Dear Dr Schelp and Dr Wegmann,

After receiving feedback from the reviewers and your respective responses I am recommending further review of your manuscript following major revisions.

Please implement all revisions outlined in your response to both reviewers.

I look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

All the best,
Michelle Parks

I am recommending publication following the implementation of minor revisions suggested by both referees.

Please address point by referee 2 regarding making the website more accessible/user friendly:
"This could be remedied with a basic walk through mode, for which there are a range of libraries and which can be trivially added with minimal effort (a day or two at the most). Even a simple page of text describing them, accessible from a link (as I think you are suggesting with ​http://hazmapper.org/learn) would do, which would be even simpler. So I recommend minor revisions to resolve this one outstanding point."

Please implement changes suggested by referee 3:
Line 10:
Authors states this tool is useful also for historical natural disasters. While true, historical events will benefit form products which can be used for scientific analysis and modeling. This iteration of Hazmapper has to rely on hand mapping within the application. Doable for a small event but highly cumbersome if needed to be done over larger areas. I think it is more suitable towards visualizing events which will occur in future.

Line 55 – 60:
Justification for developing HazMapper based on level of emergency response and available resource between affluent and non-affluent regions is not correct. I urge authors to revisit this section and come up with a better motivation for developing HazMapper.

Equation 1:
Why use VIR instead of Red which is more common?

Line 163:
How does one judge an image to be suitable?

Line 290:
How is data latency for Sentinel and Landsat in GEE. Does this add to the time mentioned here? This should be discussed.

Line 288:
Do authors envision machine learning based HazMapper to semi automate mapping of every natural hazard described here. Visualization as it is now is not an issue but when it comes to automation, different natural hazards will require different setup. Some clarification on this will be useful.

All the best,
Michelle

Many thanks for your final comments to the referees. I am recommending publishing following very minor revisions listed below:

line 231 "As such, volcanologists have been using remote-sensing tools, particularly multi-spectral satellite data, as early as the mid-1980’s to monitor volcanic heat signatures as precursors to eruptive activity (Rothery et al., 1988)." Please reword slightly.

The primary application of remote-sensing now used by volcanologists is mapping ground deformation related to magmatic intrusions to determine the parameters of the intrusion - location, geometry and volume change - and to map magma migration prior to the onset of an eruption. It is also routinely used for mapping co-eruptive deformation and estimating magma flow rates.

line 385 "possess"

All the best,
Michelle