Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elevator Restoration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oak Lawn trustees approve ordinance requiring timelier elevator restorations in residential buildings
Summary
Trustees adopted ordinance 26-07-15 after trustees and staff cited long elevator outages in high-rise buildings that impede residents with mobility impairments; the board approved the ordinance by roll call following discussion about ambulances assisting residents who cannot use stairs.
Oak Lawn trustees on March 24 unanimously approved an ordinance intended to shorten the time residents must wait for elevator service to be restored in residential buildings.
Trustee Pembroke, who introduced ordinance 26-07-15, said the measure grew out of constituent concerns in areas with high-rise condominiums and apartments. "They shouldn't have to wait 30 days to get an elevator," the trustee said, urging the board to adopt rules that would ensure residents with mobility issues receive timely attention.
Village staff and trustees described repeated calls for assistance when elevators are out of service, and the presiding official recounted a case where a five-story building's elevator was out for about 60 days. The village noted it must coordinate any local rule with state inspection and elevator maintenance responsibilities. Trustee Pembroke and administration also said the issue has attracted media attention; a CBS reporter, Suzanne Madiolo, had inquired about the village's work on the matter.
After discussion, a motion to approve the ordinance was seconded and approved by roll call; the recorded votes in the meeting transcript were "yes" from Trustees Pembroke, Mallow, Stalker and Desmond. The ordinance is listed in the meeting record as ordinance 26-07-15, described as "an ordinance amending Title 6 of the Oak Lawn Municipal Code by adding article 1 regarding timely restoration of elevator services in residential buildings." The meeting record does not state an effective date for the ordinance.
The board did not provide additional procedural deadlines in the public discussion. The ordinance was moved forward at the March 24 meeting; the transcript does not record any immediate implementation timeline or administrative rule details.
