MINUTES OF THE 1609th MEETING (ONLINE) OF THE DELHI URBAN ART COMMISSION (DUAC) HELD ON SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 04, 2021.
SL. No.PROPOSALOBSERVATIONS /SUGGESTIONSDECISIONREMARKS

C. PROJECT PROPOSALS:

1Revised Building Plans Proposal In Respect of Senior Secondary School At E-Block Main Market, Malviya Nagar For Gujranwala Gurukul Trust Society.

1.    The proposal was forwarded by the SDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2.    The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on May 07, 2018, and the concept of the revised building plan proposal was accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on August 19, 2021, specific observations were given.

3.    The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-11082127059 dated 25.08.2021. Based on the revised submission and the replies submitted following observations are to be complied with:

a)      Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. All service equipment should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Approved, observations given.The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

2Layout And Building Plan Proposal In Respect of Redevelopment of Residential Colony For AIIMS At Ayur Vigyan Nagar.

1.    The proposal was forwarded by the SDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2.    The Commission accepted the concept of the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on March 01, 2017.

3.    The layout and building plan proposal (for residential towers, apartments, local shopping centre, clubhouse, banquet hall, dispensary and informal market) received (online) was scrutinised  and the following observations are to be complied with:

a)      The Commission observed that the proposal is at a Formal level, but most of the drawings submitted are of low resolution and blurred and not easy to comprehend. i.e. resolution is too low and cannot be comprehended due to lack of clarity. The same shall be resubmitted in a high-resolution format. The current submission lacks legibility & clarity thus is not appreciated by the Commission.

b)      The 3D views have been submitted without annotations thus making it difficult to comprehend the materials etc. on the façade which could have a bearing on the visual, urban aesthetics of the complex. A sufficient number of Self-explanatory, annotated 3D views (at least 6 in numbers) of each and every block (for residential towers, apartments, local shopping centre, clubhouse, banquet hall, dispensary and informal market) at various angles along with the skin sections (in detail with 3D views), clearly showing the proposed design scheme with proper annotations and corresponding to proposal drawings be submitted for better understanding of the proposal.

c)      The parking plan shows some parking in multiple basements but still has extensive surface parking all over the site, which would mar the visual, urban aesthetics of the complex. Central landscaped core of the residential clusters (Block B & Block C) could be access controlled with bollards to facilitate fire engine movement with some soft parking located there as shown serving to meet ECS requirements but only being permitted when basement parking is exhausted.  The proposed design approach might alter and mar the aesthetics of the area by creating avoidable limitations. Accordingly, the Commission suggests revisiting basement parking capacity or consider creating a dedicated multi-level car parking (MLCP) to accommodate the majority of proposed surface parking.

d)      The parking plan needs to be detailed, i.e. it needs to mark the location of no. of cars, car movement pattern, etc. in each parking lot. The number of car parking needs to be provided in the design scheme, including provisions for waiting areas with drinking water, toilet facilities etc. for drivers, guards, maids etc.

e)      The proposal is at the formal stage and the submission also involves an examination of the following multiple building blocks as well:

a.      Clubhouse

b.      Local shopping.

c.       Banquet hall

d.      Dispensary

e.      Informal market

The elevations and sections need to be detailed clearly showing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, plumbing details etc. Detailed sections reflecting the elevation features (as shown in 3d views as well) shall be submitted for a better understanding of the overall scheme.


A.     General observations:

a)      For residential blocks and apartments, the balconies need to be screened appropriately along with the provision of screening of drying clothes. Innovative architectural features and materials shall screen dish antennas in the balconies.

b)      Drop off/porch area is not comprehensible in most of the blocks (residential/apartments/clubhouse, local shopping, banquet hall etc.) which may impact the visual, urban aesthetics of the complex, needs to show 3d views for drop-off area, entry points. To ensure clarity, a blow-up of the typical plan is to be submitted to understand the entrance, design and other details of the drop-off/porch area.

c)      The campus has a huge footprint and thus the roof terraces of the buildings can be utilised for housing solar panels for generating electricity through solar power. Also, details of power requirements viz-a-viz power generated through solar energy shall be indicated. Similarly, the details for water requirement viz-a-viz wastewater generation shall be indicated to understand the use of renewable sources in the complex.

d)      The complex should aim to maximise energy efficiency with the appropriate use of the solar panels on building rooftops etc. and screen them by using appropriate architectural mechanisms and set an example in the city for such future proposals. The elements of sustainability are missing in the design scheme. These shall be identified and marked on the plans.  Roof-top utilities are not shown in the plan/ 3D views and thus require to be shown on the relevant drawings. Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e)      A combined mobility plan showing a seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plan from outside to the main entrance to every block shall be submitted. A lot of visitors, apart from the residents, would be visiting the complex, provisions shall also be explored for the long term/ short term parking, the taxi drops off points, its parking spaces, holding areas etc. be indicated in the parking/ site plan.

f)       The air-conditioners could be an eye-sore to the building façade. To avoid the same, the provision shall be made in the design to accommodate the outdoor units, at this stage, so as not to mar the aesthetics. A scheme needs to be submitted to show the placement, screening and material of screening for the same in plans/elevations and 3d views.

g)      The boundary wall and entrance gate would have a bearing on the overall aesthetics of the area and need to be designed appropriately and shown with relevant details (plans/elevations/sections/3D views etc.).

h)      Location of services including ESS, generator, exhaust pipes etc., shall be marked on the site and shall be appropriately screened to maintain urban aesthetics. All plumbing pipes/sanitary pipes, outdoor AC units, and service equipment should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. using the same architectural elements and materials.

i)        A lot of waste (dry and wet, food items, etc.) is supposed to be generated in the complex; a detailed solid waste management plan to show effective means of waste disposal along with its location shall be submitted.

j)        The work of art (except for the residential/apartments) is missing in the submission.  Work of art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the building, at an appropriate level (human eye) which is also visible from the outside, to be installed.

k)      Submitted landscape plans lack clarity in explaining the landscape scheme. The sites’ landscaping to be improved with appropriate treatment (Hardscape & Softscape). They shall be submitted in the respective drawings, shall indicate the details of the trees planted, types of species on an appropriate scale, (in terms of the point nos. six of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. Overall the architect was advised to adhere to the above observations and suggested to submit the proposal at the conceptual level again and furnish a pointwise incorporation/reply.

Not approved, observations given.The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

3Plans In Respect Of Demolition And Reconstruction of Residential Building At Plot No.17, Block No. 10, Golf Links.

1.    The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2.    The proposal was deferred.

DeferredThe Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

The following were present at the Meeting (online) of the Commission held on Saturday, September 04, 2021, from 12.00 noon onwards:

1.  Shri Ajit Pai, Chairman, DUAC

2.  Prof. (Dr) Mandeep Singh, Member, DUAC

3.  Shri Ashutosh Agarwal, Member, DUAC

4.  Smt. Nivedita Pande, Member, DUAC