Mobility and Urban Centralities: An Analysis Based on the Motorized Flows Attraction in Belo Horizonte/State of Minas Gerais/Brazil

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors

 

Thanks for your effort to update the article content. Nevertheless, we didn`t find the answers to previous reviewer questions and after a second round we still find insufficiencies that need to be clarified.

Contextualization

In the first section, the authors refer “In the case of Belo Horizonte, some issues are central driving forces for the present work: … Has the incentive policy of decentralization, expressly defined in one of the objectives of the present Master Plan of Belo Horizonte, set forth by Act No. 7.165 [8], revoked by Act No. 11.181 as of 2019 [9], been effective in reducing the concentration level?  - They cannot prove it as the current version of Master Plan is 2019 and the first 1996 and the OD data are from 2002 and 2012? Can you precise more or reformulate if you cannot prove?

About the question “Is there any flow (re)arrangement in the intraregional scale?” we miss the presentation or clarification of this intraregional scale? Is the author studying intraregional scale or city scale? That is not clear as along the text they talk about city level. But are they working city or metro level?

Also in the text, the authors refer “the present work aims to evaluate the likely decrease of the Belo Horizonte Central Area power of attraction as a result of the induction process of the power of attraction of new urban centralities identified by travel flows”. What is the relation of this objective with the Master Plan evaluation?

Discussion

Considering the Discussion, it is descriptive and doesn`t integrate the relation with master plan evaluation. The discussion should answer to Line 43 “investigate how the spatial organization dynamics of the economic activities, as well as the action of given central spaces may be associated to the spatial distribution of the population flows. This is a necessary analysis, not only for the setting of public transport policies, but also for the proposition of actions, potentially useful to the urban and regional 46 management and planning in a broader way, including the possible environmental impacts”.

There is no linkage with the role of transport policy and their relations with centralities. We miss linkages with sustainable urban mobility patterns, polycentric structures and liveable cities or liveable metropolis.

Conclusions

We need conclusions.

 

The English needs a large revision.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Evaluators,

We would like to thank you once again for the recent suggestions made to the manuscript, which allowed us to correct important points that still had problems in the research. We would like to add that ALL the suggestions have been duly incorporated into the text.

The remarks according to the referees are numbered and discriminated as follows:

1. The meaning of the text in lines 82 to 101 has been changed. As noted by Referee 1, there is no way to check the effectiveness of the 2019 Master Plan, but only to check whether the induced changes were already manifested.
2. The main purpose of the research is to evaluate "the possible reduced power of attraction of the Central Area of ​​Belo Horizonte by means of the motorized flows as a result of the process of induction of power of attraction of new urban centralities through the planning and management policies". However, in response to the request of two other reviewers, travel flows data from the metropolitan region's municipalities were included since local mobility has a strong relationship with the metropolitan transport system.
3. We clarify that the induction of new centralities is one of the explicit purposes of the new policy of Belo Horizonte transport system, in order to reduce flows to and from Central Area. However, this objective, explicit in the Master Plan, is the result of a previous debate: the possible virtuous effects of deconcentration/spatial dispersion process in urban mobility. In this sense, in addition to and in accordance with the remarks of Referee 1, we briefly mentioned, in lines 582 to 588, the possibilities of relating the effect of the diffusion of new centralities in the induction of sustainable mobility, via expansion in the use of non-motorized modes.
4. At the request of the Referee 3, other elements of the municipal urban transport structure were included in Figure 1.
5. A short explanatory text on the OD Surveys was included in the text (lines 314 to 320).
6. Inclusion in lines 243 and 244 in response to the question "Why the densification lower the number of motorized rides?", made by the Referee 3.
7. Inclusion of Equation 2 and explanatory note in lines 378 to 380 in response to the question “Weighted Average 358 Distances (WAD). How authors weight the distances?" made by the Referee 3.

 

We thank you in advance the opportunity and we are at your disposal for further explanations and new remarks that you may deem necessary.

 

Sincerely,

Daniela Antunes Lessa

Carlos Lobo

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

THE PAPER REQUIRES SOME MINOR MODERATE REVISION.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Evaluators,

We would like to thank you once again for the recent suggestions made to the manuscript, which allowed us to correct important points that still had problems in the research. We would like to add that ALL the suggestions have been duly incorporated into the text.

The remarks according to the referees are numbered and discriminated as follows:

1. The meaning of the text in lines 82 to 101 has been changed. As noted by Referee 1, there is no way to check the effectiveness of the 2019 Master Plan, but only to check whether the induced changes were already manifested.
2. The main purpose of the research is to evaluate "the possible reduced power of attraction of the Central Area of ​​Belo Horizonte by means of the motorized flows as a result of the process of induction of power of attraction of new urban centralities through the planning and management policies". However, in response to the request of two other reviewers, travel flows data from the metropolitan region's municipalities were included since local mobility has a strong relationship with the metropolitan transport system.
3. We clarify that the induction of new centralities is one of the explicit purposes of the new policy of Belo Horizonte transport system, in order to reduce flows to and from Central Area. However, this objective, explicit in the Master Plan, is the result of a previous debate: the possible virtuous effects of deconcentration/spatial dispersion process in urban mobility. In this sense, in addition to and in accordance with the remarks of Referee 1, we briefly mentioned, in lines 582 to 588, the possibilities of relating the effect of the diffusion of new centralities in the induction of sustainable mobility, via expansion in the use of non-motorized modes.
4. At the request of the Referee 3, other elements of the municipal urban transport structure were included in Figure 1.
5. A short explanatory text on the OD Surveys was included in the text (lines 314 to 320).
6. Inclusion in lines 243 and 244 in response to the question "Why the densification lower the number of motorized rides?", made by the Referee 3.
7. Inclusion of Equation 2 and explanatory note in lines 378 to 380 in response to the question “Weighted Average 358 Distances (WAD). How authors weight the distances?" made by the Referee 3.

 

We thank you in advance the opportunity and we are at your disposal for further explanations and new remarks that you may deem necessary.

 

Sincerely,

Daniela Antunes Lessa

Carlos Lobo

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

How much tipologies of urban structures there are in the analyzed area?

Authors could describe the different tipologies of both the functional and physical urban structure or/and morphological urban tissue in the different parts the whole analyzed area.

They could also describe the influence of each tipology (structure or/and tissue) on the motorized flows attraction.

For example, would be useful add a figure with a scheme of the main infrastructures in 2002 and in 2012.

Authors could say more about used data, in particular about OD Surveys data (are they only about number of rides?).

Two questions:

Line 240 - Why the densification lower the number of motorized rides?

Line 358 - Weighted Average 358 Distances (WAD). How authors weight the distances?

 

Author Response

Dear Editors and Evaluators,

We would like to thank you once again for the recent suggestions made to the manuscript, which allowed us to correct important points that still had problems in the research. We would like to add that ALL the suggestions have been duly incorporated into the text.

The remarks according to the referees are numbered and discriminated as follows:

1. The meaning of the text in lines 82 to 101 has been changed. As noted by Referee 1, there is no way to check the effectiveness of the 2019 Master Plan, but only to check whether the induced changes were already manifested.
2. The main purpose of the research is to evaluate "the possible reduced power of attraction of the Central Area of ​​Belo Horizonte by means of the motorized flows as a result of the process of induction of power of attraction of new urban centralities through the planning and management policies". However, in response to the request of two other reviewers, travel flows data from the metropolitan region's municipalities were included since local mobility has a strong relationship with the metropolitan transport system.
3. We clarify that the induction of new centralities is one of the explicit purposes of the new policy of Belo Horizonte transport system, in order to reduce flows to and from Central Area. However, this objective, explicit in the Master Plan, is the result of a previous debate: the possible virtuous effects of deconcentration/spatial dispersion process in urban mobility. In this sense, in addition to and in accordance with the remarks of Referee 1, we briefly mentioned, in lines 582 to 588, the possibilities of relating the effect of the diffusion of new centralities in the induction of sustainable mobility, via expansion in the use of non-motorized modes.
4. At the request of the Referee 3, other elements of the municipal urban transport structure were included in Figure 1.
5. A short explanatory text on the OD Surveys was included in the text (lines 314 to 320).
6. Inclusion in lines 243 and 244 in response to the question "Why the densification lower the number of motorized rides?", made by the Referee 3.
7. Inclusion of Equation 2 and explanatory note in lines 378 to 380 in response to the question “Weighted Average 358 Distances (WAD). How authors weight the distances?" made by the Referee 3.

 

We thank you in advance the opportunity and we are at your disposal for further explanations and new remarks that you may deem necessary.

 

Sincerely,

Daniela Antunes Lessa

Carlos Lobo

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for the accomodation of our comments and the revision made.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to thank you once again for the recent suggestions made to the manuscript, which allowed us to correct important points that still had problems in the research.

Sincerely,

Daniela Antunes Lessa

Carlos Lobo