Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1815th meeting held on 15.05.2025.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of the 1815th meeting held on 15.05.2025 were discussed.

Completion plans proposal in respect of Sarv Priya Mahajan CGHS Ltd., plot no. 14/1, Sector-14, Dwarka.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission accepted the concept of the proposal at its meeting held on 27 February 2019, and specific observations were provided. Subsequently, the Commission approved the revised building plans proposal at its meeting held on May 8, 2019, and made specific observations.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the submission approved (formal) by the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: OL-06051955021 dated 10.05.2019, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect online on Cisco Web Ex meetings, who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the submission made, observations provided during the approval of the case (formally), including documentation, drawings, undertaking, and photographs, the proposal for NOC for completion is accepted. 

Completion plans proposal (Part- for extension Office building + MLCP) in respect of Intellectual Property building at plot no. 32, Sector-14, Dwarka.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission earlier approved the layout and the building plan proposal (G+3 floors) at its meeting held on September 05, 2003. The extension to the building proposal (B+G+1 floor) was approved at the meeting held on July 6, 2011, and a NOC for Completion was accepted on January 23, 2015. Subsequently, the Commission approved the extension (office building, from the 2nd floor to the 7th floor) and the MLCP at its meeting held on 30 October 2019, and specific observations were made.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion (for office building (from 2^nd floor to 7^th floor) & MLCP block) received (online) at the Completion stage was scrutinised along with the observations given, while approving (formally) the proposal, communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-24101955057 dated 06.11.2019. Based on the submission made, observations given while approving the case (formally), including documentation, drawings, undertaking and photographs, the proposal for NOC for completion (Part- for extension Office building (from 2^nd floor to 7^th floor) + MLCP)  is accepted.

Building plans proposal in respect of Residential building at plot no. 69, Golf Links.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approvals(formal/completion) taken from the Commission has been found in the Commission's available record.
3. The building plans proposal (G+2 floors) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that Incorrect documentation has been provided, i.e. the owner’s email ID mentions details of the architect; the same is to be corrected by the architect in the revised submission to ensure correct documentation.

b) The Commission noted that the proposal is at the formal stage. Upon comparing the proposed design scheme (plans versus 3D views), it was observed that only the building façade has been represented in the 3D views. In contrast, several other elements—such as the main entry gate, pergola structure at the entrance (as shown in the landscape plan), landscaped areas in the front and rear setbacks, spiral staircase, etc.—have not been depicted. This results in a mismatch between the drawings and the 3D views. Revised 3D views must be submitted, incorporating updated details of all proposed elements, including the façade, landscape features, and gate/boundary wall, to ensure a complete and correct submission

c) A discrepancy has been observed in the submission, as the design of the main gate and boundary wall differs in the plans, detailed drawings, and 3D views. Submissions at the formal stage must be correct and coordinated, ensuring consistency across plans, elevations, sections, and 3D views for the Commission's review.

d) Details regarding the air-conditioning system, including the placement and screening mechanism for outdoor units, are missing from the submission. Exposed outdoor AC units can negatively impact the building’s façade. To maintain the visual aesthetics, provisions for accommodating and screening these units should be integrated into the design at this stage.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage is incomplete and lacks clarity, and thereby, the Commission could not appreciate it judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish a pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approvals(formal/completion) taken from the Commission has been found in the Commission's available record.
3. The building plans proposal for addition/alterations received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that the submitted report (written as a concept report) is dated 18.06.2024, indicating that it is an outdated document that has not been revised, which is not appreciated. As the submission is at the formal stage and is being considered in May 2025, an updated and detailed report must be provided for the Commission’s review.

b) As per the report submitted by the architect, two structures exist at the site: the main residential block and a servant block with a garage at ground level. It is proposed that the main building be demolished, while the servant block is to be retained. However, no demolition plan has been submitted. Furthermore, some of the proposed 3D views also depict the servant block, leading to ambiguity. Since the submission has been received at the formal stage, the areas to be retained and those proposed for demolition must be indicated. A detailed demolition plan should be submitted to enable a judicious review by the Commission.

c) The proposed 3D views do not accurately represent the overall design scheme. Several areas of the site, including the rear and front landscaped zones, pool areas, and other open spaces, have not been depicted. A bird’s-eye view of the entire site should also be provided to convey the overall design intent, including details of terrace services such as solar panels and the air-conditioning system. Furthermore, the 3D views do not differentiate between existing and proposed components, making it unclear which elements require approval. It must be ensured that all proposed and retained elements are annotated to make the submission self-explanatory.

d) An incomplete submission has been received at the formal stage. According to the provided documents, the proposed building comprises G+2 floors; however, detailed floor plans for the ground, first, and second floors are missing. Additionally, the submission lacks details of the gate and boundary wall, rendering it incomplete for consideration at the formal stage.

e) The landscape detail sheet states “document awaited from landscape architect,” indicating that the submission has not been reviewed at the architect level and forwarded for the review of the Commission, which is not appreciated.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage is incomplete and lacks clarity, and thereby, the Commission could not appreciate it judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish a pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission initially approved the building plans proposal in its meeting held on February 2, 2011. A revised proposal was subsequently approved in the meeting held on June 15, 2011. However, the Commission did not approve the revised building plan proposal in its meeting on December 5, 2024; specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-27112424018 dated 12.12.2024, and a discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco WebEx meetings, during which clarifications were provided to the Commission’s queries. Based on the discussion held (online), the documentation, including drawings and photographs, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that the proposal is for the proposed media centre comprising 03B+G+04 floors after demolition of an existing temporary portable cabin structure at the site.

b) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations.

c) Solar panels shall be integrated at an appropriate clear height to ensure effective utilisation of the space beneath. Extending beyond the footprint will enable larger panel coverage, thereby enhancing generation capacity. This placement also facilitates easy maintenance, reduces heat load through increased shading, and most importantly, improves aesthetics by embedding the panels within a well-designed structural framework.

d) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level, shall ensure to be installed in terms of 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 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, solar panels, etc., should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of points nos. 10, 11, and 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approvals(formal/completion) taken from the Commission has been found in the Commission's available record.
3. The building plan proposal for C/o Office Block received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized. Based on the documentation, including drawings and photographs, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations.

b) Solar panels shall be integrated at an appropriate clear height to ensure effective utilisation of the space beneath. Extending beyond the footprint will enable larger panel coverage, thereby enhancing generation capacity. This placement also facilitates easy maintenance, reduces heat load through increased shading, and most importantly, improves aesthetics by embedding the panels within a well-designed structural framework.

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

d) The Sustainability features shall be as per point 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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

1. The South-DMC 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.
3. The building plan proposal for the residential building received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations.

b) Solar panels shall be integrated at an appropriate clear height to ensure effective utilisation of the space beneath. Extending beyond the footprint will enable larger panel coverage, thereby enhancing generation capacity. This placement also facilitates easy maintenance, reduces heat load through increased shading, and most importantly, improves aesthetics by embedding the panels within a well-designed structural framework.

c) The Sustainability features shall be as per point 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, etc., should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of points nos. 10, 11, and 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.