Our 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.
Vote 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.
Replace control cabinet, door operators, and key wear components. Improve leveling accuracy and add remote diagnostics to reduce downtime.
Shorter work period with limited shutdown days, but relies on the existing structure remaining sound.
New drive system, upgraded doors, improved ride comfort, and a clearer accessibility package (signals, leveling, and safety edges). Adds more new components to reduce long-term risk.
Longer and more complex works, with a more predictable reliability outcome.
Replace the elevator system end-to-end, including major mechanical and electrical components, aiming for a “new elevator” baseline with the strongest warranty leverage.
Highest disruption, but the cleanest reset of lifecycle risk.
EU-level context on lift safety components and regulatory framing.
Maintenance management system principles (useful for defining service levels and documentation).
