Main Design Considerations and Prospects of Contemporary Tall Timber Apartment Buildings: Views of Key Professionals from Finland

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper reports the main design considerations and prospects of tall timer builidings from the perspective of Finland. The major comments to the authors are shown below:

Table 1
How does the authors to define the generality of interviewees?

Line 193
The authors stated that "construction of the first tall apartment building in Finland was considered a significant factor in the credibility of timber construction". 
The reviewer was not fully convinced by this reason. The authors should discuss more based on the actual demand for the construction of tall timer buildings in Finland.

Section 3

Although the authors has put forward the critical issues affecting architecture and other design solutions as well as the obstacles and prospects, it is still unclear what percentage of interviewees agree/disagree with these views. So the reviewer cannot judge if the points raised by the authors are credible or not.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very interesting topic, portrayed nicely by the authors. Unfortunately, at this stage this manuscript is not ready for publication as it is in need of structural development. The language style used is very good but the authors need to upgrade their scope, objectives and data analysis.  

The scope and objectives are restricted. The conclusion that the construction cost affects architectural and structural design was expected. It is useful, but not novel.

Line 103-104 seems out of place

Why was the first part excluded and what is the case study mentioned (line 106)?

The findings are weak. The authors could reorganize their findings in a SWOT analysis scheme.

Statistical results deriving from the likert scale should also be portrayed.

The questionnaire used could be provided in an appendix.     

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors has properly addressed my questions. The paper can be accepted in the current form.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is highly improved. All additions and new text are very helpful for future readers. Congratulations to the authors.