Comparative Residents’ Satisfaction Evaluation for Socially Sustainable Regeneration—The Case of Two High-Density Communities in Suzhou
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is an interesting article with conclusions of general interest based on the research. However it needs significant revision before it could be suitable for publication, as follows:
-the style is inappropriate in its frequent note form and extensive use of bullet point-style lists; it needs to be revised in standard paragraph form.
-the use of English contains many errors and needs substantial editing for correction.
-the chapter combining results and discussion needs to be separated into two ie results (describing what was found from primary data) and then discussion (analysing/interpreting what was found from primary data, cross referencing as appropriate to the results chapter preceding it).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear author/s,
the topic of the manuscript is interesting, however there are several aspects that need to be review:
1. in the methodology part please mention how the respondents were selected? how the sample was established? how representative is the sample?
2. how was tested the reliability and validity of the questionnaire?
3. the results should be discussed comparing them with other similar researches in order to underline the originality of the manuscript and the contribution to the field.
Good luck!
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Figure 2: What's the difference between the boxes with continuous lines and dashed lines?
What is FAR?
Figure 4: legend cannot be read it.
The paper investigates the correlation between QoL and social sustainability, interviewing residents in high-dense communities regarding their perceptions. I find the study well-designed and the selected statistical method for the analysis is very interesting. The results can help shape policies improving the quality of life of residents. I suggest accepting the manuscript after minor revisions.
What is GFA?
Does architectural Density mean Building density?
Why don't you include more indicators for Community Environment such as cleanness, noise pollution, etc?
How did you invite people to participate in the survey? Were there any inclusion or exclusion criteria?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I believe issues have been addressed and only copy-editing now needed
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear author/s,
Thank you for the improved version of the manuscript!
Good luck!
