Action Taken Reports in respect of Minutes of 1858th meeting held on 05.03.2026.

1. Action Taken Reports in respect of Minutes of the 1858th meeting held on 05.03.2026 were discussed.

Completion plans proposal in respect of “Proposed Superspeciality Block in Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia (RML) Hospital Complex, Baba Kharak Singh Marg, New Delhi – 110001.”

1. The CPWD forwarded (through online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans of the proposal at its meeting held on September 23, 2015. Subsequently, the revised building plans proposal for “Super Speciality block along with the proposal for multilevel car parking” was approved by the Commission at its meeting held on July 16, 2021, specific observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for the completion (Super Speciality Block for Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital), building comprising of 3B+G+11 Floors) received (through online) at the completion stage, was scrutinised and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Webex meetings, during which clarifications were provided to the Commission’s queries. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, project report, photographs, etc, and the discussion held, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal submitted for completion reflects deviations from the deign scheme approved in its meeting held on July 16, 2021.

b) It is observed that the current submission presents a comparison of the as-built condition with the approval granted by the Heritage Conservation Committee (HCC), rather than with the scheme approved by the Commission. The architect, in coordination with the project proponent, is therefore advised to submit a revised proposal for the Commission’s consideration, incorporating a clear, side-by-side comparison of the 3D views of the scheme approved (by the Commission) on July 16, 2021 and as built condition, so as to truthfully establish the extent of deviations and to maintain proper official record.

c) During the deliberations, the architect also informed and submitted the report that the construction has been executed in accordance with the approval (formal) granted by the Heritage Conservation Committee (HCC) on December 01, 2021.

d) The Commission expressed its concern and did not appreciate that the construction was carried out without submitting the revised proposal for its prior consideration, particularly since the original proposal had been examined in detail by the Commission with due regard to the principles of urban and environmental aesthetics, including the overall frontage, façade treatment, and architectural character of the building.

e) It was further observed that, considering the existing and future parking requirements within the hospital campus for doctors, visitors, and other users, a Multi-Level Car Parking (MLCP) design scheme had also been formally approved by the Commission. However, the same has neither been reflected nor included in the current submission. During the deliberations, the architect informed that the MLCP has not yet been constructed and is proposed to be taken up at a later stage; however, this assertion has not been substantiated with appropriate documentation. The Commission, therefore, advised the project proponent and the architect to furnish relevant correspondence and documentary evidence to support the above submission.

4. Overall, the current submission, received at the Completion stage, lacks clarity and has discrepancies. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above and furnish a point-by-point incorporation and response.

Proposal in respect of “Proposed C/o Promenade & Underground Plaza for Yuga Yugeen Bharat Museum Metro Station at Pandit Pant Marg”.

1. The CPWD forwarded (through online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The ‘Central Vista precincts of North and South Block are listed Grade I heritage buildings at serial no. 9 and 7’ in the Gazette Notification no. F.No.4/2/2009/UD/I 6565 dated October 01, 2009, issued by the Department of Urban Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
3. The proposal (for the Promenade & Underground Plaza for Yuga Yugeen Bharat Museum Metro Station) received (through online) at the formal stage, was scrutinised and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Webex meetings, during which clarifications were provided to the Commission’s queries. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, including approval received from the HCC, and photographs, etc, the discussion held, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission appreciated the overall intent and objectives of the design scheme. While the design of the underground plaza was found to be well-conceived and appreciated, certain observations were noted with respect to the design scheme proposed for the promenade.

b) The Commission noted that the proposal includes the provision of two travelators, each of 1500mm width, positioned on either side of the promenade for ingress and egress. It was observed that these installations are not the most suitable with over 90mts of continuous railing-contained continuous movement posing unnecessary safety risks, would be challenging to maintain, and limit the effective throughput of the passage. The Commission recommended the removal of both travelators to maintain an unobstructed and functional pedestrian corridor.

c) Further, it was observed that the proposed shading device, as depicted in the drawings and 3D views, is discontinuous and partially open to the sky. In this regard, the Commission advised exploring the possibility of incorporating of solar panels on a space frame, which could protect from direct sun and also generate renewable energy for illuminating common public areas, thereby reducing dependence on conventional energy sources.

d) Further, considering the considerable length of the ramp (approximately 92.0 m), which is largely proposed for pedestrian use, it is recommended that the design explore the provisions of the following:

i. The Commission emphasized the need to incorporate space to intersperse  the 100m length passage with breaks from the continuity.  This could be done by having a landing in the midst of the ramp and/or having a 2000mm wide level band stepping to ramp level every 5-10 meters.  These steps could be used for multiple purposes include rest, seating, or other activity creating pause points to enhance overall user experience and functionality and contributing to a more vibrant and user-friendly pedestrian environment.

ii. Considering the high footfall of tourists, both domestic and international, and the need to ensure smooth pedestrian movement and effective crowd management, the Commission suggested the introduction of appropriate design elements to clearly and visually bifurcate the ingress and egress zones. Such longitudinal demarcation would help streamline circulation, reduce conflicts, and enhance the overall efficiency and safety of pedestrian movement across the passage.

iii. Universal accessibility as stipulated under the relevant clauses of the UBBL for Delhi 2016 shall be ensured by the local body including ductile pathway, hand rails etc.

e) It was observed that lift access has been provided at the junction of the underground plaza and entrance to the promenade, with one lift (passenger lift) on each side to facilitate movement to the ground level. The Commission suggested that the arrangement may be reconfigured such that larger-capacity lifts are clustered on one side of the promenade to enhance movement efficiency. The opposite side may be designed with a staircase of appropriate dimensions, as applicable under the relevant clause of the UBBL, thereby ensuring both functional efficiency and visual symmetry along the promenade.

f) All plumbing pipes, rainwater 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.

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

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage needs improvement. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response.

Building plans proposal in respect of “Commercial Development at Asset LP-03-02, Downtown District, Aerocity, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi.

1. The DIAL forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the master plan for Gateway and Downtown District for DIAL on March 16, 2021.
3. The building plans proposal (for proposed commercial development with 3 basements + G + 6 floors) received (through email) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made including project report, drawings, documentations, walkthrough etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

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

b) The installation of clear-story solar panels on a well-designed structural frame, integrated with the building design, is suggested to ensure the effective utilisation of the space beneath, subject to feasibility as per building bye-laws. This placement also facilitates easy maintenance, reduces heat load through increased shading, and improves aesthetics. The sustainability features shall be as per Point 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c) The Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) and Memorandum dated October 07, 2025 available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. Any deviations in the artwork from the approved design must be submitted to the Commission for prior approval before the commencement of construction, to ensure compliance and facilitate final approval upon project completion.

d) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, 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.
 

Completion plans proposal (Part-16th, 17th and 18th floors) in respect of Commercial Complex at Plot no. F5, Wazirpur District Centre, NSP, Pitampura.

1. The DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on April 03, 2007, and subsequently accepted the NOC for Completion plans at its meeting held on January 05, 2011. The Commission further approved the addition of three floors (16th, 17th & 18th) at its meeting held on June 03, 2021.
3. The Commission did not accept the proposal for NOC for the completion plan (Part- 16th, 17th & 18th) proposal at its meetings held on October 16, 2025, December 11, 2025, February 5, 2026 and February 19, 2026; specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for the completion (Part- 16th, 17th & 18th Floors) received (through email) at the completion stage, was scrutinised, along with replies submitted in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no OL-02022648065 dated 24.02.2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs and replies submitted, the following observation is to be complied with:

a) The Commission took note of the letter submitted by the Architect dated 16 March 2026, wherein it has been stated that:

“….it is acknowledged that glass glazing was shown on the façade of the upper floors in the proposal submitted earlier for approval of additions/alterations on the 16th, 17th and 18th floors.

However, during the course of construction, it was decided to accommodate air-conditioning units in this area. Considering the heat load and the height of the superstructure, a conscious decision was taken not to provide glass glazing in this portion so as to facilitate proper heat dissipation…”

5. Based on submission made including drawings, documentations, photographs, and letter from architect dated March 16, 2026, the proposal for the NOC for completion (Part- 16th, 17th & 18th Floors) is found to be accepted.