Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1625^th meeting held on 25.11.2021.

Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1625^th meeting held on 25.11.2021 was discussed.

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

2. The Commission did not accept the concept of the building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on November 03, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations (independent banquet/convention facility, addition of 26 rooms on the second floor, third and fourth floors for commercial/office space) 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-25102127073 dated 13.11.2021, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx Meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission on various aspects related to the proposal. Based on the detailed discussion held and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) The Commission observed while considering the case for additions/alteration it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site (for which no previous formal approval has been taken from the Commission). This formal approval concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal is at the formal stage but the quality of the 3d views is not satisfactory and shall be enhanced with better visuals.

c) Also, the quality of elevations and sections provided is not appreciated (they are very basic), need to be detailed clearly showing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, plumbing details etc. Also, the skin sections (in detail) shall be submitted to understand the elevation of the façade with materials.

d) The building plan proposal is for the additions/alterations to the existing building. It is suggested that the new construction should be in harmony with the old building in terms of the elevation/façade/material/specifications etc. so as not to mar the aesthetics. Also, to mitigate the visual inconsistency between the old and new construction/additions, it was suggested to plan for an overall revamp scheme of the whole façade for better visual and aesthetics.

e) The provision of a vehicular ramp through a no construction green zone (as specified in the drawings) directly to the basement does not seem to be feasible as it directly accesses the basement without passing the security check at the entry.

f) The area marked to accommodate electric sub-station (ESS) and the solid waste etc. shall be suitably screened using appropriate architectural mechanisms and be shown in the drawings/3D views, so as not to remain visible and mar the aesthetics of the complex.

4) The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

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

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal (for 3 basements+G+14 floors) at its meeting held on July 03, 2020, specific observations were given. But, did not approve the revised building plan proposal (for 2 basements+G+20 floors) at the meeting of the Commission held on October 22, 2021speific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal (for 2 basements+G+20 floors) 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-19102155050 dated 28.10.2021. Based on the revised submission made the 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.

b) 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.

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

2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on July 03, 2002 and the NOC for completion was accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on December 15, 2005.

3. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed while considering the case for additions/alterations it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This formal submission concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) The proposal has been submitted for addition to an existing superstructure. A lot of live/dead load is being added to the existing building. The structure shall be such designed that it can withstand weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquakes etc. and can withstand the additional load.

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.in.

d) 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.

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

2. The building plan proposal for demolition and reconstructions received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The entire proposal shall adhere to all the applicable statutory provisions, and norms/regulations of the prevailing Lutyens Bungalow Zone (LBZ) guidelines.

b) 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.

c) 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.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the CPWD (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

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

2. The Commission approved the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on July 17, 1998, and the NOC for completion plan proposal was approved in the meeting held on May 26, 2005. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on November 11, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations (expansion of the kitchen, store area and balcony area in various dwelling units, construction of a public toilet) 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-08112122040 dated 16.11.2021, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx Meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission on various aspects related to the proposal. Based on the detailed discussion held and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) The Commission observed while considering the case for additions/alterations it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This formal submission concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) Provisions of double-stack parking arrangements have been shown at three places in the housing society to accommodate the requisite parking requirements (current and proposed). But, the double-stack parking arrangements shown near the green areas at an angle appears to be impracticable and not feasible. Also, considering the safety and security of the residents, especially the elderly and the children, double-stack parking arrangements proposed along the green area shall be removed and alternative arrangements shall be made.

c) The double-stack parking arrangements proposed along the boundary wall shall be screened suitably with an appropriate selection of native trees, and its details etc. shall be provided and shown correctly in the plans/3D views etc. so as not to mar the aesthetics of the complex.

4. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal in respect of Geriatrics Block at its meeting held on October 18, 2014.
3. The building plan proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised and found acceptable.

Building plans proposal in respect of Commercial Centre at Plot No. 1487 & 1487/1, Chandni Chowk. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.

2. The building plan proposal for Commercial Centre after the demolition of the old structure (Moti Cinema) received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal is located in the vicinity of the Chandni Chowk and cannot be studied in isolation i.e. it needs to be reviewed in conjunction with the surrounding facilities, therefore, 3D views of the site shall be superimposed with the existing context of the surroundings including road networks, structures around the site, for better understanding of the proposal in the actual environment to make it clearer.

b) The primary use of the building is commercial with shops throughout the complex. The Commission opines that loading and unloading areas shall be carefully designed and marked clearly in the layout plan/plans as appropriate.

3. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and resubmit the proposal again at the conceptual stage along with pointwise incorporation & reply.

Building plans proposal in respect of Group Housing on plot no. 67, Najafgarh Road, Kirti Nagar. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission did not approve the layout and the building plan proposal at its meeting held on July 29, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised layout and the building plan proposal received (online) at the 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 nos: OL-12042123011 and OL-28072123027 dated 19.04.2021 and 03.08.2021 respectively. Based on the revised submission and the replies submitted following observations are to be complied with:

a) The complex shall be designed from a visitors experience point of view, drop off areas of every block shall be detailed and presented with enhanced 3D views indicating the materials used.

b) Submitted landscape plans lack clarity in explaining the landscape scheme. The Landscape plan has to be more detailed with the appropriate treatment of Hardscape & Softscape and need to be shown clearly in the drawings/3D views.

c) The area accommodating DG set/DG exhaust pipes, rooftop utilities etc. shall be suitably screened using appropriate architectural mechanisms so as not to remain visible, and mar the aesthetics of the complex.

d) 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) 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.

4. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission in the subsequent submission (formal) and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

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

2. The building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal is at the formal stage and the address of the property submitted on the DUAC online portal through the MCD online portal as :

“Plot no 89, MCD property no. 4903/XI, Shayam Lal Road, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj”

Whereas the project report and all the submission drawings bear the property address is:

“Plot no 89, MCD property no. 4909/XI, Shayam Lal Road, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj”

b) Due to a mismatch of the property address in the drawings and the project report submitted it is returned to the concerned local body i.e. SDMC without consideration of the Commission.

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

2. The building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal is at the formal stage and the address of the property submitted on the DUAC online portal through the MCD online portal as :

“Plot no 90, MCD property no. 4903/XI, Shayam Lal Road, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj”

Whereas the project report and all the submission drawings bear the property address is:

“Plot no 90, MCD property no. 4909/XI, Shayam Lal Road, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj”

b) Due to a mismatch of the property address in the drawings and the project report submitted it is returned to the concerned local body i.e. SDMC without consideration of the Commission.

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

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on May 11, 2016, and the layout of the proposal was approved in the meeting held on June 01, 2016. The Commission did not accept the NOC for completion plan proposal at its meeting held on November 11, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal of NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) The Commission has observed that the proposal has been received for NOC for completion for Block Type-1, 2, 3, and Block A (Community services on GF & residential on the First floor). But an appropriate number of photographs of the other areas/structures (except for Block Type-1,2,3) of the actual built construction (including interior areas) to substantiate an actual work executed at the site, has not been provided.

b) An appropriate number of photographs of the completed superstructure (for which NOC for completion is required including Block A, Public toilets/ATM (constructed under Swatch Bharat Mission), DG Set, Sub-station etc.) shall be provided with proper labelling/delineation and uncut/clear photographs from all sides (including interior areas) to substantiate an actual work executed at the site.

4. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.