Sustainable-Oriented Development for Urban Interface of Historic Centers

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

General comment:

In its present form, the paper presents rather a first step of a work, meaning the compilation of indices to characterise the urban fabric in Jeddah. Justification of the choice made are to be included as well as information on data sources. The presentation of results is short and limited and more importantly the interpretation of those into the perspective of providing recommendations building designers (as listed in from L303 to 333) are not provided nor supported by a reasoning or/and literature.

Hereafter a list of suggestions for improving the interest of the paper and provide important clarifications:

First point, while doing a quick literature review there are some interesting new papers that can bring interesting elements as input into that work on Jeddah city.

Example: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13218 to substantiate the historical city growth and related reasons and can be complementary to this work

Introduction

Overall, the introduction is to be reorganised from regional context to the specificity of this study and what points are to be addressed. For instance, the section on Jeddah case study should come last after the context on MENA urban areas. Please make sur to clearly state what are the objectives of that work precisely.

Additionally, please shortly indicate what this means “the social, economic, and environmental requirements “for the well-being of the population in urban areas of Jeddah

Figure 1 is not clear: why the three boxes related to Urban analysis framework are disconnected to the rest of the methodological flow?

Sections 1.1 urban morphology classification and 1.2 urban morphology and microclimate interrelationship are reviewing shortly the literature and what has been used for these 2, but please justify the choice of indexes to allow the urban fabric classification with regards to what you wish to quantify and the analyse. For instance, in section 1.1, we got the list of retained indexes without any explanation on why these among the ones available were chosen. Additionally, it is claimed that “it aims to develop a workflow for analyzing main urban features to identify physical characteristics that fulfill the social, economic, and environmental requirements L53-54”, therefore this link with social, economic, and environmental requirements and the indexes chosen should be explicitly said. In the same way in section 1.2 , from the literature review, what is adopted as characteristics for thermal comfort/microclimate evaluation in that study- please specify clearly.

 

L-145 to 147: partial sentence?

 

Material and methods:

Please add a section with data source used to compile the morphology indicators + reliability/confidence of these data. This is even important to substantiate then the discussion section that tackled this topic. Please justify the representativeness of the sites selected.

Please specify the meaning of each indicator as such (the more the indice X is high, the more the X is) and toward more sustainable urban fabric.

For instance: what are the desirable values of sub-indexes for path to be considered contributing to sustainable and better well -adapted urban fabric in that specific case of Jeddah.

Figure 4 is too low resolution, should be rearranged to be able to read it.

In figure 6A include the perimeter of the historic city centre.

Results

This section is generally under-developed.

In a general way, the list of recommendations presented in discussion sections should be supported by the presentation of the results.

As a suggestion, the characteristics of urban morphology of each site have to be clearly presented and assessed in term of advantage and disadvantage in term of habitability for inhabitants, in order to clearly see the difference between historic urban fabric and others. It could in this way substantiate the list of recommendations provided later on in the paper

 The paragraph on the Factor SVF and related figure 8 did not explain why that specific indicator among the others is showed case and what is this particular added value toward the goals of the study->1. to identify physical characteristics that fulfill the social, economic, and environmental requirements and 2 provided building designers recommendations

Discussions:

The first part (l277 to 330) is rather to go to results section-because being rather interpretation and conclusions/recommendations from results in discussion with literature

In addition to the discussion on data accuracy, a discussion on the efforts needed to potentially implement the recommendations could be done; i.e are the on-going renovation/replacement policies/actions in Jeddah far or in line with those recommendations in terms of constructions? Are they social /eco/physical constraints that will facilitate or on the contrary block following such recommendations?

Conclusions

 To be redone with 1 ) summarising the main results 2 ) presented way forward

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

 

Thank you for your valuable, constructive comments that contribute positively to the research.

Point 1: The compilation of indices to characterize the urban fabric in Jeddah. Justification of choice made is to be included, and information on data sources.

Response 1: Justification of selecting indexes was added to material and method section L167-182.

 

Point 2: some interesting new papers can bring interesting elements as input into that work on Jeddah city.

Example: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13218 to substantiate the historical city growth and related reasons and can be complementary to this work. 

Response 2: Thank you for the comment; it was very beneficial and utilized in the research.

 

Point 3: The introduction is to be reorganized from a regional context to the specificity of this study and what points are to be addressed. For instance, the section on the Jeddah case study should come last after the context on MENA urban areas.

Response 3: The introduction was edited to reflect the comment. The first paragraph (L26 - L40) introduced the regional trends in urban upgrade policies, while the second paragraph (L41 - L50) introduced the case of Jeddah city.

 

Point 4: Please make sure to clearly state the objectives of that work precisely.

Response 4: Research objectives were clearly stated in L 55-62.

 

Point 5: shortly indicate what this means "the social, economic, and environmental requirements "for the well-being of the population in urban areas of Jeddah

Response 5: A description of the Islamic urban area and an explanation of its composition and relation to socio-climate local conditions were added to the introduction L49-59

 

Point 6: Figure 1 is not clear: why the three boxes related to the Urban analysis framework are disconnected from the rest of the methodological flow?

Response 6: Figure 1 was adjusted as per the comment.

 

Point 7: Sections 1.1, urban morphology classification, and 1.2, urban morphology and microclimate interrelationship are, reviewing shortly the literature and what has been used for these 2, but please justify the choice of indexes to allow the urban fabric classification with regards to what you wish to quantify and analyze.  For instance, in section 1.1, we got the list of retained indexes without explaining why these among the ones available were chosen.

Additionally, it is claimed that "it aims to develop a workflow for analyzing main urban features to identify physical characteristics that fulfill the social, economic, and environmental requirements L53-54"; therefore, this link with social, economic, and environmental requirements and the indexes chosen should be explicitly said.

In the same way, in section 1.2, from the literature review, what is adopted as characteristics for thermal comfort/microclimate evaluation in that study- please specify clearly.

 

Response 7:

A chart was added to illustrate the relationship between the physical characteristics and the social, economic, and environmental requirements.

• Urban morphology indexes resulting from the literature review were presented in figure 2; the paragraph was adjusted to highlight this point.
• The unique character of Jeddah's historic urban area was elaborated. The link between social and
• Thermal comfort/microclimate evaluation is not the scope of the study, but the urban morphology is. Only the impact of urban fabric characteristics on the microclimate was highlighted. Section 1.2 was adjusted accordingly.

 

 

Point 8:  L-145 to 147: partial sentence?

Response 8: Corrected

 

Point 9:

• Add a section with the data source used to compile the morphology indicators and reliability/confidence of these data.
• Justify the representativeness of the sites selected. For instance: what are the desirable values of sub-indexes for a path to be considered contributing to sustainable and better well-adapted urban fabric in that specific case of Jeddah?

Response 9:

• A section of the data sources used to compile indicators was added in L214-215 and L285-294.
• Case study selection justification was added to section 2.2.1. L245-248

 

Point 10: Figure 4 is too low resolution; it should be rearranged to be able to read it.

Response 10: Figure 4 charts were replaced.

 

Point 11:         In figure 6A, include the perimeter of the historic city center.

Response 11: Figures 6a and 6b were replaced with better-resolution ones.

 

 

Point 12: the list of recommendations presented in discussion sections should be supported by the presentation of the results.

Response 12: Recommendations revised.

 

Point 13: As a suggestion, the characteristics of urban morphology of each site have to be presented and assessed in terms of advantages and disadvantages in terms of habitability for inhabitants to clearly see the difference between historic urban fabric and others. It could, in this way, substantiate the list of recommendations provided later in the paper.

Response 13: Results, discussion, and conclusion revised. Consistency between them and the introduction was maintained.

 

Point 14: The paragraph on the Factor SVF and related figure 8 did not explain why that specific indicator, among the others, is shown case and what is this particular added value toward the goals of the study->1. to identify physical characteristics that fulfil the social, economic, and environmental requirements and 2 provide building designers recommendations.

Response 14: It was added as a visual interpretation of one of the most affecting factors on the thermal conditions within the outdoor spaces. In response to the comment, I removed the figure to allow for a more prominent discussion within the paper relying on the average SVF for each site in the table.

 

Point 15: The first part (l277 to 330) is rather to go to the results section because being rather interpretation and conclusions/recommendations from results in discussion with the literature.

Response 15: The mentioned section moved to the results section.

 

Point 16: In addition to the discussion on data accuracy, a discussion on the efforts needed to implement the recommendations could potentially be done; i.e., is the ongoing renovation/replacement policies/actions in Jeddah far or in line with those recommendations in terms of constructions? Are they social /eco/physical constraints that will facilitate or, on the contrary, block following such recommendations?

Response 16: Revised as described.

 

Point 17: Conclusions to be redone with 1) summarising the main results and 2) presenting a way forward.

Response 17: Revised as described.

 

 

Reviewer 2 Report

It is very fascinating to judge the sustainability of cities through the changes of cities. There are some moderate concerns there because of the current content.

1. The results section needs to be enhanced because of the lack of content.

2. Can the discussion be divided into several summaries? According to the authors' research, the policy recommendations must be very exciting.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

 Thank you for your valuable comments.

It is fascinating to judge the sustainability of cities through the changes in cities. There are some moderate concerns there because of the current content.

 

Point 1: The results section needs to be enhanced because of the lack of content.

Response 1: Results section redone.

 

Point 2: Can the discussion be divided into several summaries? According to the authors' research, the policy recommendations must be very exciting.

Response 2: The discussion section and recommendations were enhanced and elaborated.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

This is a very interesting paper on the physical characteristics of the urban interface between the historical centres and the rest of the cities' urban expansions to ensure a smooth transition between the historic urban fabric and the rest of the city's urban fabric. The topic is interesting and has the potential to contribute to both sustainable design and long-term urban development policy-making. Therefore, the manuscript seems highly promising. The overall structure is clear, making the manuscript very readable. Here are some comments and suggestions for the author:

1. In the introduction, it would be ideal to provide more details about the research question. Explain why investigating the physical characteristics of the urban interface between the historical centres and the rest of the cities' urban expansions is important for urban development. This would be important for readers to identify the meaning of this research.

2. Section 1.2 is a little bit too general. A more detailed review would be much preferred.

3. Give more discussion and especially, provide more about the implications of the research. Explain how this work contributes to urban design in the Middle East and other areas of the world.

4. A detailed explanation of Figure 8 is necessary. The current discussion is too general. 

5. Explaining more about the six growth phases would be very helpful.

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Thank you for your constructive comments.

This is a very interesting paper on the physical characteristics of the urban interface between the historical centers and the rest of the cities' urban expansions to ensure a smooth transition between the historic urban fabric and the rest of the city's urban fabric.

The topic is interesting and has the potential to contribute to both sustainable design and long-term urban development policy-making. Therefore, the manuscript seems highly promising. The overall structure is clear, making the manuscript very readable. Here are some comments and suggestions for the author:

Point 1: In the introduction, it would be ideal to provide more details about the research question. Explain why investigating the physical characteristics of the urban interface between the historical centers and the rest of the cities' urban expansions is important for urban development. This would be important for readers to identify the meaning of this research.

Response 1:  Research significance and objectives were included.

 

Point 2: Section 1.2 is a little bit too general. A more detailed review would be much preferred. 

Response 2: Section 1.2 enhanced.

 

Point 3: Give more discussion and, especially, provide more about the implications of the research. Explain how this work contributes to urban design in the Middle East and other areas of the world.

Response 3: Revised as described.

 

Point 4: A detailed explanation of Figure 8 is necessary. The current discussion is too general.

Response 4: Revised as described.

 

Point 5: Explaining more about the six growth phases would be very helpful.

Response 5: Revised as described.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The  introduction  is very well developed and sourced from recent literature. The new analysis of results is now interesting because interpreting now the measurements of computed indicators  and ability of the different urban fabrics to provide good living environment ( not too hot, walkable or suitable for socio-economic activity).

Some typos and formatting errors are to be corrected:

L140 to 147 is a paragraph that has to be removed- > previous text that has been probably forgotten and not deleted.

L214 lower case of “These four indicators”

Table1: last column label on Energy needs to be made visible, it is cut

Line label “Urban Mass Permeability” is twice – please remove 1

Line378: Put upper case at the beginning of the sentence

Table 4: one of the labels “ buildings” has to be removed.

 

 

 

Author Response

Thank you for your constructive comments that help me to develop the manuscript. The manuscript was reviewed in light of your comments, and the mentioned locations within the manuscript were checked carefully. I believe they are now free from the mentioned mistakes.