Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1873rd meeting held on 10.06.2026.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (for Commercial cum Residential building) received at formal stage at its meeting held on June 4, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for Commercial cum residential building (comprising of ground + three floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-29052623017 dated 10-06-2026 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, photographs and replies submitted etc, the discussion held, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that, while considering the proposal in its meeting held on 04.06.2026, comprehensive observations were communicated with a view to improving the overall design, and the Architect was requested to submit a point-wise compliance report. However, upon review of the revised proposal in its meeting held on 25.06.2026, it was observed that the replies furnished pertained to observations that had not been communicated by the Commission, while the actual observations remained unaddressed. The Commission did not appreciate this approach.

b) The Architect was accordingly advised to submit a point-wise compliance report against the observations actually communicated by the Commission. However, the same is still awaited.

c) It was observed that the proposal provides an open-to-sky vertical space extending from the ground floor to the third floor in front of the proposed staircase, enclosed with a railing of approximately 1.0 m height. Considering user safety, particularly that of children and the elderly, the design shall be reviewed and the railing height, along with other appropriate safety measures, shall be suitably enhanced in accordance with applicable safety norms and good design practices.

d) It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and comply with the applicable Building Bye-Laws and statutory provisions.

4. In view of the above and due to non-compliances to its previous observations, the architect is advised to adhere to all the above, and communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-29052623017 dated 10-06-2026 and furnish a point-by-point incorporation and response.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous reference of approval taken at formal/completion stage has been traced in DUAC records.
3. The building plans proposal for addition and alterations (alteration in ground & first floor and proposed second and third floor) received (through email) 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, photographs and the discussion held, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The proposal pertains to building with G+1 floor. The Commission noted that when evaluating the case for additions or alterations, it did not take into account the existing built construction at the site. This relates only to the proposal for additions and alterations.

b) The architect is advised to provide a machine-room-less (MRL) lift arrangement so that the roof above the lift shaft may be utilised for the installation of overhead water tanks. 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.

c) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d) Since the proposal pertains to additions and alterations involving the construction of additional floors over an existing structure, it shall be ensured that the proposed structural system is adequately designed it withstands weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquake etc. The concerned local body shall ensure the structural stability and safety of both the existing and the proposed structure.

e) It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and comply with the applicable Building Bye-Laws and statutory provisions.

f) The provisions for road widening shall be addressed by the concerned local body in accordance with prevailing UBBL norms, regulations, and applicable statutory provisions.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions and alterations (for comprising of Stilt + Ground + 3 upper floors) received at formal stage at its meeting held on May 6, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for residential building (comprising Stilt + Ground + 3 upper floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-03052623011 dated 13-05-2026. Based on the submission made, including documentation, drawings, photographs, and replies submitted, the following observation are to be complied with:

a) The proposal pertains to building with S+G+3 floors. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and comply with the applicable Building Bye-Laws and statutory provisions.

c) The provisions for road widening shall be addressed by the concerned local body in accordance with prevailing UBBL norms, regulations, and applicable statutory provisions.

d) 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.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The building plans proposal for residential building (comprising of basement + stilt + ground + three floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including documentation, drawings, photographs the following observation are to be complied with:

a) The proposal pertains to building with basement + S+G+3 floors.

b) To ensure adequate natural light and ventilation to the staircase, the architect is advised to provide a skylight over the marked open area. The architect is further advised to adopt a machine-room-less (MRL) lift arrangement so that the roof above the lift shaft can be utilised for the installation of the overhead water tanks.

c) It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and comply with the applicable Building Bye-Laws and statutory provisions.

d) The provisions for road widening shall be addressed by the concerned local body in accordance with prevailing UBBL norms, regulations, and applicable statutory provisions.

e) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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.

1. The CPWD forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The ‘Building within the President Estate’ is a listed Grade - I heritage at serial no. 05 in the Gazette Notification no. F.No.4/2/2009/UD/I 6565 dated October 1, 2009, issued by the Department of Urban Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
3. The proposal for the Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan (CCMP) of the President’s Estate was earlier approved by the Commission in its meeting held on 21.11.2013. Subsequently, the proposal for Shifting of Services was considered by the Commission in its meeting held on 09.10.2025; however, the same was not approved, and specific observations were given.
4. Earlier, the Commission approved the proposal for Shifting of Services (Proposed New Service Block) at South Lawns, President's Estate (near Gate No. 04) at its meeting held on 29.10.2025, subject to specific observations. Subsequently, the revised proposal submitted at the Formal Stage was considered by the Commission in its meeting held on 10.06.2026; however, the proposal was not approved, and specific observations were communicated.
5. The revised proposal for shifting of services (proposed New Service Block) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage, was scrutinised along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-04062662011 dated 15-06-2026. Based on the submission made, including documentation, drawings, photographs, and replies submitted, the following observation are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that bamboo plantation has been proposed along the barbed wire fencing for screening purposes. Alternatively, the Architect may explore the use of suitable creepers or other climbing vegetation as a landscape screening element in place of bamboo plantation to achieve a more integrated and aesthetically pleasing treatment.

b) 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.

1. The CPWD forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal forwarded by the architect was scrutinized. In terms of the Gazette notification no. 4/2/2009/UD/l/6565 dated 1st October 2009 issued by the Department of Urban Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi ‘Dr. RML Hospital and Campus at Wellington Crescent’ listed in the notified list at serial no. 7 are in the Grade-III.
3. The Heritage Conservation Committee (HCC) accepted the proposal at its meeting held on 01.12.2021 specific observations were given.
4. 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.
5. The Commission did not accept the proposal at the Completion Stage at its meeting held on 19.03.2026, and specific observations were given. Subsequently, the revised proposal submitted at the Conceptual Stage was also not accepted by the Commission during its meetings held on 29.04.2026 and 26.05.2026, and detailed observations given.
6. 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 along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-19052627020 dated 02-06-2026, and a letter no: Dir/ABVIMS/RMLH/2026/76 dated 24.06.2026 from the Director, ABVIMS & Dr. RML Hospital.  Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, letter from the Director, RML hospital and replies submitted etc., the proposal for NOC for Completion (Super Speciality Block for Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital), building comprising of (3B+G+11 Floors) is accepted.

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 January 11, 2012 and the Commission accepted the NOC for Completion at its July 15, 2015, meeting.
3. Subsequently, the Commission approved the building proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on September 29, 2018 and revised submission for Multilevel Parking with Commercial development was approved by the Commission at its meeting held on February 26, 2020.
4. The Commission accepted the revised building plans proposal for Multilevel parking with Commercial Development received at conceptual stage at its meeting held on March 12, 2026; specific observations were given.
5. The proposal for Part NOC for completion (Commercial Development) received (through email) at the completion stage was scrutinised.  Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations and photographs etc., the proposal for Part NOC for Completion (Commercial Development) is accepted.

Proposal in respect of Redevelopment of National Rail Museum, Chanakyapuri. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2.  The building plans proposal for Redevelopment of National Rail Museum received (through online) at the Conceptual Stage was scrutinized along with the submitted documentation. The Architect made a detailed online presentation through Cisco Webex Meetings, during which the design proposal was explained in detail, discussions were held, and clarifications were provided in response to the queries raised by the Commission. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, the discussion held and the presentation made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed from the Project Report that the proposal envisages the relocation of the existing turntable to a central location, along with the reorganization of the railway tracks and outdoor exhibits around it. The proposed redevelopment includes a new museum building, a 300-seat auditorium, conference facilities, a food court, a fine-dining restaurant, a library, workshops, and other ancillary facilities. The submission also indicates a phase-wise demolition of the existing development.

b) Since the proposal envisages the complete demolition and phased reconstruction of the Rail Museum complex, the architect shall submit a detailed assessment identifying the limitations of the existing museum, including deficiencies relating to visitor footfall, parking, circulation, exhibition spaces, public amenities, staff facilities, accessibility, operational requirements, and other functional and infrastructural constraints.

The submission shall also clearly demonstrate how these deficiencies have been addressed in the proposed redevelopment. A comparative statement, supported by relevant drawings, diagrams, and measurable data, shall be provided to explain the design rationale and highlight the proposed improvements in planning, circulation, visitor experience, capacity, operational efficiency, parking, and overall functionality, thereby facilitating a comprehensive assessment of the redevelopment strategy by the Commission.

c) The Commission observed that the proposal comprises interconnected building blocks accommodating the museum, auditorium, conference facilities, banquet spaces, restaurants, and other ancillary uses. However, despite being part of an integrated campus, the buildings exhibit varied architectural forms, proportions, façade treatments, material palettes, and design elements, resulting in the absence of a cohesive architectural identity.

Considering the project's strategic location in New Delhi and its significance as a national cultural destination attracting both domestic and international visitors, the Commission emphasized that the development should represent a unified and contemporary architectural character befitting its institutional importance.

Accordingly, the overall design shall be reviewed to establish a coherent architectural language through the harmonious integration of building forms, façade treatments, materials, landscape, public spaces, signage, and street furniture, while retaining the distinct functional identity of individual components. The revised proposal shall present an integrated design vision that reflects the museum's cultural significance and projects it as a landmark institution of international standards.

d) During the presentation, the Architect informed the Commission that, against the permissible FAR of 120, the proposed development utilises only about 0.34 FAR. It was further apprised that the balance permissible FAR is proposed to be accommodated in future on the adjoining NRM land parcel, which is presently under encroachment. The Commission suggested that the adjoining land parcel, along with its proposed future development potential, be incorporated in the overall master plan. The revised submission shall clearly illustrate the long-term design strategy, including the integration of existing and proposed facilities, circulation network, functional interrelationships, and future expansion, to facilitate a comprehensive understanding and assessment of the overall development scheme.

e) As indicated in the project report (2047 parking scenario), the minimum parking requirement for the proposed development is 380 Equivalent Car Spaces (ECS). However, the submitted parking plan provides only 265 ECS, comprising 126 ECS in the basement, 62 ECS at the surface level, and 77 ECS proposed in the adjoining NDMC parking area. The Commission observed that the proposed parking provision falls substantially short of the minimum requirement and is not in conformity with the applicable Building Bye-Laws.

The Commission emphasized that the requisite parking requirement shall be accommodated within the museum campus/plot itself and shall not be dependent upon adjoining parking facilities. The revised proposal shall demonstrate how the minimum parking requirement of 380 ECS, along with future parking demand arising from the site's ultimate development potential, shall be accommodated within the site boundaries.

The design shall maximise basement parking to enable the surface areas to be predominantly utilised for landscaped open spaces, public plazas, and other visitor-oriented amenities. Maximum retention of existing trees shall be ensured, with tree removal kept to the minimum. The landscape design shall be enhanced through an appropriate integration of hardscape and softscape elements to preserve the site's green character and improve its environmental quality, visual appeal, and overall visitor experience.

The Architect informed the Commission that, to strengthen last-mile connectivity, NDMC proposes to provide shuttle services between the museum complex and nearby public transport facilities, including metro stations and bus stops. While such measures may supplement accessibility, they shall not be considered a substitute for the minimum on-site parking requirement prescribed under the applicable Building Bye-Laws.

Further, the overall master plan shall incorporate the adjoining NRM land parcel, presently under encroachment, as part of the long-term development strategy. The submission shall clearly illustrate the proposed future expansion, integrated circulation system, parking strategy, functional interrelationships, and phased development so as to present a comprehensive planning and urban design framework for consideration by the Commission.

The concerned local body shall verify the adequacy and compliance of the parking provisions before granting the requisite approvals. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

f) Considering the anticipated visitor footfall and the associated safety requirements, the Commission strongly recommends that the parking be accommodated within the museum premises so as to minimize dependence on external parking facilities. The overall site planning shall ensure clear segregation of pedestrian and vehicular movement, with safe, seamless, and conflict-free circulation throughout the campus.

Accordingly, the Architect shall submit a comprehensive Mobility and Circulation Plan clearly indicating pedestrian pathways, vehicular movement, service access, emergency/fire tender movement, drop-off and pick-up areas, parking circulation, and access to all major building components. The plan shall demonstrate clear segregation of pedestrian and vehicular routes, ensuring safe, efficient, and universally accessible movement within the site, while minimizing potential conflict points and enhancing the overall visitor experience with due consideration to point No. 16, 17 the CPAA (Criteria for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

g) The proposal envisages a central entry plaza with various activity zones arranged around the central roundhouse. The Commission observed that the proposed circulation pattern requires visitors to repeatedly return to the central plaza to access different parts of the museum, thereby interrupting the continuity of movement and affecting the overall visitor experience. It is, therefore, strongly recommended that the circulation system be reviewed and redesigned to incorporate a continuous and intuitive loop, enabling seamless movement through the various exhibition and activity zones without unnecessary backtracking.

h) The revised proposal shall clearly demonstrate the overall visitor circulation strategy, including the sequence of movement through indoor and outdoor exhibits, activity zones, amenities, and public spaces. The plans, sections, elevations, and other relevant drawings shall be revised accordingly to reflect the proposed circulation pattern and its integration with the overall planning and design of the museum complex (in terms of points no.1, 2 and 4 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

i) The Commission observed that the proposed development offers substantial roof area, which shall be optimally utilised for the installation of solar photovoltaic (PV) panels. The design shall maximise the generation of renewable energy to meet, to the extent feasible, the energy requirements of common areas, outdoor lighting, and other public utilities, thereby reducing dependence on conventional energy sources and mitigating the project's carbon footprint.

j) The solar PV installations shall be thoughtfully integrated into the architectural design and suitably located so as not to adversely affect the visual character and aesthetics of the development. 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.

k) 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.

l) Considering the scale of the proposed development, a comprehensive Solid Waste Management (SWM) Plan shall be integrated with the overall master plan, clearly indicating the provisions for segregation, collection, storage, processing, recycling, and disposal of dry, wet, food, and other waste streams in accordance with the applicable statutory guidelines.

m) The proposal shall also incorporate a sustainable water management strategy, including an on-site greywater treatment and recycling system with a dual plumbing network for reuse in flushing, landscaping, and other non-potable purposes. The locations and capacities of the SWM facilities, STP, greywater treatment system, recycled water network, and other associated infrastructure shall be clearly indicated in the plans to demonstrate an integrated and environmentally sustainable development strategy.

3. Overall, the proposal received at the conceptual stage lacks clarity, and 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 Residential building at 4782/1, Plot no.8, Block-A, Ansari Road, Daryaganj. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous reference of approval taken at formal/completion stage has been traced in DUAC records.
3. The building plans proposal for residential building (comprising of Basement + Stilts + Ground + three floors) received (through online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised along with the documentation submitted, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) During its meeting on October 17, 2024, the Commission issued specific guidelines through memorandum no. 1(2)/82-DUAC dated October 29, 2024, for the conceptual proposal under review. It was noted that the ‘authorisation from the owner appointing the architect for the project’ was missing from the checklist. As the proposal is at the conceptual stage, it is imperative to provide accurate and complete documentation, adhering to the requirements specified in the checklist for conceptual proposals (available on the OPAAS login page under "Steps to Submit Proposals for Conceptual Proposals"). This shall ensure that the Commission appropriately considers the proposal.

4. The Commission did not consider the proposal due to a lack of information at the Conceptual stage (as per the checklist available on the DUAC website). Thus, the architect is advised to provide complete and correct information to ensure consideration of the proposal.

Building plans proposal in respect of “Proposed building plans of Add. /Alts in Existing Motel Building on New Khasra no. 98, Village Chandan Hola, Chhatarpur, New Delhi”.  (Conceptual stage)

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

Proposal in respect of GPRA Kasturba Nagar Part Artwork. (Conceptual stage)

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