ER: Enhance Address Search House Icon with Additional Features

[kiranofans]

Dependency

• UXD - Create address details modal #1924
• PRD - Determine if we can obtain website, addresses, and social media information for each NC #1925

Emergent Requirement - Problem Description

• The original issue was that users couldn’t understand the purpose of the house icon on the map.

Relevant Issue(s)

• Redesign address search house icon #1816 (comment)

Date discovered

• Around the end of August, the issue was posted on September 7th

Did this require a temporary workaround? If yes, what was it?

• Yes there might be temporary workaround but it won't take long for I have already many design samples. The only problem I have was with Figma's manual positioning feature for prototyping, but I think there are alternative approaches I can use.

Who was involved

• (@name, optional)

What happens if this is not addressed

• The design will be too simple, showing only the NC’s name and address, and this may be less informative and interactive. The users may still be unclear about the purpose of the address search icon, potentially leading to confusion or a lack of engagement with the map.

Resources

Click to see Design 1

Figma Link: Design #1

Click to see Design 2

Design #2

Click to see Design 3

Design #3

Recommended Action Items

• Share issue link with team Lead
• Add to upcoming agenda

Potential Solutions

To improve clarity, I’ll replace the address house icon with a location pin, add hover animation, make it clickable, and include key info like the NC’s name, exact address(cause the address in some cases doesn't show), Google Maps directions, and simple contact options(social media handles, which are more reliable than websites links). If a NC doesn't have certain social media account, remove that specific handle from the card and automatically fix the layout.

If anything needs me to correct, feel free to let me know. Thanks.

Dependency

• recruit UXR Leads to scope out Research Plan on Address Search functionality

[ryanfchase]

Assigned myself so I can make sure the responses are clear, and then I will move to In Progress once I start making an assessment

[ryanfchase]

Adding this to PM meeting agenda to discuss if this ER aligns with product roadmap. My initial take is that I do think users may appreciate the big text that tells them what NC that address is in. This certainly is worth exploring in a usability test.

Concerns for post-launch: I do think that any information we provide on the popup should align with our objectives for the user. So for example, I think I'd prefer to have this popup look a little closer to our SR details popup. Perhaps it could share a breakdown of Service Requests that are present in a 1mi radius.

Tagging design lead for thoughts on pre-launch vs post-launch considerations for this ER
@Joy-Truex

[Joy-Truex]

I think with some refining it does align with our overall goals by providing relevant information and context around a particular address/request. information included on this additional hover modal should be determined based on what the user's goals of using the site

potential data points for discussion:

• neighborhood council address is in
• how to get in touch with that NC (i.e. socials, contact info)
• SR present in surrounding radius

That being said I do think this is a post-launch or non-MVP feature as it is not essential to site functionality and in my opinion more of a "nice-to-have" than a "need-to-have"

[ryanfchase]

Post Launch Research Discussion:

I'd like to propose a usability test around the address lookup feature. Potential questions for users who may demo the app:

• what locations do they search for
• what do they do once a location has been entered?
  • do they view SRs near them?
  • are they jotting down which NC the address belongs to?
  • are they reaching for next steps?

I also think we should be honing in on which problems we are seeking to provide for users:

• for community members (non-technical) or community organizers, perhaps they want to know how they provide assistance to their community
• for NC members (non-technical to semi-technical), perhaps they are noting down hotspots of SR reports so they may address it in council meetings
• for NC council members or city staff (technical), perhaps they are collecting data on specific addresses to create reports / documentation on city services (e.g. Waste Management, Dept of Water and Power)

I think next steps for me might be to create a Research Plan but we don't have UXR leads to outline this. I will leave this assigned to me in Icebox while we wait for UXR support.

[ExperimentsInHonesty]

@ryanfchase will add dependency for research ops being setup to this issue and return to icebox

[ryanfchase]

Questions / Discussion for design lead:

• I'm hearing that this is a post-launch concern. I mentioned my thoughts on future research, do you share the same thoughts? Or is design team capable of moving forward with making this work available? Post-Launch work should still be evaluated and moved to prioritized backlog.
• We should also recognize that @kiranofans did much of the work required on this ticket. We just need to sort out how to make time for feedback and iterations. I don't quite have a mechanism for delaying the design review process. Perhaps its simpler than I'm making it. Can you suggest a way forward? Or perhaps we can add this to an upcoming agenda (doesn't need to be next available).

[Joy-Truex]

I'm hearing that this is a post-launch concern. I mentioned my thoughts on future research, do you share the same thoughts? Or is design team capable of moving forward with making this work available? Post-Launch work should still be evaluated and moved to prioritized backlog.

While i believe there are merits to additional research, I am comfortable continuing design work based on assumptions. Can the PM team agree on what information should be included on this modal or do you prefer design team recommends?

Summary of WIP-

My recommendations:

• NC name
• user-entered address

Design Lead mid-fidelity mockup

Designer has also recommended including:

• information about NC (contact, address, social media handle, email address). i'd like PM input on whether this is necessary/adds additional workload that outweighs benefit (See more in figma file here and follow arrows 1-11)

Designer mid-fidelity mockup

[Joy-Truex]

We should also recognize that @kiranofans did much of the work required on this ticket. We just need to sort out how to make time for feedback and iterations. I don't quite have a mechanism for delaying the design review process. Perhaps its simpler than I'm making it. Can you suggest a way forward? Or perhaps we can add this to an upcoming agenda (doesn't need to be next available).

I recommend once the PM team approves necessary information we should include we reopen ticket for continued design work.

[ryanfchase]

Thank you @Joy-Truex, that makes perfect sense. I will try and discuss this in during the PM breakout room during general meeting. Will kick it back to PM meeting if needed.

[ryanfchase]

Based on discussion, PMs want to move forward with design lead's mid-fidelity mockup. If this is sufficient, we can close this ER and PMs will open a proper design ticket to complete the work.

[ryanfchase]

After discussion with design team, we will create the new design ticket. Design has requested we revisit this ER once we have received some feedback about the Address Info Modal, we can assess whether we want to include details like socials, directions, etc.