Safety drawings are often returned with recurring comments that could have been avoided from the start, and each round of comments means extra weeks before construction or licensing. The cause is usually not the project's complexity but basic mistakes in classification, means of egress or coordination with the architecture. This guide sets out the most common civil defense comments on safety drawings, linked to the principles in its regulations, with a table showing each comment, its effect and how to avoid it, and a checklist before upload.

1. Incorrect Occupancy Classification

All requirements start from the classification. Classifying a large restaurant or club as ordinary commercial instead of an assembly building (50 people or more under the civil defense definition) drops essential requirements. Read: The fire protection code.

2. Means of Egress

  • Too few exits for the number of occupants.
  • Travel distances longer than allowed.
  • Exits leading to unsafe places instead of outside.
  • Unprotected stairs where the regulation requires protection.

Read: Evacuation signs and escape routes.

3. Fire Compartments

Not separating different uses; the regulation states that if a building is used for more than one purpose, the section for each purpose is considered a fire compartment. In residential buildings, each unit is a separate compartment, and a corridor over 30 metres needs a fire door.

4. Systems Not Matching the Height

Omitting dry standpipes in buildings of five floors or more or 18 metres, or wet standpipes above 28 metres, according to civil defense requirements. Read: The high-rise towers requirements guide.

5. Gaps in Detection and Alarm

Areas without detectors, a detector type unsuited to the space, or no manual call points near exits. Read: Fire alarm system requirements.

6. Calculations and Specifications

Missing hydraulic calculations or equipment specifications. See our fire-fighting systems design service.

7. Lack of Coordination

The safety drawing conflicting with the approved architecture (an exit in a different place, or a door whose swing has changed). Read: Clashes between drawings.

Table: Comment, Effect and How to Avoid It

CommentEffectAvoidance
Wrong classificationRedesigning large partsCalculate occupant numbers and use accurately first
Insufficient exitsArchitectural changesEarly coordination with the architect
Undefined compartmentsChanging walls and doorsShow compartments clearly on the drawing
Missing standpipesAdding a whole networkReview height requirements
Missing calculationsRe-uploadAttach pump and network calculations

Checklist Before Upload

  • Classification and occupant numbers set and justified.
  • Number of exits and travel distances compliant.
  • Compartments and fire-resistant doors shown.
  • Detectors and call points cover all spaces.
  • Hydraulic calculations attached.
  • The drawing matches the latest approved architectural set.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who responds to the comments?

The engineering office that designed the safety drawing.

Do comments delay the licence?

Yes, each round adds time, so prior self-review is important.

Do comments differ between small and large projects?

The principles are the same, but large and mixed-use projects attract more comments on compartments and systems.

Can comments be avoided entirely?

They can be greatly reduced through correct classification, self-review and coordination.

What happens after the drawing is approved?

Installation to the approved set, then testing. Read: Fire system drawings.

How Abak Engineering Consultancy Helps

Abak is an accredited engineering office in Riyadh that designs safety drawings with accurate classification, self-review and coordination with the architecture before upload, and addresses any comments until approval. See our safety systems design review service, or contact us.

Regulatory information is based on the Balady platform and the Ministry of Municipalities and Housing, and procedures may be updated by the competent authority. Last reviewed: October 2026.