Towards Urban Sustainability: Developing Noise Prediction Model in an Informal Setting

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

What does growth rate of 3.9 mean? Which units are used here?

There are still many errors in the verbs and in the punctuation, please work through and correct again.

Some words are crossed out? Probably still comes from the correction?

What does the abbreviation NDVI stand for?

Sometimes the zero is written before the point and sometimes not, strange? What does that mean? Must be unified!

Figure 1 is pixelated and blurred, you can't see anything!

Author Response

Comment 1: There are still many errors in the verbs and in the punctuation, please work through and correct again.

Response: The article had been re-read by English Teacher. The punctuation and verbs errors were effected.

Comment 2: Some words are crossed out? Probably still comes from the correction?

Response: Yes, this had been addressed during editing
Comment 3: What does the abbreviation NDVI stand for?

Response: NDVI stand s for Normalized Differential Vegetation Index. The had been addressed too

Comment 4: Sometimes the zero is written before the point and sometimes not, strange? What does that mean? Must be unified!

Response: Has been unified as requested

Comment 5: Figure 1 is pixelated and blurred, you can't see anything!

Response: A better resolution copy of the figure has been inserted now.

Reviewer 2 Report

This article mainly uses weighted geographic regression to analyze the impact of noise, and mainly analyzes the impact of noise on (land cover, distance from road, population density, residential subdivision, land use, traffic volume). I don't think the paper's methodology and conclusions contribute to science. And the methodology of the article is too old to see any innovations in the methodology. Conclusion It seems that many articles have been researched. So I think it's a long way from acceptance and I recommend rejecting it. I think the following four major issues need to be addressed in order for an article to reach publication quality.

1. The article needs a lot of innovation and systematic organization of methodology in order to have certain scientific value.

2. The indicators of noise need to be systematically discussed. At present, it is not clear why these indicators are chosen.

3. The research results need to have different findings from previous research or have newer conclusions.

4. The discussion part requires more in-depth research, such as the research contribution of the article, the difference between the article and previous research, and the limitations of this research.

Author Response

Comment 1: The article needs a lot of innovation and systematic organization of methodology in order to have certain scientific value.

Response: The paper adopted and modified the method used by Sieber et al (2017) in south Africa. Our methodology identify and the source of data, the variable used and technique used to arrived at the current conclusion. The method may note looked so new, but in the study area no similar study had been conducted. More so Kano City, the study area had one peculiarity in that both formal and informal areas are sandwiched.

Comment 2: The indicators of noise need to be systematically discussed. At present, it is not clear why these indicators are chosen.

Response: Line 146-154 was added to justify the reason why the indicators were chosen by the study  

Comment 3: The research results need to have different findings from previous research or have newer conclusions.

Response: The study agreed with and corroborate many past studies. This had been highlighted in the discussion section, specifically line 267-272.

4. The discussion part requires more in-depth research, such as the research contribution of the article, the difference between the article and previous research, and the limitations of this research.

Response: The finding of this study was discussed in relation to the past studies. For example in line 267-272 relationship with past studies as finding agreed with many past studies. The study have limitation in not considering other variable, believing that no study exhaustive. There is generally uncertainty in noise modelling in urban certain especially in cities in developing countries such as Nigeria. The study was able to demonstrate population as the most important indicator in noise generation as highlighted in the studies conclusion.    

Reviewer 3 Report

Sustainable urban development is an essential component of modern urban fabric planning. Noise - as a pollution, it plays an increasingly important role in building a friendly space and the well-being of city dwellers. For this reason, the authors have taken the subject right. Boundary conditions were correctly adopted for the tests, but it is a pity that the additional time interval was not taken into account, i.e. 18.00 - 20.00 when in densely populated areas, residents use the city space relatively intensively in some quarters. Through lower temperatures after 18.00 it seems that the activity of the inhabitants may be increased periodically. Taking into account the fact that in the authors' research it was the human factor that played the greatest role in increasing noise, it was the research during these hours that could support their thesis.

 It is a pity that the research did not take into account an additional factor, namely there is no information on the speed and direction of winds in the studied area, which could be helpful in the analysis of noise propagation.

 In my opinion, the final conclusions are too little elaborate. On the basis of the conducted research, it could also be possible to propose preliminary guidelines supporting the reduction of noise in the urban space in such areas, taking into account the physiographic conditions of the city and its buildings in order to balance the urban tissue.

Nevertheless, the work is interesting and can be published after completion.

Author Response

Comment 1: Sustainable urban development is an essential component of modern urban fabric planning. Noise - as a pollution, it plays an increasingly important role in building a friendly space and the well-being of city dwellers. For this reason, the authors have taken the subject right. Boundary conditions were correctly adopted for the tests, but it is a pity that the additional time interval was not taken into account, i.e. 18.00 - 20.00 when in densely populated areas, residents use the city space relatively intensively in some quarters. Through lower temperatures after 18.00 it seems that the activity of the inhabitants may be increased periodically. Taking into account the fact that in the authors' research it was the human factor that played the greatest role in increasing noise, it was the research during these hours that could support their thesis.

Response:  Data for the hours 18.00-2.00 had not been captured by the studies design as rightly observed. While this time is important as observed, the research team consider 16.00-18.00 as the most intense activity hours in the area and therefore chosen by the study. The observation has been noted and might be considered in future work.

Comment 2: It is a pity that the research did not take into account an additional factor, namely there is no information on the speed and direction of winds in the studied area, which could be helpful in the analysis of noise propagation.

Repose: There is general paucity of data on local variation in wind speed and direction in the study area. In the whole metropolis there only two meteorological stations which will not be sufficient to see the impact of this important variable. This can been identified as one of the limitation of the study, as it assumed that wind speed and direction did not significantly varies. Kano is a located in plain a with almost uniform slope and topography, wind speed and direction variation is probably not significant.

Comment 3: In my opinion, the final conclusions are too little elaborate. On the basis of the conducted research, it could also be possible to propose preliminary guidelines supporting the reduction of noise in the urban space in such areas, taking into account the physiographic conditions of the city and its buildings in order to balance the urban tissue.

Response: New recommendation was added based on this observation.

Comment 4: Nevertheless, the work is interesting and can be published after completion

Response: Comments was taken and corrections were done.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for the improvements
Now ok. 

Reviewer 2 Report

The article has been modified to a certain extent, which has increased the interest of readers. I wish I good luck.