Shared Living Concorder
Peer space for building managers and residents coordinating maintenance, vendors, and shared rules. ...
Proposals
Members
Condo special assessment vote: fund major repairs or defer?
Context: a big repair bill meets real-world condo financesMany condo communities reach a moment when planned reserve funding is not enough to cover a major repair or an unexpected cost spike. In those cases, boards often consider a special assessment: an extra one-time charge added to owners’ common expenses to cover a shortfall or a large, one-off event.This proposal is designed for a condo corporation / shared building community that is facing a significant repair project (for example building envelope, balconies, or other capital work) and needs a clear, member-facing decision. The goal is to pick a financially responsible path that protects safety and long-term property value, while keeping payment shocks as manageable as possible for residents.Reserve planning is meant to reduce the need for sudden supplemental funding, but reserve studies and funding plans are only effective if they are kept current and used as a practical roadmap. Where a repair project outpaces available reserves, the community must decide whether to proceed now with a special assessment (and how to structure it) or to defer and accept the risks of delay.What this proposal asks you to vote onDecision 1: Do we proceed with the repair project now or defer?Decision 2: If we proceed, what funding approach should be used (reserve drawdown, special assessment, or a blended approach)?Decision 3: Which reserve-planning improvements should be adopted to reduce the likelihood of repeat special assessments?Use comments to attach your building’s reserve-study summary, engineer’s scope outline, and any legal requirements in your jurisdiction. Keep discussion evidence-based and focused on sustainability: what keeps the building safe, financially stable, and fair to owners.
Condo AGM planning: set the meeting date and format
Context: increase turnout by choosing a date and a workable meeting formatAnnual General Meetings (AGMs) are where owners can ask questions, review the financial picture, and hold the board accountable. In practice, participation often depends on two choices: when the meeting happens and how it’s held.This proposal uses Concorder to organize participation while keeping an accessibility option for owners who do not have reliable devices or internet access. The default format can be fully remote via Concorder, but the condo can also provide an in-person support room hosted by the property administrator/manager for those who need help joining or voting.The goal is to improve owner engagement and reduce friction around major decisions (budgets, contracts, repairs) by selecting a date early and agreeing on a meeting format that is transparent and inclusive.What this proposal asks you to vote onDate: select the AGM date(s) you can realistically attend.Format: choose whether the AGM is fully remote on Concorder or hybrid with an in-person support room for owners without digital access.Use comments to flag accessibility needs, preferred start times, and any translation or captioning requirements.
Central water softener: quotes and maintenance plan
ContextWe are considering installing (or replacing) a central water softener to reduce limescale on pipes and shared equipment (booster pump, heat exchangers, central plant), lower breakdown risk, and improve efficiency. Quotes differ in sizing assumptions, regeneration approach, salt management, monitoring, and maintenance coverage.This is not only a price decision: it’s about reliability, annual running costs, service response time, and avoiding undersizing. This proposal showcases Concorder by combining ranking on quotes, a multi-select vote on non-negotiable requirements, and a date-range vote for the works window (because water interruptions are operationally important).What we’re decidingWhich softener option to approveWhich requirements must be mandatory (quality checks, SLA, transparency)Which works window is most compatible (minimising disruption)How to participateRank the options, select the mandatory requirements, then choose all works windows that work for you. In comments: describe current issues (scale, breakdowns, pressure) and whether you prefer full-service maintenance or more internal handling.
Elevator modernization bids and outage schedule
We are considering an elevator modernization to improve reliability, accessibility, and safety. The decision is not only about price: we need to compare scope (controller, doors, cabin upgrades), warranty terms, maintenance response times, and how the contractor manages resident disruption and safety during works.Because elevator downtime is a major impact (especially for residents with mobility constraints), the schedule window is part of the decision. This proposal demonstrates Concorder by using ranking for bid approval (each bid includes detailed HTML scope and targeted pros/cons), plus a separate vote on acceptable work windows using date ranges. Attachments reference the EU lift safety framework so residents can ask the right questions about compliance and documentation.Which bid we approve for modernizationWhich work window(s) are acceptableWhich contract requirements must be mandatoryRank the bids, then choose the work windows that are feasible. In comments: add resident constraints (strollers, medical needs), preferred notice period, and any observed current issues (breakdowns, door faults, leveling problems).
Parcel lockers in the lobby: siting, safety, and rollout
Deliveries are increasing and missed parcels create friction (re-deliveries, theft risk, concierge burden). Parcel lockers in the entrance lobby can reduce missed deliveries and improve security—but only if the siting and fire-safety approach is acceptable. Common areas often serve as escape routes, so any installation must avoid obstructing evacuation paths and should be assessed against relevant safety guidance.This proposal showcases Concorder by keeping decisions separate: we choose the installation approach, we agree on rollout timing, and we vote on exact placement options because the physical location is genuinely part of the decision.Which locker approach to adoptWhich rollout window works bestWhich placement(s) are acceptable in the lobbyRank the approach options, then choose timing windows and placement points you can live with. In comments: note mobility/accessibility needs, circulation constraints, and any current issues (door congestion, queuing, theft incidents).
Basement flood risk: sump pump, drainage upgrades, or full waterproofing?
After heavy rain, our basement and storage areas have shown signs of water intrusion. Sometimes it’s minor dampness, sometimes it’s standing water near the lowest points. Even when damage looks small, it can create mold risk, ruin stored items, and shorten the life of electrical and mechanical systems. The question is how far we want to go now, and how much we want to rely on “wait and patch” versus a more durable fix.There are a few realistic pathways. One is to manage water actively with pumps and sensors. Another is to improve drainage and backflow protection so water is less likely to enter in the first place. The most extensive path is full waterproofing of vulnerable walls and joints, often the most disruptive but also the most definitive.We are choosing an investment approach for flood risk reduction, including indicative budgets, and also agreeing on how costs and responsibilities should be handled. This proposal intentionally separates “what we do” from “how we govern it”, because a technically good solution can still fail if maintenance and accountability are unclear.How quickly we can reduce risk before the next intense rainfallLong-term reliability and maintenance burdenDisruption during works and access limitationsInsurance implications and documentation for claimsComments are useful here, especially if you’ve observed where water enters, when it happens, and whether it correlates with specific drains or courtyard areas.
Elevator modernization: choose a works plan and timetable
Reliability and long-term maintenance costDowntime risk during works and the need for temporary supportWarranty strength and spare-parts availabilityNoise, dust, and daily building logisticsOur elevator is becoming a recurring problem: small failures are more frequent, downtime is harder to predict, and the user experience is drifting away from what residents consider acceptable, especially for older residents and families with strollers. We have two competing risks. If we postpone too long, we risk a major breakdown that forces an emergency decision at a worse price. If we overreact, we may commit to an expensive scope that goes beyond what the building truly needs.This proposal frames the decision as a choice between three realistic modernization packages. Each package comes with a different work window, because timing is not a detail here: it changes disruption, temporary accessibility measures, and contractor availability. The goal is to approve a direction and a timetable that the administrator can translate into contracts and resident communications.The modernization scope (from targeted upgrade to full replacement)The execution window (works timing is part of the choice)The resident protections and service guarantees that should be written into the contractVote on the package you find most reasonable, then choose the protections that matter most to you. Comments are especially useful if you have constraints such as medical needs, mobility issues, or specific periods when downtime would be particularly difficult.
EV charging in the garage: system design, rules, and timeline
ContextWhat we’re decidingSystem architecture: individual-only, centralized infrastructure, or hybrid scalableNon-negotiable requirements: metering, load management, safety inspectionsPreferred works window for garage interventionsHow to participateRank the system options, then select all mandatory requirements. Finally, select all works windows that are compatible for you (multi-select recommended). In comments: estimate how many EV users we may have in the next 12 months and note any garage constraints (cable routes, sensitive common areas).More residents are requesting EV (and plug-in hybrid) charging in the shared garage. We can either allow individual installations case-by-case, or adopt a building-level scalable system that avoids repeated works, electrical overload risk, and future disputes.This decision affects safety (capacity, protections, fire risk), fairness (only users pay), and future-proofing (ready for more charging points). To demonstrate Concorder’s mixed-option depth, the options include attachments (guides/legal reference), pros/cons, and a separate vote on the works window using date ranges.