Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1777th meeting held on 05.09.2024.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of the 1777th meeting held on 05.09.2024 were discussed.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal in respect of Technical Institute and Staff Quarters at PSP area plot no. 4, Rohini for Bhartiya Brahman Charitable Trust at its meeting held on May 27,2003
3. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations (proposed extension to academic block (B+S+5 floors) and two floors (4^th (partial) and 5^th floors) over the existing block) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with: 

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

b) In addition to the proposed new academic block (B+S+5 floors), the proposal includes the addition of two more floors (4th (partial) and 5th) to an existing three-story building, significantly increasing the dead and live load on the older structure. The design must ensure that the structure can endure weather conditions, resist impacts from calamities such as earthquakes, and support the added load.

c) The proposed shaft between the existing building and the proposed new block shall be ensured to be treated with all internal surfaces either treated, decorated, painted upon, or landscaped appropriately to ensure it does not resemble a service shaft. An artwork, visible from inside the building can be installed in the shaft to improve the aesthetics while ensuring it is serviceable and approachable from an appropriate location.

d) Ventilation in the rooms shall be as per appliable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

e) The design proposal incorporates provisions for double stack parking arrangements to meet the necessary parking requirements. Nevertheless, the architect or proponent to ensure the proper implementation of these arrangements on-site, which will be examined during the proposal's completion stage. All parking arrangements adhere to the relevant rules, regulations, guidelines, and other applicable requirements.

f) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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

h) All water tanks, rainwater pipes, plumbing pipes, service equipment, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal in respect of addition and alteration in Gargi College at its meeting held on January 17, 2018.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinized, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was noted that the proposal has been submitted for NOC for completion; however, the submission lacks site photographs of key areas, including the terrace and basement. The provided photographs are cropped and do not clearly display the required details. Since the proposal is at the completion stage, uncut and clear photographs of the built structure (from all sides, including the terrace, basement) must be submitted. These should show the terrace (highlighting utilities with proper screening, solar panels, etc.) and the basement parking (clearly showing the parking provisions) to substantiate the work completed on-site for the Commission's review.

b) Existing site photographs show exposed pipes and cables at certain areas in the façade. Excluding the gas pipelines which need to be exposed as per norms, all other pipes/cables including rainwater, soil pipes etc. to be appropriately screened or painted with the same colour as the building to camouflage and ensure they do not mar the aesthetics of the façade.

c) For a better understanding of the proposal side by side photographs 'Before (submitted 3d views at the time of DUAC formal approval) and After (current actual built construction)' of the constructed building blocks to be provided.

d) Approval received from DUAC (at the formal stage) shall be superimposed on the plans/elevations/sections etc., over actual built structure on the site, existing & proposed changes done in the design from the approval (by DUAC), to understand the extents of deviations made internally as well as external changes made with respect to the sanctioned plan, if any.

e) The completed public artwork at the site is missing. Completed work of Art shall be as per point no. 14 of the CPAA (Criteria for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website (www.duac.org.in), public art of suitable scale, size, and material, which imparts character and identity to the complex and is visible from outside, must be installed.

4. The proposal submitted at the completion stage lacks clarity, cropped photographs have been used, photographs of the terrace, basement etc. are missing, and is not comprehensive. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal its meeting held on August 31, 2016. The Commission accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on October 06, 2022.  
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinized. Based on the documentation, drawings, photographs, the proposal for NOC for Completion for Boys hostel-E is found to be accepted.

1. The DDA forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the Commission approved layout and building plans at its meeting held on January 30, 1997.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinized, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that the CGHS society comprises four blocks, two of which include stilt areas. The photographs submitted for the NOC at the completion stage are cropped, and an insufficient number of site photographs have been provided. The submitted images do not clearly depict the necessary details of the built structures. Since the proposal is at the completion stage, unedited and clear photographs of all the buildings (capturing all sides, including the terrace) must be submitted. These should include images of the terrace (showing utilities with proper screening, solar panels, etc.) and stilt parking (clearly displaying parking arrangements) to accurately represent the executed work for the Commission’s review.

b) For a better understanding of the proposal side by side photographs 'Before (submitted 3d views at the time of DUAC formal approval) and After (current actual built construction)' of the constructed building blocks to be provided.

c) Approval received from DUAC (at the formal stage) shall be superimposed on the plans/elevations/sections etc., over actual built structure on the site, existing & proposed changes done in the design from the approval (by DUAC), to understand the extents of deviations made internally as well as external changes made with respect to the sanctioned plan, if any.

4. The proposal received at the completion stage lacks adequate documentation, including all side uncut actual photographs of the built construction (all four blocks from all sides including terrace). The Architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved building plans at its meeting held on December 11, 2020, specific observations were given. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on August 01, 2024, observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinized. Based on the documentation, drawings, photographs, the proposal for NOC for Completion is found to be accepted.

Completion plans proposal in respect of Plot no. 203, Golf Links.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved building plans for demolition and reconstruction at its meeting held on August 25, 2021.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinized. Based on the documentation, drawings, photographs, the proposal for NOC for Completion is found to be accepted.

Building plans proposal in respect of Group Housing Building on kh. No.1279, 1280, 1283, 1284, 1286/2 situated at Extended Abadi Lal Dora of Village Kapashera. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2.  The Commission did not accept the concept of building plans proposal at its meeting held on February 08, 2024 and May 02,2024, respectively, observations were given.
3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinized, along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Conceptually Unsuitable letter no: OL-30012427004 dated 13.02.2024. Based on the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that this proposal had previously been reviewed twice at the conceptual stage, during its meetings on February 8, 2024, and May 2, 2024, with detailed and specific comments. However, it was noted that the compliance with these observations was unsatisfactory, which is not appreciated.

b) Discrepancies were noted in the submission regarding the plot area figures. The total plot area listed in the proforma is 14,964.799 sq. m., while the area details mention given in drawing sheets as 19,212.652 sq. m, the same need to be corrected and the submission shall be revised with corrected figures.

c) The photographs of the existing context are unclear and do not adequately convey the current situation. A sufficient number of site and surrounding photographs should be provided to offer a comprehensive understanding of the site and its surroundings. These should be resubmitted with proper, uncut views from all angles.

d) The Commission noted that the proposal cannot be reviewed in isolation and must be considered in relation to the surrounding facilities. Therefore, 3D views of the site (including aerial and night-time perspectives) should be superimposed with the existing context, incorporating surrounding structures and road networks. This will provide a clearer understanding of the proposal within its actual environment.

e) The Commission observed that, despite still being at the conceptual stage and having been reviewed twice, the overall design scheme remains unclear and lacks sufficient elucidation. The submitted 3D views are sketchy, with the façade materials not clearly depicted, and architectural elements such as balcony screens, railing details, and door/window specifications are not adequately detailed, the Commission is unable to review the design scheme judiciously.

f) The proposed EWS block is not adequately represented in the submitted design scheme. Detailed and annotated 3D views, clearly identifying each block with corresponding material specifications, should be provided for better understanding.

g) The elevations and sections must be meticulously detailed, clearly showcasing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, and other pertinent features. Additionally, submit comprehensive skin sections that provide a detailed understanding of the facade's elevation, including the materials employed. By providing these detailed elements, a comprehensive overview of the architectural design and facade can be obtained.

h) Architectural elements, pergolas, canopy, landscaped greens, sitting areas, other landscaped & architectural elements etc. shown in the proposed 3D views are not clear, the same shall be elucidated with appropriate details including materiality, architectural design, fabric used & detailing etc. for the better understanding of the Commission.

i) The landscape plan is incomplete and should be further detailed with appropriate hardscape and softscape treatments. It must include information on planted trees, existing trees, ground levels, and the types of species, all presented at an appropriate scale (in terms of point nos. Six of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

j) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in

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

l) All water tanks, rainwater pipes, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. Overall, the design scheme submitted at the conceptual stage remains very sketchy, lacking clarity, detail, and comprehensiveness. The architect is advised to address all the observations mentioned above, including those previously communicated in letters nos. OL-30012427004 dated February 13, 2024, and OL-26042427018 dated May 7, 2024, issued by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

Building plans proposal in respect of Residential building at 4242/25 Plot No. 36, At 2 Ansari Road, Daryaganj. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the Commission's available record.
3. The building plan proposal received online at the conceptual stage was scrutinized, 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) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in

b) All water tanks, rainwater pipes, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission
2. The Commission approved proposal at formal stage at its January 17, 2018, meeting, specific observations were given. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion (part) at its meeting held on August 29, 2024 specific observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised. Based on the documentation, drawings, photographs received, the proposal for NOC for Completion (Part- for Tower I and Tower II) is found to be accepted.

1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal at its meetings held on May 24, 2024, June 28, 2024 and August 22, 2024, respectively, specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-20082455115 dated 29.08.2024. Based on the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) The Commission took note of the letter PGPL/DUAC/2024/01 dated September 14, 2024, wherein the architect states that the required parking (as per current regulations) has been relocated to the ground floor of the building footprint, specifically as stilt parking (double stack). However, a portion of the site has been designated for a Multi-Level Car Park (MLCP) to be utilized in the future, as an increase in Floor Area Ratio (FAR) will necessitate additional parking accommodations in the proposed separate block for the MLCP.

b) The design proposal incorporates provisions for double stack parking arrangements to meet the necessary parking requirements. Nevertheless, the architect or proponent to ensure the proper implementation of these arrangements on-site, which will be examined during the proposal's completion stage. All parking arrangements adhere to the relevant rules, regulations, guidelines, and other applicable requirements.

c) It should also be ensured that the rooms adjacent to the stilt (double stack parking) are ventilated in accordance with the prevailing building bye-laws, so that the parking does not obstruct their light and ventilation.

d) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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

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

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2.  The Commission accepted the concept of revised building plan proposal at its meeting held on April 13, 2023 and approved the building plans (formal) at its January 18, 2024, meeting with specific observations. The Commission did not approve the revised building plans proposal at its meeting held on July 18, 2024 and August 08, 2024, respectively, specific observations were given.
3. The revised building plans proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL- 07082423133, F. No. 23(133)/2024-DUAC dated 13.08.2024. Based on the replies submitted, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) All parking arrangements adhere to the relevant rules, regulations, guidelines, and other applicable requirements.

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

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

1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2.  Earlier, the Commission approved the building plan proposal (for 2basements+G+14 floors) at its meeting held on July 03, 2020 and revised building plan proposal (for 2basements+G+20 floors) at its meeting held on December 09, 2021.
3. The Commission did not approve the revised building plans proposal at formal stage at its meeting held on July 04, 2024, specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plans proposal (Two towers, each of 2 basements + G + 15 floors) received (online) at formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL- 02072455102, F. No. 55(102)/2024-DUAC dated 10.07.2024. Based on the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The design proposal incorporates provisions for double stack parking arrangements to meet the necessary parking requirements. Nevertheless, the architect or proponent to ensure the proper implementation of these arrangements on-site, which will be examined during the proposal's completion stage. All parking arrangements adhere to the relevant rules, regulations, guidelines, and other applicable requirements.

b) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.​​​​​​​

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

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

1. The EDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2.  The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on October 28, 1997 and accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on July 19,2005.
3. The Commission accepted the concept of the building plans proposal at its meeting held on August 22, 2024, specific observations were given.
4. The building plans for additions and alterations received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Conceptually suitable letter no: OL- 08082427054, F. No. dated 29.08.2024, the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations, it did not consider or cover the existing construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) It was suggested to replace the dark colour background of the proposal work of art with a very light or white colour background.

c) The design of the proposed classrooms shall be as per prevalent Unified building bye laws including the provision of appropriate light and ventilation, entry/exits to classroom etc.

d) All requisite car parking requirements shall be as per applicable rules/regulations/guidelines etc. in the site to be as per prevalent building bye laws.

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 water tanks, rainwater pipes, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.