Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this work, Liu et al applied the compact city theory to Shenyang (China) to evaluate the city quality from several different aspects. This work not only provides a direct guidance for the development of Shenyang, but also offer a tool for the evaluation of the other cities. The reviewer believes that more analysis should be applied to the data, and the work can be accepted after a moderate revision.

 

Section 3.1, Figure 3 is a straightforward map for the evaluation of spatial compactness. How the authors find that the “the distribution of spatial compactness on the South Bank was relatively balanced“？Is it only a feeling by eye? As this conclusion is quite important, deeper analysis based on e.g. statistics should be provided. It is good to apply the same analysis to the other sections.

 

The overall level of spatial compactness in the study area was not high, with an average value of only 0.376932. It is unclear how the “not high” is evaluated. Is there any standard?

 

There are several big city parks on both banks facing to the river, which should have a significant effect or signal in the heat maps, as the examples included the Nanhu, Shenhe Campus. I suggest a further discussion on it.

 

Please indicate the full name of “POI data” at its first appearance in section 2.2.1.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you very much for the chance of reviewing this manuscript about the effect of rapid urbanization on the land use of Shenyang City. Urbanization, which involves the conversion of land use from non-urban to urban uses, occurs in many cities and countries. Although urbanization could address the issues of unemployment, educational opportunities and enhancing the quality of life, a series of side effects were derived, such as environmental pollution, poor sanitation and housing conditions, and related health conditions. This study is timely work and thus I read it with great interest. The methodologies section was well conducted as each procedure was clearly described and demonstrated. However, several issues in the introduction, discussion and limitation sections need to be clarified and improved, as listed below.

 

1.     In section 1.1, could you provide related evidence (references) for these statements for the following statements “Since 1990sm, China’s economy has maintained… development and construction.”; “Meanwhile, the compact city, conceptualized to deal with sprawling urban forms…in Mainland China.”; “Compact city theory proposes …energy consumption by transportation.”?

2.     In section 1.1, “Therefore, based on the concepts of the compact city and intensive development, we explored the compact development goals and opportunities for urban governance and scientific pathways for urban renewal and design governance. We expected to help realize the sustainable development of the city and promote the scientific nature of planning and management.” Whether this statement indicated the intention of this study.

3.     I found that “We aimed to provide scientific guidance for policy measures relevant to the densification of urban morphology and renewal governance” which should be the purpose of this study. However, these statements were not convincing enough to show the significance of this study. Please improve it. Are any special or remarkable spatial/ land characteristics of that area in Shenyang City compared with other areas that you think Shenyang City is worthy to be investigated?

4.     In section 4.2, different governance strategies were mentioned. However, no sources were used to support your statement and findings. You had to elucidate both supporting and opposing findings from previous studies. However, it is obvious that no related evidence and statements were shown, leading to a weak and unpersuasive analysis of the findings.

5.     Could you list the selection of this area in Shenyang City as one of the limitations and explain it? It is because different cultures or citizens' characteristics may affect the urbanization process and the results of this studies just can serve as a reference for the related parties, and the data should be used with caution due to the discrepancies.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This study uses GIS data on parcels and buildings to create a spatial compactness index and a land use mixing index, and evaluates the target city based on their coupling coordination. The study analyzes differences in spatial characteristics, and it looks succeed in extracting the characteristics of the subject district.

 However, it is difficult to understand what the indicators mean because the explanations of the terms and the details of the indicators are insufficient and the mathematical formulas cannot be traced. The following points need to be addressed.

l  It is necessary to explain what is meant by dispersion in Table 2.

l  It is necessary to explain why the explanatory variable for Compactness is sufficient.

l  Equation (1) φ and ϕ should be distinguished.

l  It is necessary to explain what r means. The derivation process of equation (2) also needs to be explained.

l  Pj is explained in the text, but it needs to be expressed in a formula.

l  The meaning of n used in equations (1) and (4) is different. Different symbols should be used.

l  It is necessary to explain what is meant by "functional impact.”

l  U1 and U2 must be expressed in mathematical expressions using the symbols in Equations (1) - (6).

l  Are D on the right and left sides of equation (9) the same? If they are the same, then D=C is the solution.

l  It is necessary to explain why the coupling degree and the Degree of coordination can be expressed by equations (7) and (8). It is also necessary to explain how the evaluation values in Table 4 were obtained.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

My questions are solved. I think the manuscript can be accepted in its current form.

Author Response

谢谢你的帮助.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript has been revised according to the requirements. Thank you very much.

Author Response

谢谢你的帮助.

Reviewer 3 Report

My previous comment regarding the coupling degree was addressed in the response form but not reflected in the revised draft. I think the coupling index is quite arbitrary, and I think it would be better to describe in the manuscript that as explained in the response form.

Author Response

Thank you for reminding me. I modified the manuscript accordingly.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf