MINUTES OF THE 1594th MEETING (ONLINE) OF THE DELHI URBAN ART COMMISSION (DUAC) HELD ON THURSDAY, MAY 27, 2021

A.   The minutes of the 1593rd meeting (online) of the Delhi Urban Art Commission held on 21.05.2021 were confirmed and approved.

SL. No.PROPOSALOBSERVATIONS /SUGGESTIONSDECISIONREMARKS

B.ACTION TAKEN REPORT IN RESPECT OF MINUTES OF 1592ND MEETING HELD ON 13.05.2021.1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1592nd meeting held on 13.05.2021 was discussed.Noted by the Commission.

C. PROJECT PROPOSALS:

1BUILDING PLANS IN RESPECT OF DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION AT PLOT NO. 134, GOLF LINKS, NEW DELHI.

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

2. The building plan proposal received (online) was scrutinised and following observations were given:

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.

b) All service equipment (including outdoor AC units, exposed plumbing pipes on the façade) at the terrace ensured to be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on DUAC website at www.duac.org.

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

2PROPOSAL FOR INTEGRATED TRANSIT CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN FROM RAJA GARDEN FLYOVER TO PUNJABI BAGH FLYOVER (DOUBLING OF MOTI NAGAR & CLUB ROAD FLYOVER) ON RING ROAD, DELHI.

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

2. The proposal for Integrated Transit Corridor Development Plan from Raja Garden Flyover to Punjabi Bagh Flyover received (online) was scrutinised and following observations were given:

a) The Commission observed that the proposals should not be considered only for problems pertaining to engineering solutions of traffic/transportation in the form of flyovers and underpasses but should be seen into the larger context of a cityscape focussing on its spatial impact. It should be considered as a large scale intervention in the city fabric, and its impact on the urban form and the surrounding areas, particularly on edges shall not be neglected. Therefore, complete information in this regard needs to be submitted.

b) The proposed flyover is a long, uninterrupted stretch of concrete mass of approximately 2.70 km with residential colonies on either side. The Commission observed that the proposal cannot be studied in isolation i.e. it needs to be reviewed in conjunction with the surrounding facilities. The 3D views shall be superimposed with the existing context of the surroundings, for a better understanding of the proposal in the existing environment to make it clearer.

c) The proposal shall also be seen from the perspective of the motorists driving experience. All elements need to be worked out at an initial stage and nothing should be done as an afterthought incongruous to the design. An overall comprehensive scheme needs to be formulated to avoid any additions/alterations at a later stage. Details of various street elements like Light poles, railings, crash guards, noise cutters, signages for wayfinding, pedestrian facilities, cyclist facilities and appropriate provisions for rainwater harvesting need to be submitted. Rainwater pipes etc. shall ensure to be screened/ harvesting need to be submitted.

d) Considering the scale, size, location, and abundance of spaces available under the flyover, they shall be designed and put to appropriate use to ensure that they do not become dumping grounds or be encroached so as not to spoil the overall urban and visual aesthetics of the area. Also, these spaces may be used for landscaping, rainwater harvesting, and utilities that can be accommodated and are required for the surrounding areas.

e) A comprehensive landscape plan including the area on/underside flyover etc. including area below flyover for the complete scheme needs to be worked out and shown along with a sufficient number of Self-explanatory 3D views. The details of trees affected for the proposal, if any, shall also be submitted.

f) Considering a lot of development, both residential & Commercial along the stretch, an appropriate number of sections (longitudinal and cross-sections) along with the elevational heights of the surrounding development etc. be submitted for better understanding of the overall scheme in actual environment.

g) It was observed that the design and appearance of the existing and the proposed structural provisions are varying in scale, proportions etc. For better visual and urban aesthetics, these shall be designed harmonious to the existing arrangements in appearance.

h) It has been observed that the pedestrian & cyclist tracks terminate abruptly. Continuous pedestrian and cyclist movement shall ensure seamless connectivity.

i) The provisions made for the work of art shall be planned keeping in mind the scale, material and significance in the form of Murals, sculptures, art & architecture, rich cultural heritage of the city etc. as appropriate, to make the spaces lively & inviting, needs to be submitted.

3. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish a point wise incorporation/reply.

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

D. ADDITIONAL DETAILS:

1REVISED BUILDING PLANS IN RESPECT OF ADDITION/ALTERATIONS IN MOTEL BUILDING SITUATED AT KHASRA NO. 41/9 MIN, 12 MIN, 37/23/2, 24/2, 41/3, 41/2/2, 41/2/3, 31/2/1 AT VILLAGE SAMALKHA AND KHASRA NO. 450 AT VILLAGE RAJOKRI. (CONCEPTUAL STAGE)1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) for consideration of the Commission.


2. The Commission did not accept the concept of building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on April 08, 2021 specific observations were given.


3. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations received (online) at conceptual 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-22032127024 dated 19.04.2021. Based on the revised submission and the replies submitted following observations were given:


a) The Commission observed that the existing built structure (single story with basement) was constructed more than ten years back. The proposed eight stories structure is more than 30 m in height. A lot of live/dead load is being added to the existing building (single story) with different usages. Thus, new structural arrangements shall be such designed that it withstands weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquake etc. and it shall be vetted from a third-party repute.


b) The level differences between the existing and the proposed floors portions, as well as the two blocks with different floor-to-floor heights, shall be carefully resolved so as not to mar the overall aesthetics of the external façade and the internal views between the two blocks (parking and other).


c) 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.


d) All service equipment at the terrace ensured to be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on DUAC website at www.duac.org.
Accepted, observations given.The 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 Thursday, May 27, 2021 from 02.30 PM 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