Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1819th meeting held on 12.06.2025.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of the 1819th meeting held on 12.06.2025 were discussed.

1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the proposal for the redevelopment of General Pool Residential Accommodation at Kasturba Nagar in its meeting held on January 28, 2020, along with specific observations. However, the revised Master Plan proposal was not accepted by the Commission in its meeting held on January 16, 2025. Subsequently, the proposal was also not approved at the formal stage in the meetings held on March 6, 2025, April 24, 2025, and June 5, 2025, with detailed observations.
3. The proposal for the revised master plan in respect of the redevelopment of GPRA Colony, Kasturba Nagar, now received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no. OL-28052562022 dated 10.06.2025, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect, who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the submission and the discussion held, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that the Master Plan for the redevelopment of the General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) at Kasturba Nagar was previously approved in its meeting held on January 28, 2020, with a total plot area of 213,715.36 sqm. A revised master plan proposal has now been submitted, reflecting a reduced site area of 208,604.93 sqm due to the exclusion of 5,110.43 sqm (for an existing temple and RBI staff quarters). The revised proposal also introduces a division of the site into two zones—Zone 1 and Zone 2—and includes modifications, such as converting previously approved Type V and Type VI residential units to Type IV units in newly created zone-2. Further, the following additions for building proposals are also introduced:

i. Anganwadi

ii. Convenient Shops

iii. Coaching Centre

iv. Banquet Hall

v. Podium

vi. Proposed Residential Building Type -IV

b) All parking provisions shall comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and guidelines.

c) 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. 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.

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, DG set, DG exhaust 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 (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not accept the concept of the layout and building plan proposal at its meetings held on January 9, 2025. Subsequently, the Commission did not approve it at the formal stage at its meetings held on March 20, 2025, and May 15, 2025, and specific observations were given.
3. The layout and building plans proposal received (online) at the formal stage were scrutinised, along with the replies submitted in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated via DUAC letter no. OL-13052562020 dated 20 May 2025 and a detailed discussion was held with the architect, who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the submission and the discussion held, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The proposal includes constructing blocks A and B, each consisting of ground and 8 floors, while provisions for two additional blocks, Blocks C and D, have been reserved for future expansion. As per the project report, the entire basement will be constructed in the first phase, covering Blocks A, B, C, and D. However, to meet the parking requirements for Phase 2, the basement can be converted into double-stack parking to accommodate additional vehicles.

b) The design proposal incorporates provisions for double-stack parking arrangements to meet the necessary parking requirements. Nevertheless, the architect and proponent must ensure the proper implementation of these arrangements on-site, which will be examined during the completion stage of the proposal. All parking provisions shall comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and guidelines.

c) 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. 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.

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, DG set, DG exhaust 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 (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. In terms of the Gazette notification no. 4/2/2009/UD/l/6565, dated 1st October 2009, issued by the Department of Urban Development, Government of NCT of Delhi, North Block and South Block, are listed as heritage in the notified list at serial no. 7 in Grade I.
3. The proposal for Restoration and Comprehensive repairs of North Block received (online) was scrutinised, and a detailed presentation was given by the architect who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the presentation made, the discussion held, and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) First and foremost, the Commission appreciated the commendable efforts of the architect, for meticulously capturing and mapping the existing heritage building. Every aspect—including the external façade, architectural elements, columns, ornamental motifs, stone mouldings, wooden doors and windows, and internal courtyards—has been carefully documented. This thorough documentation lays a strong foundation for undertaking restoration and repair works with authenticity and sensitivity, aiming to bring the structure back to its original form as envisioned and constructed over a century ago.

b) The current restoration scheme also includes the upgradation and refurbishment of MEP services, along with the renovation of toilets, covering the replacement of fittings and fixtures, lighting improvements, the repair of old sewer lines, the installation of new sewer lines, and revised plumbing arrangements. During the actual restoration process, the restored external façade material may appear different from the 3D visualisations provided. Therefore, the Commission would like to review actual, finished samples of the restored façade to ensure the outcomes are consistent with the desired standards. Additionally, as the original fixtures and plumbing may no longer be available in toilets, the Commission wishes to be kept informed and involved during the finalisation of these components to ensure the restoration aligns with the intended quality and objectives. Similarly, air conditioning, lighting, and electricals have undergone massive transformations in the past century and the intended changes in the proposed restoration should be shared and confirmed with the DUAC in sufficient detail and advance by the architects/project sponsors.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DIAL (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the Master Plan for the Gateway and Downtown District at DIAL’s IGI Airport during its meeting held on March 16, 2021, along with specific observations. Subsequently, the building plan proposal was approved in the meeting held on April 13, 2022, with observations.
3. The proposal for the issuance of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for Completion of Asset LP-1B-04, Gateway District, Aerocity, IGI Airport, received (online) at the completion stage, was scrutinised. This included reviewing the observations and recommendations provided by the concerned local body, i.e., DIAL, in Part ‘B’ of the Proforma. A detailed online discussion was also held with the architect on Cisco Webex meetings, during which clarifications were provided in response to the Commission’s queries. Based on the submitted documentation, including drawings, photographs, the proposal for the NOC for Completion is accepted.

Building plans proposal for the addition of an Activity Block at Cambridge School, Block H, Sriniwaspuri. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2.  Earlier, the Commission approved the building plans for additions and alterations at its meeting on April 8, 1980. However, the Commission did not accept the concept of the building proposal for adding an Activity Block at its meetings on March 13, 2025 and May 15, 2025; specific observations were made.
3. The building plans proposal for the additions/alterations (Activity Block G+03 floors) received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-08052527029 dated 20.05.2025. A detailed discussion was held with the architect, who provided clarifications to the Commission's queries. Based on the replies submitted and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It has been observed that the submission has been resubmitted with partial addressing of previous observations outlined in DUAC letter no: OL-08052527029 dated 20.05.2025.

b) The Commission observed that parking concerns remain unresolved. Simply providing double-stack parking within a constrained surface area is insufficient to meet the overall requirements. Alternative strategies must be explored to accommodate proposed parking within the building footprint. The surface area freed from parking should be utilised to mitigate urban flooding and support groundwater recharge.

c) The entrance to the canteen block still lacks adequate space for congregation and forms an acute angle that restricts movement. It is reiterated that the entrance should be redesigned—preferably with a rectangular configuration—to provide sufficient circulation space, avoid sharp or inefficient angles, and include appropriate weather protection.

d) An acute angle is also observed in the area designated for hydroponics and horticulture. It is recommended that this area be redesigned and rationalised by eliminating sharp corners—preferably adopting a rectangular configuration—to enhance usability of both the internal and external spaces.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the conceptual stage still requires improvement, especially in addressing the requisite parking provisions and canteen areas. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response.