[Molybdenum]

I find it much harder to quickly scan through the list of threads in the Buildings forum to find the ones I am interested in now that every single thread title starts with "Toronto". I suggest filtering out the starting "Toronto" for users reading the UT forum but leaving it in when these threads are displayed on other forums in the global site.

 

[salsa]

We considered this. The only problem with this is length of thread names especially when there are more than one developer and architect. This is especially true with mobile devices.

Toronto | One Bloor East | 257m | 76s | (Cityzen / Fernbrook / Castlepoint / Hariri Pontarini Architects / aA) for example. But we get it.

Why not use a short form of the architect, such as HP instead of Hariri Pontarini Architects? In your same example you used aA and not Architects Alliance.

 

[anonymous0024]

In terms of mobile viewing, I assume you guys have looked at the traffic and decided it's an important audience at UT?

Personally, while I understand posting pictures from one's phone, and it being important to find threads in that instance, when it comes to actually reading those threads, mobile viewing wouldn't be my ideal way of accessing UT (nevermind the ridiculous amount of data doing so would consume by accessing many of the projects and construction threads).

If I had to prioritize, being able to see the architect and developer in the thread title would be the top things I'd like reverted back, though as a less important third point, having the address/major intersection in the title was also helpful for, at a glance, telling you all the relevant information your need to know, especially when a project gets renamed.

Separate to the changes, in terms of the DB, it seems that info regarding #of bedrooms, bathrooms, ceiling height, etc... is rarely actually used (though total # of units often is, which is great). I'd also like to see sections that keep track of the project's Total Square Footage (or Square Metres), and the breakdown between residential and commercial (ideally also office vs retail). It would provide a lot more useful info, especially when it comes to discussions about land usage, loss (or growth) of office space, etc...

 

[Michael Ianni]

I'm really enjoying the new site, works a lot better on iPad compared to Urbantoronto and the new database projects are a big improvement. Be cool to see many of these changes on Urbantoronto

 

[Edward Skira]

I'm really enjoying the new site, works a lot better on iPad compared to Urbantoronto and the new database projects are a big improvement. Be cool to see many of these changes on Urbantoronto

The plan is to update UT in the future to work in a similar way.

 

[modernizt]

I have various comments and concerns about the direction you guys are taking UT/this new site in, but I'll spare you and simply ask a more pragmatic question that is more directly related to UT:

Why have we now got all development threads in one place? It strikes me as very counterintuitive to have 80-storey mega-projects in the same section as 3-storey suburban townhouse developments.

The "Toronto" in front of all the threads is also very redundant, especially seeing as it takes up space that could list the architecture firm responsible, instead. I realize the idea is that there will be projects from other parts of the GTA/Ontario in the same section, but if you ask me, the vast majority of projects will be "Toronto" projects.

 

[Ramako]

Why have we now got all development threads in one place? It strikes me as very counterintuitive to have 80-storey mega-projects in the same section as 3-storey suburban townhouse developments.

I don't really mind it. That's the way it was just a little while ago before the lowrise section was added and it worked fine.

The "Toronto" in front of all the threads is also very redundant, especially seeing as it takes up space that could list the architecture firm responsible, instead. I realize the idea is that there will be projects from other parts of the GTA/Ontario in the same section, but if you ask me, the vast majority of projects will be "Toronto" projects.

The "Toronto" tag isn't because other GTA projects will be listed in the same section. GTA projects will indeed be in the same section as Toronto projects but they will all be tagged "Toronto". The purpose of the tag is so that Toronto project threads (which are aggregated into the world building forums) are distinguishable from projects in other cities in the world. Each major city has its own tag (and suburbs do not, at least for now).

The tag is indeed redundant if you are only browsing the Toronto forum (i.e. Urban Toronto). I agree if there were a way to filter "Toronto" out of the title at the local forum level that would be ideal.

 

[Johnny Au]

Not everyone uses a Sony Xperia Z Ultra (though I do); they are very much the largest smartphones on the market with a 6.4" screen size. Therefore, some of the thread titles are too long for very much every other smartphone.

 

[whatever]

Just to chime in and agree with others, the Toronto tag at the beginning of every thread title is annoying. When I browse the forums I generally like opening all of the threads I'm interested in in new tabs, but because every page now starts with "Toronto" all I see are 20 tabs labelled the same. If the goal is to tag the threads surely there has to be a better way of tagging them than to have it in the thread title itself

 

[anonymous0024]

Seems I stand corrected on the mobile front.

But having had some more time to think about it, as Tuscani mentioned earlier, the hyperlocal focus of UT has always been one of the major draws. Interrelated to that, I'd add that another key aspect of UT's appeal has been the fact that there's always been a certain presence of individuals who, to varying extents, are involved in urban development in some capacity (Adma, UrbanShocker, ProjectEnd, or Skyjacked, as random examples), and their contributions have been absolutely invaluable in providing a level of insight and basis for intelligent conversation that is lacking on some of what I'd now define as competing sites (SSC in particular).

So for the different communities to truly thrive, I think there has to be a concerted effort on SRC's part not simply to attract casual skypscraper fanboys, but to proactively also try and get folks who are similarly involved in their respective cities to become contributors, providing a backbone of sorts for these incipient communities, creating value for other new members, who are similarly passionate about their city, to join, and going beyond the simple photo/project updates, fostering a much more nuanced and discourse based platform for discussing urban development, and everything that goes with it (incidentally, the guys behind this website may be good such candidates for Vancouver, as they're already providing regular and frequent development updates in Vancouver on their website, though it lacks a proper discussion platform). I also recall hearing it remarked that there are still certain developers and architects in Toronto who don't 'get,' UT, so there also needs to be some ability for educating these possible contributors on precisely why they should get involved as well.

Realistically, I have a hard time seeing UT successfully scale out to provide truly comparable communities worldwide with SRC, and I'd rather have seen a much more targeted focus on growth, as WislaHD mentioned, possibly with an UrbanCalgary, UrbanMontreal, or UrbanVancouver, which I think would also serve as better and much more relevant base points for conversations that tie back in with those here.

 

[Uptowner]

Congratulations on the new site. It's great to see a successful company wanting to scale up.

I do hope you don't have to compromise much on the UT experience and take seriously what has been raised so far by other members. Nothing too hard to adjust to, though, is my verdict at this point.

 

[TheKingEast]

Just to chime in and agree with others, the Toronto tag at the beginning of every thread title is annoying. When I browse the forums I generally like opening all of the threads I'm interested in in new tabs, but because every page now starts with "Toronto" all I see are 20 tabs labelled the same. If the goal is to tag the threads surely there has to be a better way of tagging them than to have it in the thread title itself

Yep I browse the exact same way.

 

[smably]

I also really miss the architect in the thread title. That's essential information for me, because it determines whether I'm actually interested in clicking a thread. If I see a thread for a brand new project that just has an address in the title, whether or not I click through will depend very much on whether I see "S+P" or "Kirkor" at the end, if you catch my drift.

I think the thread title format needs to be a bit more flexible -- e.g., do I really need to see height and storeys for the UPX? Because they're in the thread title right now.

Also, while I appreciate the desire to expand globally, I wonder whether it is really possible or desirable to compete against active, locally developed forums. For example, when I want info on Melbourne, I'll go to Urban Melbourne (inspired by UT!), for Victoria I'll visit Vibrant Victoria, and for KW, I'll visit Waterloo Region Connected. Honestly I don't think vibrant communities will develop in 90% of the cities represented, especially the ones that already have their own sites. I wonder whether the cities with forum threads should be limited to places where there is no established local site -- and for those that do have a preexisting site, there could just be database listings with external links to active forum threads.

I think it would be much useful to act as an aggregator for local city forums, and fill in the gaps only in places when there isn't already an active site. Otherwise, I suspect that the vast majority of the city sections will be ghost towns.

 

[Edward Skira]

Thanks all. A lot to think about over this long weekend.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I think it would be much useful to act as an aggregator for local city forums, and fill in the gaps only in places when there isn't already an active site. Otherwise, I suspect that the vast majority of the city sections will be ghost towns.

Yes, this is what I was trying to get at earlier, you said it much more concisely!

I concur with what others have said. UT's appeal is not just the vast amount of information, it is the community, discussion and userbase too, that is what keeps me coming back every day rather than every 3 months (like I do with SSC) and that is the model that needs to be built up in other cities, not only the database (though that is important too).

I feel like Vancouver's population would be the best place to begin with, anecdotally speaking, they seem to have a big sense of municipal pride like Toronto. (And as we all know, comparing themselves to Toronto is their favorite pastime ) Vancouver also like Toronto, has a massive construction boom, many towers going up and lots of interesting things always going on as well.

Cooperation with existing communities is also important. Early adapters are important in leading discussion, but also in moderating the new community and in writing the news articles that will appear on the front page! That Urban.Melbourne community could easily be co-opted into SRC's format.