1. Introduction
The main line of urban construction has changed from incremental expansion to the stage of stock improvement, and urban renewal has become an inevitable choice for future urban development [
1]. This transition aligns with the pressing need to move beyond mere economic growth toward enhancing environmental quality and climate resilience. In this context, the renewal of historic districts emerges as a distinct typology of urban intervention, presenting the dual imperative of preserving irreplaceable cultural heritage while improving the living conditions of their inhabitants.
Urban residential historic districts are defined by their dual function as both living spaces and heritage sites. This combination creates unique challenges. Their building layout is compact and lacks open space; hot air cannot be diffused, and urban thermal environmental problems directly affect the comprehensive environment of the historical and cultural districts, which, in turn, will cause irreversible damage to the historical and cultural heritage. Furthermore, as residential land often constitutes about 80% of these districts [
2], outdoor environmental quality is directly linked to resident health and well-being [
3]. Strict regulations aimed at preserving historical authenticity severely limit the range of permissible physical interventions, making conventional environmental upgrades difficult. Therefore, finding ways to improve the microclimate within these strict constraints is a key problem for historic districts planning and conservation.
The regulation of microclimate at the district scale has received growing attention. According to the urban canopy theory proposed by Oke [
4], optimizing physical factors related to solar illumination at the district level and incorporating climate adaptation into urban planning and design will contribute to sustainable urban development. Research on improving outdoor comfort can be broadly divided into three categories: district wind environment research [
5,
6], district thermal environment research [
7,
8,
9,
10], and district light environment research [
11,
12,
13,
14]. The outdoor thermal environment of a historic district is a collection of microclimatic elements such as air temperature, humidity, wind speed and solar radiation, which is closely related to the spatial pattern of the district. The degree of influence of each microclimatic element on the outdoor thermal environment varies, and for historic districts, in the absence of effective shading, the intensity of solar radiation has a stronger effect on the outdoor thermal environment than air temperature, and under shaded conditions, the outdoor thermal environment is most sensitive to air temperature [
15]. The spatial morphology of a historic district mainly includes the district layout, street orientation, street height-to-width ratios (H/W), and sky view factor (SVF) [
16,
17]. Under the condition of respecting the district texture and not changing the existing built environment and underlay material, the influence of greening and street orientation on the outdoor comfort of historic districts is particularly critical [
18,
19,
20,
21], and their rational planning and layout are important for alleviating the urban heat island effect, enhancing the living comfort of the districts and promoting the protection of history and culture.
Urban greening is a fundamental strategy for improving microclimates, providing cooling, humidity regulation, and wind modulation [
22]. Tree planting is the most common approach at the district level. Trees cool the environment and improve pedestrian comfort mainly through shading and transpiration [
23], with shading being a particularly key mechanism [
7]. Research shows the impact of vegetation varies by scale. For individual trees, factors like species, height, leaf area index (LAI), leaf area density (LAD), and canopy structure determine cooling effectiveness [
24,
25,
26,
27]. For groups of trees, their spacing, layout, and configuration control the overall shading and cooling effects, making these design choices a major research focus [
28].
Street orientation is another critical factor. Studies show that in street canyons, the thermal environment is shaped by both vegetation and urban form. For example, east–west streets usually receive more direct sunlight. The cooling benefit of trees is also influenced by street orientation and the H/W ratio [
28]. Research on tree layout indicates that arrangements like double rows can be more effective than single rows, and that calm wind conditions are more favorable for vegetation to improve comfort [
29].
A central practical question is how to quantify the effect of specific design choices, like tree spacing, in these constrained settings. The sky view factor (SVF) is a valuable metric here. It measures the openness of the sky from a given Point, effectively summarizing the shading effects of both buildings and trees. In historic districts with fixed buildings, adjusting tree spacing is a primary way to modify SVF. While closer spacing can increase shade and block the sun, too much density can lead to overcrowding, poor tree health, and reduced long-term shading [
30]. Therefore, establishing clear links between practical design parameters like spacing and the resulting SVF and comfort is essential for effective, evidence-based greening in historic areas.
Based on this understanding, this study takes the historic districts in Nanjing, a historical and cultural city in China, as a case. Specifically, the study aims to: (1) analyze the spatial characteristics of the thermal environment of residential historic districts in Nanjing through empirical measurements; (2) use street tree spacing as a regulatory variable, ENVI-met simulations are employed to examine how microclimatic elements and thermal comfort interact under different combinations of season, spacing, and street orientation; (3) by modeling various street tree layouts, the study further applies the sky view factor (SVF) as a quantitative measure of shading to identify the optimal annual shading strategy.
3. Results
3.1. Summer Simulation Results—Characterization of the Thermal Environment for Different Scenarios
- (1)
Air temperature
SVF at street monitoring sites a, b, and c for the typical summer day control group were 0.571, 0.67, and 0.706, and the air temperatures at each monitoring Point showed a trend of increasing and then decreasing with time, and the simulation group showed the same trend (
Table 8). The average peak temperatures all appeared at 16:00, with the control group at 32.885 °C. The highest temperatures of the simulated groups were all higher than those of the control group. The highest temperature of the S–N street was 32.997 °C. The highest temperature of the E–W street was 33.135 °C. The highest temperature of the SE–NW street was 32.962 °C. The highest temperature of the NE–SW street was 32.941 °C. This is different from what is traditionally perceived, but should be due to the fact that the overall SVF of the modeled spaces is all lower, and the denser environment affects air flow.
Under the influence of different planting spacings, the air temperature of S–N streets was lower at a planting spacing of 12 m, and the air temperature at Point A was lower at all the measurement Points, and Point C was higher at all the measurement Points; the air temperature of E–W streets was lower at a planting spacing of 8 m, the air temperature at Point A was lower at all the monitoring Points at a planting spacing of 4 m and 8 m, and the air temperature at Point C was lower at all the monitoring Points only at a planting spacing of 12 m; the air temperature of SE–NW streets was lower at a planting spacing of 12 m, and air temperature was higher at Point A and lower at Point C at all monitoring Points; air temperature at NE–SW streets was lower at a planting spacing of 8 m, lower at Point B at planting spacings of 4 m and 8 m, and lower at Point C at a planting spacing of 12 m.
- (2)
Relative humidity
The change trend of each street is basically the same; the control group and the simulation group both show the trend of decreasing first and then increasing with time (
Table 8). From 9:00 to 18:00, all of them are decreasing first and then increasing, the minimum value of the relative humidity all appeared at 16:00, which coincides with the time of the maximum value of the temperature, and the minimum value of the control group is 51.256%, and the relative humidity of simulated groups are all decreasing compared with that of the control group, with 51.108% for the S–N streets, 51.069% for the E–W streets, 51.366% for the SE–NW streets and 51.239% for the NE–SW streets.
Under the influence of different planting spacings, the relative humidity is lower when the planting spacing of S–N streets is 12 m, and the relative humidity at Point B of each monitoring Point is lower; the difference in relative humidity between E–W streets under different planting spacings is very small, and the relative humidity is smaller when the planting spacing is 12 m; the humidity in NE–SW and SE–NW streets is basically the same, and the relative humidity is lower when the planting spacing is 12 m, and the relative humidity at Point C of the monitoring Point is lower.
- (3)
Average radiation temperature
Typical summer day street Tmrt control and simulated time-by-time plots are shown in (
Table 8), and the relative humidity at each monitoring Point in the control group shows a trend of decreasing, then increasing, and then decreasing with time, and the overall is relatively stable after 9:00, and the lowest value of the Tmrt average is 22.777 °C at 12:00. The trend of the simulation group is basically the same as that of the control group, but the lowest value occurs at 10:00, with 26.312 °C in the S–N streets, 26.605 °C in the E–W streets, 26.489 °C in the SE–NW streets, and 26.459 °C in the NE–SW streets, which is an overall increase compared to that of the control group, and the increase in SE–NW streets is the most, with a maximum increase of 3.543 °C.
Under the influence of different planting spacings, the lowest mean Tmrt value was found at 12 m planting spacing in the S–N streets; the lowest mean Tmrt value was found at 8 m spacing in the E–W streets, with the lowest Tmrt value at Point A; the lowest mean Tmrt value was found at 12 m planting spacing in the SE–NW streets, with the lowest Tmrt at Point B, and the lowest Tmrt value was found at Point A at planting spacing of 4 and 8 m; Tmrt was lowest at planting spacing of 8 m in the NE–SW streets.
- (4)
UTCI
The control and simulated time-by-time plots of street UTCI on a typical day in summer are shown in (
Table 8), and the UTCI at each monitoring Point in the control group showed an overall trend of decreasing, then increasing, and then decreasing over time, with the minimum value of the average UTCI value appearing at 13:00 during the overall simulation. The trend of UTCI change for each street in the simulation group was basically the same, experiencing three decreases and two increases from 8:00 to 17:00. Except for the minimum value of UTCI for the E–W-oriented street, which appeared at 12:00, and was 31.328 °C, the minimum values for the rest of the streets appeared at 13:00, with 31.415 °C for the S–N-oriented streets, 31.405 °C for the SE–NW-oriented streets, and 31.477 °C for the NE–SW-oriented streets. According to the comfort classification of UTCI, 32–38 °C belongs to the hot zone and 26–32 °C belongs to the warm zone, and the E–W-oriented streets, which have the lowest UTCI among the streets, are the most comfortable with a mean value of 31.895 °C.
Under the influence of different planting spacings, the mean value of UTCI for all four alignments of streets was taken to be the lowest at a planting spacing of 12 m. At this Point, the UTCI was the lowest at Point B among all the measurement Points.
3.2. Summer Correlation Analysis and Discussion
From the above study, it is clear that SVF has a relationship with air temperature, relative humidity, mean radiant temperature, and UTCI, and in order to explore the specific relationship between them, regression analyses were conducted to analyze the SVF with each influencing factor in terms of seasons and streets.
- (1)
SVF and air temperature
As can be seen from
Table 9, the R
2 of the fitted curve of air temperature and SVF in summer is only greater than 0.3 for streets in the SE–NW-oriented streets, and the
p-value of all streets is greater than 0.05, which is not statistically significant, and the difference is not statistically significant; in terms of sub-direction, there is no obvious relationship between the SVF and the air temperature of each street. This is the same as the results of Li Jingjin et al. [
37]. It shows that the streets of Nanjing historical and cultural districts in the summer is not simply the more shaded space, the lower the radiation value, the lower the temperature, SVF can not directly affect the air temperature, or maybe the simulation space is more ideal than the actual space, the actual street interface of the various changes produced by the climate of the space is more complex.
- (2)
SVF and relative humidity
The linear R
2 in the fitted curves is higher than the quadratic curves, so the linear relationship is used for the description. As can be seen from
Table 9, the linear fit of relative humidity in summer has some significance; R
2 is greater than 0.3, the fit is more meaningful, the
p-value is less than 0.05, and the difference is more significant. SE–NW-oriented streets have a higher fit, and the difference in the data is also higher compared to the other directions. The overall trend is that the relative humidity decreases as the SVF increases, and the S–N-oriented streets have the fastest decreasing speed, with the mean relative humidity decreasing by −0.104% for every 0.1 increase in SVF; the E–W-oriented streets have the slowest decreasing speed, with the mean relative humidity decreasing by −0.039% for every 0.1 increase in SVF.
- (3)
SVF and average radiation temperature
As can be seen from
Table 9, the curve fit of Tmrt in summer is higher; R
2 is greater than 0.6, the fit is significant,
p-values are less than 0.05, and the difference is significant. S–N-oriented street has a higher fit, and the variability of the data is also higher compared to the other directions. The overall trend is that Tmrt increases and then decreases as SVF increases. The mean values of Tmrt for the S–N-, SE–NW-, and NE–SW-oriented streets all obtain their maximum values when SVF is less than 0.2, and the E–W-oriented street obtains its maximum value near the SVF of 0.1, which is the largest among the four streets, and the S–N-oriented street is the lowest.
- (4)
SVF and UTCI
As shown in
Table 9, the curve fits of summer UTCI are very high, with R
2 greater than 0.7, which is a significant fit, and the
p-values are less than 0.001, except for the SE–NW-oriented street, which is a significant difference. The overall trend is that the mean value of UTCI increases and then decreases with the increase in SVF, and the mean value of UTCI in the E–W-, SE–NW-, and NE–SW-oriented streets obtains the maximum value when the SVF is less than 0.2, and the maximum value of UTCI in the S–N-oriented street is near 0.1. Therefore, when designing small-scale streetscapes, one should try to avoid overly confined spaces, which can lead to reduced comfort.
3.3. Winter Simulation Results—Characterization of the Thermal Environment for Different Scenarios
- (1)
Air temperature
The SVF corresponding to street monitoring Points A, B, and C were 0.571, 0.67, and 0.706 for the typical winter day control group. And the air temperatures of the monitoring Points in the control group showed a trend of increasing and then decreasing, while the trend of the air temperature in the simulation group was the same as that of the control group, and the peaks of the mean temperatures all appeared at 15:00. The peak temperature of the S–N street was 0.25 °C. The peak temperature of the E–W street was 0.45 °C. The peak temperature of the SE–NW street was 0.343 °C. The peak temperature of the NE–SW street was 0.272 °C. All of these were higher than that of the control group, with the NE–SW street increasing the most, by 0.21 °C. Overall, E–W streets still had the highest average temperature of −0.559 °C, and NE–SW streets had the lowest average temperature of −0.658 °C.
Under the influence of different planting spacings, the air temperature across all four street orientations tended to be higher at the 4 m planting spacing, with Point A typically recording higher temperatures and Point C lower at each monitoring Point, except for S–N streets, where Point B was lower, and NE–SW streets, where Point B was higher.
- (2)
Relative humidity
The trend of change was basically the same for all streets, with two increases and two decreases from 9:00 to 18:00. The minimum value of relative humidity appeared at 15:00, which coincided with the time of the maximum value of temperature, which was 56.42% for the S–N street, 52.391% for the E–W street, 54.712% for the SE–NW street, and 55.871% for the NE–SW street; relative humidity decreased from the control except for E–W street, with SE–NW street experiencing the greatest decrease of 0.92%. Overall, the highest RH was 61.874% in the S–N street, and the lowest was 57.523% in the E–W street.
Under the influence of different planting spacing, relative humidity tended to be lower at narrower planting spacings (4 m or 8 m) for most streets, with the specific measurement Point (A, B, or C) showing the lowest humidity varying by orientation. In general, except for the S–N street, the difference in relative humidity between the same measurement Points in each direction is not significant.
- (3)
Average radiation temperature
The trend of Tmrt changes in each street is basically the same; from 9:00 to 18:00, all of them are decreasing, then increasing and then decreasing, and the larger value of Tmrt in the simulation process occurs at 14:00. On the whole, the Tmrt of the S–N street was the highest at −3.614 °C, and the Tmrt of the E–W street was the lowest at −4.371 °C. The highest mean Tmrt values were generally found at 4 m planting spacing across orientations, with Point B often recording the highest Tmrt values.
- (4)
UTCI
The minimum mean UTCI values were −0.75 °C for S–N-oriented streets, −4.902 °C for E–W-oriented streets, −3.735 °C for SE–NW-oriented streets, and −3.521 °C for NE–SW-oriented streets. Compared to the control group, the UTCI increased in all streets. The largest increase in the S–N street was 3.282 °C. According to UTCI Comfort Classification, −13 to 0 °C belongs to the cold zone, and 0 to 9 °C is the cool zone. The highest mean UTCI value of −0.219 °C was recorded for S–N-oriented streets. The cool zone is 4 h and is overall significantly more comfortable than the rest of the street. E–W-oriented street UTCI average is the lowest at −4.326 °C, all in the cold range.
Under the influence of different planting spacings, the highest mean UTCI was found at 4 m planting spacing in the S–N-oriented street with 5 h in the cool zone. Point A was the highest among the measured Points, with 8 h in the cool zone. 12 m planting spacing in the E–W street had the highest mean UTCI values, all of which were cool intervals, with Point a being the highest among the measured Points. For the SE–NW street, the highest mean UTCI values were found at 4 m planting spacing, all in the cold range, and Point B was the highest among the measured Points. The highest mean UTCI values were found at 12 m spacing between street plantings in the NE–SW street, all in the cold zone, with Point a being the highest among the measurement Points.
3.4. Winter Correlation Analysis
- (1)
SVF and air temperature
The curve fits for winter air temperatures were very good (R2 > 0.5, p < 0.05), indicating a significant fit. E–W, S–N, and NE–SW streets exhibited a general trend of air temperature first increasing and then decreasing with rising SVF, while SE–NW streets showed a decreasing trend. The average values of air temperatures in the E–W streets have maximum values near SVF 0, S–N streets have maximum values near SVF 0.26, and NE–SW streets have maximum values near SVF 0.4. The minimum value of the SE–NW direction has its minimum value when SVF > 1, but SVF > 1 does not have practical significance, and so it does not have a minimum value. Initial air temperatures are highest toward streets SE–NW and lowest toward streets NE–SW. NE–SW street air temperature maxima are the lowest among the streets, and E–W streets are the highest.
- (2)
SVF and relative humidity
The linear fits for SE–NW and NE–SW street relative humidity in winter were meaningful (R
2 > 0.3,
p < 0.05). In contrast, the fits for E–W and S–N streets were not statistically significant (
p > 0.05), suggesting SVF does not directly affect relative humidity in these orientations during winter. For SE–NW and NE–SW streets, relative humidity generally increased with SVF. The SE–NW streets showed a faster increase rate, with mean relative humidity rising by 1.819% for every 0.1 increase in SVF (
Figure 4), and exceeding that of NE–SW streets when SVF > 0.6.
- (3)
SVF and average radiation temperature
The curve fit for winter Tmrt was high (R
2 > 0.6,
p < 0.05), indicating a very significant relationship. In general, the Tmrt of each street shows a trend of increasing and then decreasing with the increase in SVF (
Figure 4). The average values of Tmrt of S–N and NE–SW streets are maximized around SVF 0.3, the maximum values of E–W and SE–NW streets are maximized around SVF 0.1, and the maximum value of the E–W street is the largest among the four, which is consistent with the summer. Tmrt maxima are lowest for NE–SW-oriented streets. Tmrt initial values are highest for SE–NW-oriented streets and lowest for S–N-oriented streets, again as in summer.
- (4)
SVF and UTCI
The curve fits for winter UTCI were very good (R
2 > 0.7,
p < 0.05), showing a significant relationship. In general, the mean UTCI values tended to increase and then decrease with increasing SVF (
Figure 4). According to the UTCI thermal sensory temperature range, the simulated mean UTCI for this day is in the cool range except for the S–N street SVF of 0~0.4, where the UTCI is > 0 °C. The rest of the time is in the −13~0 °C range, which is in the cool range. The average S–N street UTCI value maximizes around the SVF of 0.1. The E–W street maximizes around the SVF of 0.4. SE–NW and NE–SW streets are maximized around SVF 0.3. The S–N street had the highest mean maximum UTCI value, indicating it was the most comfortable orientation, while the E–W street had the lowest, indicating the least comfort. This pattern of initial UTCI values was also consistent with summer findings.
5. Conclusions
This study contributes to incorporating considerations of microclimate comfort into the design of street spaces in historical districts of hot-summer and cold-winter regions, such as Nanjing, in the future, making the design more scientific and providing a reference for future planning decisions. It is important to acknowledge that the field campaign was conducted on eight streets over two days in early September, and the detailed winter analysis and SVF thresholds are based solely on ENVI-met simulations, as no winter field measurements were available. The main findings of this paper are as follows.
(1) It was found that SVF was correlated with air temperature, relative humidity and solar radiation.
(2) Based on simulations of typical street spaces within the historical districts of Nanjing, this study examines the thermal comfort characteristics of streets with different orientations under identical environmental conditions. The results reveal the following patterns.
① On a typical summer day, E–W-oriented streets exhibit lower mean UTCI values than streets in other directions, indicating the highest level of thermal comfort, while S–N-oriented streets perform the worst.
② On a typical winter day, the mean UTCI values of S–N-oriented streets are higher than those of other orientations, suggesting superior thermal comfort in winter, whereas E–W-oriented streets demonstrate the poorest performance.
③ Considering both seasonal scenarios, SE–NW- and NE–SW-oriented streets maintain moderate and relatively balanced thermal comfort throughout the year. Therefore, urban design and planning in historical districts should prioritize these two orientations when configuring pedestrian routes and spatial nodes. In addition, design interventions should focus on enhancing winter comfort along E–W streets and mitigating excessive summer UTCI values along S–N streets.
(3) There is a difference in the performance of each street in different planting spacing, specifically in the S–N and SE–NW streets; street tree planting spacing of 8 m can be achieved with a more comfortable feeling, while in the E–W and NE–SW streets, street tree planting spacing of 12 m can be achieved with a more comfortable feeling in the summer. It shows that in the summer of Nanjing, the street space of the historic district is not the denser the trees, the lower the SVF, the higher the comfort, but the overly dense space will lead to the accumulation of humidity and the increase in air temperature.
(4) Through the regression model of SVF and microclimate factors and comfort, the following results are obtained.
① The SVF of S–N-oriented streets should be maintained at 0.3 to 0.5 in the summer, so that it is appropriate to plant trees with higher LAD and higher branches, thus ensuring the formation of ventilation corridors in the summer.
② E–W-oriented streets should avoid the vicinity of 0.2 SVF in the summer, and it is more reasonable that SVF should remain near 0.4 to 0.6, with broadleaf deciduous trees recommended.
③ SE–NW-oriented streets should avoid the vicinity of 0.2 SVF in the summer, and NE–SW-oriented streets are about the same as SE–NW-oriented streets, so it makes more sense that the SVF should remain near 0.3 to 0.5.
④ SVF was highly correlated with UTCI in all streets, and the R2 of the fitted curves of SVF with UTCI toward streets S–N, E–W, SE–NW, and NE–SW in summer were 0.832, 0.783, 0.746, and 0.886.
Overall, it is reasonable to control the SVF value of streets in Nanjing’s historic districts at 0.3~0.6. Too open or too closed will reduce the comfort of the district microclimate environment.
(5) Insights into microclimate optimization in historic districts
Regarding the renovation of Yongyuan Road, the following key optimization insights are mainly obtained for the planning of urban historical districts in hot-summer and cold-winter regions:
① Planning for reasonable planting spacing
Reasonable planting spacing can, on the one hand, obtain suitable SVF values and, on the other hand, save unnecessary waste of plant resources.
② Choosing the right tree species
When planting street trees, consider the crown width, seasonal characteristics, and height under the branches on the one hand, and the LAD value of the trees on the other hand.
③ Considering a variety of top masking options
In the above simulation, the interference of trees and shrubs as SVF is taken into account, and the traditional methods, such as awnings, arcades, and cold alleys along the street in real life, are all active adaptations to the environment.
④ Vertical greening
On the one hand, vertical greening can save the footprint of greening and improve the utilization of land resources, and on the other hand, the effect of vertical greening on the improvement of microclimate has also been confirmed by early studies.