Urban Project, a Matter of Morphology
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The list of references is mainly based on Italian rather than on English/international sources, however, some books could be added to the list making the article more accessible for the English reading audience (for e.g. The Historical Dictionary of Architecture of Qatremere de Quincy: The True, the Fictive and the Real by Samir Younes (2008), Sustainable City of Possible by Ettore Maria Mazzola (2008), etc. as well as a few more general titles on Italian urbanism.
The present text in my opinion, is somewhat flawed as the authors provide a discussion of two projects rather than introduce their own conclusions. I strongly recommend to make some conceptual rearrangements: to turn the present conclusion into another chapter/discussion chapter and finally make concise conclusions in the very end of the present article.
Author Response
ABOUT REFERENCES
When possible the English edition of the texts were added. Due to the fact, as asked, only the quoted or referred texts are inserted in the References, not other books were added. We know that the Italian references are prevalent but, to tell the truth, the essay is specifically related to an 'Italian tradition' and it would not be correct to add texts that we don't know well and weren't part of our research framework.
ABOUT CONCLUSIONS/RESULTS
Even if we tried to present the idea that 'projects' are the demonstration of a theory in architecture and they end a research activity... we modify the paragraph (now Results) and add a short Conclusion.
The mainly reviewed parts are underlined in yellow
Reviewer 2 Report
The author advocates a return to traditional typological methods in urban research, integrating an analysis of various qualities of urban spaces. They emphasize the fusion of analysis and design in architectural practice. This integration is demonstrated through the application of the author's theory in the two projects presented in the "Results" section. The author's focus on analyzing urban space and integrating it with architectural design is noteworthy, aiming to contribute to sustainable urban development. Anyway, there are issues that need to be resolved and aspects that can be improved to make the article more effective and ready for publication.
First of all the whole paper requires an English review by a native and the correction of several sparse typing errors. More specific observations and issues I note are the following:
1.Abstract:
The author, building upon urban typology, enhances the understanding of the city by identifying spatial aspects and applying them in practical urban projects. In reality, this approach is not wrong, but could it be considered too simplistic for a scientific paper? In contemporary design practice, analysis of urban context has become an indispensable part of architectural design. So, what aspects does the author introduce innovation?
2.Introduction
Lines 29-33 “Unfortunately, today, this experience is considered definitively closed by many, or worse obsolete, above all in a context where the architectural design wants to be free from any form of knowledge of the reality: under the pretext of the artistic creation, architecture often becomes arbitrariness or reduction to image without fundamentals.” The conclusion is too naif for a scientific paper, please reformulate the sentence.
3.Urban Studies. The Italian tradition
OK, but there needs to be more focus on English.
4. Urban morphology today. Form and Space of the city
Lines 251-258: Could you provide a more detailed explanation of the division using Rotblauplan? In Lines 251-258, you mentioned that this division is based on space, but the method defines the city plan and the connection to space isn't evident. Perhaps the author can incorporate photos to provide a more detailed explanation of the mapping division.
The division of Rotblauplan could perhaps be illustrated using a layering technique to demonstrate its innovative aspect. There is an interesting aspect regarding the partitioning of spaces at different scales. However, precision is needed in the expression. Additionally, in Figure 8, I observed that most of the blank areas are in red. However, based on the earlier definition, they should be blue. Is there a potential misunderstanding?
Lines 294-297: Indeed, there are various approaches to analyzing cities. The method you mentioned, utilizing typology, is an ancient and excellent one. However, every method has its limitations. Alternatively, the author could consider a shift in approach by integrating typology with space syntax for a more comprehensive analysis of the city. This could potentially be a better option.
Could you label where the images correspond to in the text, either by sentence or paragraph? This would be more reader-friendly.
4. Conclusions
Could you please add a concluding paragraph summarizing the methods you've employed throughout your article and the projects discussed? The article abruptly ends after presenting the project, and it would be beneficial to elaborate on your methods and future prospects after introducing the project.
The English language should be improved.
Author Response
1_Abstract. Two things are innovative if referred to the 'traditional' urban analysis approach derived from the Italian School of the Sixties. The first one is related to the integration of the bi-dimensional analysis with another one (inaugurated by Uwe Schröder) focused on the 'spatiality' of the city. The research by Schröder (well-known in Europe) is applied to the 'compact' historical city. Innovative is the 'test' to different contexts (peripheral) were we cannot recognize clear urban fabrics. This is a field of studies and application strictly related to a tradition but, in any cases, not considered 'passed' in Italy, as in the position of Franco Purini and in the debate within ISUFITaly. The author completely agree that analysis and design are indissoluble and this is affirmed in the article. With the addition of a paragraph 'Conclusion' after the two projects, the author hopes the subject proposed by the reviewer is 'solved'.
2_Introduction. Improved. Also References added in order to give positions of reference (Gregotti and Purini) in the debate on the topic of Urban Morphology.
3_OK
4_Some improvement of the texts are now presented in order to clarify in what sense the Rotblauplan is a spatial analysis and to avoid the misunderstanding of the red spaces in the Figure 8 (dark and light red have different meanings but it wasn't well explained in the text).
Images are now recalled in the texts and their order has been partially changed.
About space syntax, the author is not sure that the two approaches can be 'mixed' or are complementary or how to do it ... probably a new study or research could try to combine the different approaches but, at the moment, face the subject appears not easy to do seriously.
5_Conclusions have been added.
The mainly reviewed parts are underlined in yellow
The text has been read again to correct typing mistakes and to improve English.
Reviewer 3 Report
SourceURL:file:///run/media/indre/Toshiba/Dokumentai/Darbas is namu 2020 16 06/Recenzijos/Straipsniu recenzijos.docx
This is valuable and well written research that presents the Italian school of urban morphology to the wider audience by citing and reviewing the classical and more recent works. The paper can be published after minor revisions are done:
- conclusions are overly extended, conclusions must be very concentrated statements revealing the findings of research. The material, that currently is presented in conclusions section (descriptions of the projects) could be presented in discussion section located before the conclusions.
- the sources of the figures must be indicated. the resolution of some figures, for example Figure 3 are not sufficient.
- I suggest replacing the term “essay” with more scientific “research” or “study”.
Author Response
- In the new version of the essay, the projects presented as 'Conclusion' became 'Results' and - following the suggestion of another reviewer - a paragraph of more general Conclusions has been added. In this way we answered to the requested improvement.
- Figures have been improved (quality and sources, when necessary)
- the word essay has been replaced
The mainly reviewed parts are underlined in yellow
