 year average life; 15-18 years remaining. Note: MRL gearless machines have shorter lifecycle than traditional gearless machines. |
|
Suspension Belts (Elastomeric) |
8-10 year average life; 6-8 years remaining. Rejection criteria based on jacket damage or run count, not traditional rope measurement. |
|
Door Equipment |
10-15 year average life; 12-15 years remaining. Well-adjusted and in good condition. |
|
Travel Cable and Wiring |
15-20 year average life; 15-18 years remaining. |
|
Governors |
20-25 year average life; 18-20 years remaining. |
|
Fixtures |
10-15 year average life; 10-15 years remaining. Stainless steel brushed finish. |
|
Entrances and Doors |
20-40 year service life; no replacement anticipated absent damage. |
One item of particular note for reserve planning: the elastomeric suspension belts used in this MRL design have a substantially shorter replacement horizon (8-10 years) compared to traditional wire rope suspension, and their replacement criteria are unique. Because the structural cords are encased inside an elastomeric sheathing, they cannot be measured for wear in the conventional way. Replacement is triggered by jacket damage or accumulated run count. This is a technology-specific detail that reserve studies based on standard elevator templates may miss.
The Value Delivered: What the Association Gained
Documented baseline before liability transferred
The six identified deficiencies were documented under independent professional authority before the association accepted ongoing maintenance responsibility. This positions the association to seek remediation from the responsible parties, rather than absorbing those costs as a new owner.
A maintenance accountability framework
The findings created a clear, documented basis for requiring the maintenance contractor to correct the record-keeping gaps and demonstrate ongoing compliance. The association now has a specific, code-grounded set of expectations to enforce.
Forward-looking capital planning data
Component life expectancy estimates, particularly the 6-8 year suspension belt replacement horizon and the technology-specific replacement criteria for MRL systems, give the association reserve study-ready data that generic assessments do not produce.
Independent performance verification
Quantitative performance data – speed, g-forces, jerk, door timing, floor leveling – establishes a documented performance baseline. Future assessments can compare against this baseline to identify deterioration trends before they become failures.
Life-safety assurance
The fireman service and Category 1 testing gaps are not administrative items. They are code requirements with direct life-safety implications. Identifying and correcting them early protects residents, reduces liability exposure, and ensures the building passes its next statutory inspection without penalty.
Key Takeaways for Condominium Associations and Property Managers
What Every Condo Association Should Know About Elevator Due Diligence
- New elevator installations still require independent third-party assessment at transition. Manufacturer installation does not equal code compliance documentation.
- Maintenance Task Records are a code requirement, not optional. Blank records since installation mean the association cannot verify its maintenance contract is being honored.
- MRL traction elevator systems use proprietary, technology-specific components. Reserve studies and life expectancy analyses must account for MRL-specific replacement criteria, especially for elastomeric suspension belts.
- Fireman service verification is a monthly code obligation. Gaps in this record create both safety risk and regulatory exposure at the next state inspection.
- Category 1 testing is time-bound. Associations should confirm test dates and schedule the next required test before the interval lapses, not after.
- Third-party monitoring programs provide ongoing accountability independent of the maintenance contractor’s self-reporting.
Meet Our Florida Expert: Craig M. Dudas, RS
Senior Practice Leader, Construction Advisory
Built Environment Solutions, Florida
+1 813 521 5020
[email protected]
View Craig’s Expert Profile
Craig leads developer transition studies and capital reserve assessments for community associations across Florida, bringing decades of construction, engineering, and forensic expertise to HOA boards navigating turnover.
Connect with Craig directly or submit a request for consultation today!
This case study is intended to provide general information and insights into prevailing industry practices. It is not intended to constitute, and should not be relied upon as, legal, technical, or professional advice. The content does not replace consultation with a qualified expert or professional regarding the specific facts and circumstances of any particular matter.