MINUTES OF THE 1630th MEETING OF THE DELHI URBAN ART COMMISSION (DUAC) HELD ON THURSDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2021.

A.   The minutes of the 1629th meeting of the Delhi Urban Art Commission held on 23.12.2021 were confirmed and approved.

SL. No.PROPOSALOBSERVATIONS /SUGGESTIONSDECISIONREMARKS

B.

Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1628th meeting held on 16.12.2021.

Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1628th meeting held on 16.12.2021 was discussed.

Noted by the Commission.

C. PROJECT PROPOSALS:

1Building plans proposal in respect of Residential building at plot no. 89, Khasra no. 216/137-139, Ansari Road, Daryaganj.

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

2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 09, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the observations communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-08122155057 dated 14.12.2021. Based on the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal is located in the special area of the Daryaganj. Considering the heritage character of the area, it cannot be studied in isolation i.e. it needs to be reviewed in conjunction with the surrounding facilities, therefore, annotated 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 quality of 3d views submitted along with the design proposal is not appropriate. They are very sketchy and the scale, proportion, materials etc. are not understood it shall be enhanced with better visuals. Annotated 3D views clearly specifying the materials to be used on the façade shall be provided.

c) The façade of the building looks very dull and is not contextual to the surroundings i.e. does not match the heritage character of Daryaganj in the vicinity of Shahjahanabad. It is, accordingly, suggested to use some of the existing heritage elements of the existing building in the proposed design scheme using similar architectural elements etc.

d) A functional furniture arrangement shall be shown in one of the typical floor plans so as to understand the functioning of the floor better..

e) The requisite parking arrangements shown appears to be not feasible including the location of a car lift. Various workable solutions for parking shall be presented. All parking requirements shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

f) The air-conditioners could be an eye-sore to the building façade thereby spoiling the aesthetics of the façade. Appropriate arrangements shall be made to screen the outdoor air conditioners and exposed plumbing pipes so that they are not exposed on the outer façade and mar the aesthetics.

g) Appropriate screening arrangements shall be made to ensure screening of clothes hanging in the balconies.

h) The location/arrangement for pipes (shafts) in the toilets is not shown in the plans. It needs to be clearly marked in all floor plans and be treated appropriately in the elevations so as not to mar the visual and urban aesthetics. It needs to be clearly indicated in the drawings and resubmitted.

i) 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.

j) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, solar panels etc. shall be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) 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 and furnish 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.

2Building plans proposal in respect of Residential building at plot no. 90, MCD Property no. 4903/XI, Shayam Lal Road, Ansari Road, Daryaganj.

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

2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 09, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the observations communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-08122155058 dated 14.12.2021. Based on the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal is located in the special area of the Daryaganj. Considering the heritage character of the area, it cannot be studied in isolation i.e. it needs to be reviewed in conjunction with the surrounding facilities, therefore, annotated 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 quality of 3d views submitted along with the design proposal is not appropriate. They are very sketchy and the scale, proportion, materials etc. are not understood it shall be enhanced with better visuals. Annotated 3D views clearly specifying the materials to be used on the façade shall be provided.

c) The façade of the building looks very dull and is not contextual to the surroundings i.e. does not match the heritage character of Daryaganj in the vicinity of Shahjahanabad. It is, accordingly, suggested to use some of the existing heritage elements of the existing building in the proposed design scheme using similar architectural elements etc.

d) Functional furniture arrangements shall be shown in one of the typical floor plans so as to understand the functioning of the floor better.

e) The requisite parking arrangements shown appears to be not feasible including the location of a car lift. Various workable solutions for parking shall be presented. All parking requirements shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

f) The air-conditioners could be an eye-sore to the building façade thereby spoiling the aesthetics of the façade. Appropriate arrangements shall be made to screen the outdoor air conditioners and exposed plumbing pipes so that they are not exposed on the outer façade and mar the aesthetics.

g) Appropriate screening arrangements shall be made to ensure screening of clothes hanging in the balconies.

h) The location/arrangement for pipes (shafts) in the toilets is not shown in the plans. It needs to be clearly marked in all floor plans and be treated appropriately in the elevations so as not to mar the visual and urban aesthetics. It needs to be clearly indicated in the drawings and resubmitted.

i) 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.

j) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, solar panels etc. shall be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) 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 and submit at the conceptual stage first and furnish 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.

3Building plan proposal for additions/alterations in respect of Primary School at Pocket C, Vasant Kunj.

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 02, 2000, and the NOC for completion was accepted in the meeting held on October 30, 2019. The Commission accepted the design proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on November 25, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of 3rd floor for classrooms & hall, storage & services along with mechanical car lift in the basement, staircase & lift lobby on all floors, demolition of a classroom on ground + 3 floors above) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and 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 plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, solar panels etc. shall be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) 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.

4Completion plans proposal in respect of Cinema cum Commercial at Kalkaji, District centre Nehru Place (Known as Paras Cinema).

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 July 29, 2009. The proposal for major additions/alterations was approved in the meeting held on October 05, 2016.

3. The building plan proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised. The Commission intended to discuss the proposal with the architect but he did not respond. On the basis of the proposal submitted, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was observed that while forwarding the proposal to the Commission at the completion stage following observation/recommendations has been made in Part-C (completion stage) by South DMC:

“…….Observations/recommendations of the sanctioning authority while forwarding the matter to DUAC for consideration in the Performa Part-C of the Completion stage from serial no 1 to 4 indicates the following:

“…..NO..…”

The Commission considers the proposals based on the certification related to building bye-laws etc. furnished by the concerned local body. Taking into consideration the observations/recommendations made and forwarded by the concerned local body i.e. South DMC, it is referred back to South DMC for clarification and confirmation.

b) Cropped photographs of the completion plan proposal have been submitted which do not indicate the required details. An appropriate number of existing site pictures (including interior areas) to be provided to understand the existing site condition. They need to be resubmitted with proper uncut views from all sides to comprehend the proposal.

c) The proposal being at the Completion stage need to provide an actual Artwork executed at the site. The same shall be provided with an appropriate number of photographs of actual work of public art executed at the site.

4. In absence of sufficient information provided by the architect/proponent, the proposal could not be examined appropriately by the Commission.

5. The architect was advised to adhere to the above observations and revise the proposal for NOC for completion and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

NOC for completion not accepted.
The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

5Completion plans proposal in respect of Delhi Police HQ at Jai Singh Road.

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

2. The Commission approved the building plans of the proposal at its meeting held on September 23, 2015. The NOC for completion plans approval was not accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on October 23, 2019, specific observations were given. The NOC for completion (for the main building right-wing from the ground floor to the fourth floor) was accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on October 30, 2019. The Commission did not accept the proposal for NOC of Completion at its meeting held on November 03, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal of NOC for completion (for Block C (main building), D (Residential quarters) and E (ESS) only) received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect. Based on the revised submission and the replies submitted, the proposal for NOC for completion was found to be accepted.

NOC for completion accepted.
The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

6Building plans proposal for additions/alterations in respect of Vishwa Bharati Public School at Sector -6, Dwarka.

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

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on June 21, 1996, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of a lift from ground to the fourth floor, administrative area on the second floor, and fourth floor) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that all the available open spaces have been taken into ECS parking calculations and fragmented stack parking provisions have been given across the site which appears to be not feasible. Also, the fragmented stack parking provisions have not been shown in the 3D views/elevations/sections etc. which do not give the correct picture of the site. The Commission observed that it could spoil the visual, urban, and aesthetic environment of the school complex. The revised coordinated drawings (plan/elevations/sections/3D views etc.) shall be submitted for the consideration of the Commission.

b) Further, the Commission strongly suggests that set-back areas/roads counted towards achieving ECS calculations (for car parking) is not acceptable, and spoiling the visual, urban, aesthetics of the area. These areas are suggested to be kept free from all vehicular parking requirements, it shall be kept free for emergencies. Alternative suitable solutions/mechanisms shall be explored to accommodate all the existing and proposed parking requirements of the proposal without compromising areas meant for pedestrian and vehicular circulation.

c) The proposal is for additions/alterations, existing parking and parking from additional FAR (proposed) are to be shown clearly on the layout plan with the bifurcation of two.

d) The proposal is for the addition of one more floor above the 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.

e) 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.

f) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, solar panels etc. shall be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) 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 and furnish 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.

7Completion plans proposal in respect of Pedestrian street and sunken Plaza at Hospitality District, Aerocity, IGI Airport, Delhi.

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

2. The Commission approved the master plan of the hospitality district at IGI airport at its meeting held on March 09, 2011, and the revised conceptual master plan was accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on October 18, 2017, specific observations were given.

3. The proposal (formal) for Pedestrian street and Sunken Plaza at the hospitality district. aerocity, IGI airport was approved in the meeting of the Commission held on July 23, 2021, specific observations were given. The NOC for the completion plan proposal was not accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on November 25, 2021, specific observations were given.

4. The revised proposal for NOC for completion plan received (online) at the completion 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: 66(1)/2021-DUAC and OL-15112166001 dated 03.12.2021 respectively. Based on the replies submitted and the revised submission made, the proposal for NOC for completion was found to be accepted.  

NOC for completion accepted.
The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

8

Demolition and reconstruction in respect of a Motel building on land bearing khasra no.3/16/2 Min, 3/24 Min, 3/25 Min, 10/4 Min, 10/5 Min, 10/6 Min, 10/7 Min, 3/17/2  at  Village Samalkha Tehsil Mehrauli. (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 demolition and reconstruction of a motel building received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Clarity on the site layout shall be given. The dimensions of the plot do not match with the sanctioned site layout plan submitted for the consideration of the Commission, which needs clarification and a corrected site layout plan be submitted.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal cannot be studied in isolation i.e. it needs to be reviewed in conjunction with the surrounding facilities, therefore, annotated 3D views (including night time to understand the lighting mechanism) 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.

c) Drawing of a basic single incomplete section has been submitted for the consideration of the Commission. The elevation features in the buildings are not reflected in the sections. Detailed sections (longitudinal and cross-section across the site as well) reflecting the elevation features (as shown in 3d views as well) shall be submitted for a better understanding of the overall scheme 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 requisite parking arrangements made for the design proposal are not understood clearly. The total parking requirements are 469 ECS, but the details have not been provided. The parking plan needs to be detailed, i.e. it needs to mark the location of no. of cars, car movement pattern, etc. to have a clear understanding of the requisite parking arrangements. Long term/ short term parking for the visitors, staff, taxi drop off points, its parking spaces, holding areas etc. be also indicated in the parking/ site plan.

e) Besides commercial use, office spaces have also been created. Entry/exit to office spaces shall be segregated and shown properly. A combined mobility plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plan from outside to be submitted, to understand the movement pattern within the site better. It shall be indicated clearly with clear segregation of pedestrian and vehicular movement.

f) Internal furniture layout of one of the typical floors shall be given to understand the functional furniture arrangement properly.

g) Appropriate signages/ graphics shall be installed in the building complex to ensure proper wayfinding.

h) A lot of waste (dry and wet, food items, etc.) is supposed to be generated in the motel, a detailed solid waste management plan proposal along with its location on the site plan be submitted.

i) The area accommodating DG set etc. shall be suitably screened, including DG exhaust pipes, using appropriate architectural mechanisms so as not to remain visible, and mar the aesthetics of the complex. A design scheme shall be submitted for the consideration of the Commission.

j) The Commission observed that provision of a VRV system has been planned for the motel building. The 3D views of the terrace area indicated that all the VRV systems have been accommodated in one place which appears to be not feasible. However, ammonia-based air-conditioning shall be prioritised for air-conditioning in the proposed scheme. Also, priority shall be given to central systems of air-conditioning and individual units shall be discouraged to ensure energy efficiency.

k) It was observed that the location of the public toilet, ATM and the guard room etc. are also part of the conceptual submission but their detailed drawings (including screening mechanism, elevations, sections, 3D views etc.) have not been submitted. The Commission observed that these components have a bearing on the overall visual, urban, and aesthetic quality of the complex. The same is to be revised appropriately and be incorporated for review by the Commission.

l) Submitted landscape plans lack clarity in explaining the landscape scheme. The sites’ landscaping to be improved with appropriate treatment (Hardscape & Softscape). Where ever possible peripheral greenery to be maintained and need to be shown clearly in the drawings, 3D views.

m) All plumbing pipes, DG set, DG exhaust pipes, service equipment, water tanks, solar panels etc. shall be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

n) 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.

o) Overall, the design scheme submitted by the architect is not comprehensible i.e., they are not self-explanatory. The proposal submitted needs to be complete and comprehensive. In absence of sufficient information provided by the architect, the proposal could not be examined appropriately by the Commission.

3. The architect is advised to revise the submission adhering to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

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

9

Layout and Building plan proposal in respect of Residential Accommodation for faculty and staff (Phase III) at Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences (ILBS), D-1, Vasant Kunj. (Conceptual stage)

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

2. The Commission approved the layout and the building plan proposal for the 100 bedded hospital building at its meeting held on December 26, 2001, and the revised proposal was approved in the meeting held on September 28, 2011. The NOC for completion was accepted in the meeting held on January 11, 2016.

3. The Commission did not accept the layout and building plan proposal for residential accommodation for faculty and staff proposed in Phase-III at its meeting held on December 02, 2021, specific observations were given.

4. The revised layout and building plan proposal for residential accommodation for faculty and staff proposed in the Phase-III 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 no: OL-01122155054 dated 09.12.2021. Based on the replies submitted and 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 plumbing pipes, DG set, DG exhaust pipes, service equipment, water tanks, solar panels etc. shall be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Concept 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 of the Commission held on Thursday, December 30, 2021, from 02.30 PM onwards:

1.      Shri Ajit Pai, Chairman, DUAC

2.      Shri Ashutosh Kumar Agarwal, Member, DUAC

3.      Smt. Nivedita Pande, Member, DUAC