Action Taken Reports in respect of Minutes of 1859th meeting held on 12.03.2026.

1. Action Taken Reports in respect of Minutes of the 1859th meeting held on 12.03.2026 were discussed.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal at its meetings held on February 12, 2026 and February 26, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations received (through email) at the formal stage was scrutinised, along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no. OL-30111223056, 23(56)/2012-DUAC dated March 10, 2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, replies submitted, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was noted by the Commission that site photographs show empty plot with only a single small one-story structure, which would be demolished. 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 Commission observed that the proposed clear height of 3.85 m for stack parking in the basement appears to be insufficient. It was, therefore, advised that the basement height be revised to meet the minimum requirements prescribed under the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL) for accommodating double stack parking systems. As the design proposal incorporates provisions for double stack parking arrangements to meet the necessary parking requirements, it shall be examined during the proposal's completion stage. 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.

c) It was suggested that mosaic tiles be used in place of a paint finish for the execution of the artwork, so as to ensure greater durability, reduced maintenance, and long-term preservation of the façade treatment.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) It was also observed that a vertical jaali has been proposed to screen the exposed rainwater pipes, which are presently indicated in varying colours. To maintain visual coherence and uniformity in the overall colour scheme, it is recommended that the same colour palette be adopted for all such elements.

e) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, DG set, DG exhaust pipes, 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.

f) 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.

1. The DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on October 17, 1997 and subsequently accepted the NOC for completion plans proposal at its meeting held on December 11, 2013. 
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meetings held on December 18, 2025 and February 12, 2026; specific observations were given.
4. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations (extension of living room, bedroom and balcony to each flat) received (through email) at the formal stage was scrutinised , along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no. OL-16122522119  dated February 19, 2026 and the Commission intended to discuss with the architect (online), but he was not available for discussion.  Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, and the unavailability of the architect for discussion (online), the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that during its meetings held on December 18, 2025 and February 12, 2026, detailed and comprehensive observations were communicated vide DUAC observation letters no. OL-12122522119 dated December 23, 2025 and OL-16122522119 dated February 19, 2026, with a clear advice to adhere to these observations and submit a point-wise incorporation and response. However, it was observed that only partial compliance has been provided, without a structured point-wise incorporation and response, which is not appreciated.

b) Some of the main observations concerning the proposal for additions/alterations and also communicated vide DUAC letter no. OL-16122522119  dated February 19, 2026, and thus, are being reinstated under:

“…..c) An inconsistency has been noted in the submission. Although the project report indicates provision of 78 ECS through stack parking, the exact location and related details of the same have not been clearly shown in the drawings. Furthermore, it has been observed that a portion of the proposed parking is being accommodated beneath the mandatory green area, with the balance provided at surface level. In order to maximise the mandatory green and keep the surface free from vehicular parking, it is recommended that the parking be consolidated and relocated in the form of a parking tower within the space between Block 2 and Block 3, by exploring appropriate alternative parking solutions. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc.

h. It shall be ensured that the nomenclature of the buildings, such as Block 1, Block 2, Block 3, etc., is not displayed at the top of the structures in the actual construction, as it tends to overpower the façade and adversely affect the overall architectural aesthetics of the complex.

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

The Commission noted that although the proposal pertains to additions and alterations, but it is being reviewed holistically and not in isolation, particularly with regard to parking provisions. It was observed that the parking layout requires further detailing, including the clear demarcation of the number and location of parking spaces, as well as the vehicular circulation and movement patterns. Additionally, the existing parking and the parking proposed under additional FAR shall be clearly shown on the layout plan, with a clear bifurcation between the two.

c) Further, it was observed from the 3D views that the windows on the outer façade are proposed without adequate provision of overhangs/chajjas for weather protection, particularly against rain and direct sunlight. In the absence of such elements, occupants may resort to temporary coverings, which could adversely affect the visual aesthetics of the complex. The Commission, therefore, advised the provision of appropriately designed sunshades of suitable shape and size to ensure effective weather protection while maintaining the architectural integrity of the façade. A detailed skin sections shall also be submitted to clearly illustrate the façade treatment, including material specifications and provisions for weather protection.

5. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage lacks clarity, especially in view of the non-compliance and the point-wise replies to its previous observations communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-12122522119 dated December 23, 2025 and OL-16122522119 dated February 19, 2026. The architect is again advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish a pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The NDMC forwarded (through online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the demolition and reconstruction for residential building at its meeting held on May 22, 2020.  
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for completion plans proposal received at Completion stage at its meeting held on February 26, 2026.  
4. The proposal for NOC for completion received (through online) at the completion stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-19022650004 dated 10.03.2026. Based on the submission, including documentation, drawings, and photographs and the replies submitted, the proposal NOC for completion is found to be 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 on March 16, 1998; specific observations were given. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meetings held on December 11, 2025, January 8, 2026, January 29, 2026 and March 5, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for addition/alteration (addition of bedroom, toilet, balcony, and extension of living and dining room in all dwelling units) received (through email) at the formal stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-02122522118, 22(118)/2025-DUAC dated 12.03.2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, replies submitted etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that, in order to accommodate the requisite car parking provisions (both existing and proposed), pit parking (for 82 ECS) has been proposed within the front setback. The architect/proponent/local body shall ensure that the same is executed as per the approved proposal at site. The appropriateness and implementation of these parking arrangements shall be verified at the completion stage of the project. 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) A lot of live/dead load is being added to the existing building. The added balcony structure shall be designed to withstand weather effects and impacts from calamities such as earthquakes, etc., as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. It shall be ensured it is braced strongly to the building and does not impact the safety of the superstructure during addition/alteration. The local body shall ensure the structural safety of the additions/alterations done on the existing superstructure.  

c) It shall be ensured that the nomenclature of the buildings, such as Block A, Block B, Block C, Tower D etc., is not displayed at the top of the structures in the actual construction, as it tends to overpower the façade and adversely affect the overall architectural aesthetics of the complex.

d) 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.

e) The Commission emphasised that, to obtain the NOC for completion, the building must properly screen all exposed pipes, designate screened spaces for outdoor air conditioning units, and remove all temporary balcony coverings. 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.

Building plans proposal in respect of “Residential Building At 4563-64, Plot No. B-1 at 16, Daryaganj, Delhi 110002”. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not accept the conceptual plans proposal received at conceptual stage at its meeting held on March 12, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for a residential building received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no:  OL-08032627009 dated 17.03.2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, and photographs, and the replies submitted, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The submission, including the drawings, indicates that the existing building is proposed to be demolished.

b) The Commission observed from the 3D views that a ramp has been proposed along the front and the side periphery of the proposed building. It shall be ensured that appropriate levels and gradients are maintained to prevent any possibility of water stagnation or flooding within the site. Further, it shall be ensured that the ramp shall be constructed within the plot boundary and do not protrude into the municipal road and shall conform to the provisions stipulated under the applicable Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL).

c) The Commission observed that the drawings indicate direct access to the basement without the provision of an intermediate landing, which may pose a safety concern. It was, therefore, advised that an appropriate landing be incorporated at the basement entry to ensure safe, convenient, and controlled access. Additionally, suitable measures shall be provided to prevent ingress of surface runoff during rains, in accordance with applicable norms and standards.

d) The Commission observed that there are inconsistencies between the submitted 3D views and the elevation drawings. The proposed door leading to the basement does not correspond with what is depicted in the plans/elevations and the 3D views, indicating discrepancies in the submission. It was, therefore, advised that revised and coordinated drawings comprising plans, elevations, sections, and 3D views be submitted at the formal stage for the review of the Commission.

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.

4. Overall, the architect is advised to ensure the compliance to the above observations in the next submission (formal stage) and furnish a pointwise incorporation and reply.

Found conceptually suitable (not limited to these observations).
‘The conceptual suitability is only with reference to the mandate of the Commission. However, it would be reassessed at the formal stage based on the 20-point criteria as available on the DUAC website.  It would not be a substitute for formal approval of the proposal referred through the concerned local body in terms of section 12 of the DUAC Act, 1973.

Building plans proposal in respect of “Residential Building at 4530/3 Ward No XI Plot No 7/26 Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Delhi 110002”. (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 a residential building received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, and photographs, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The submission, including the drawings (ground, mezzanine and first floor plan), indicates that the existing building is proposed to be demolished.

b) The Commission observed from the proposed 3D views that the front façade comprises brick cladding and a railing has been proposed at the parapet level. In this regard, it is strongly recommended that the design of the parapet railing be aligned and coordinated with that of the main gate, so as to ensure visual coherence and a harmonious architectural expression of the façade as per Point 8 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c) The Commission observed that the drawings indicate direct access to the basement without the provision of an intermediate landing, which may pose a safety concern. It was, therefore, advised that an appropriate landing be incorporated at the basement entry to ensure safe, convenient, and controlled access. Additionally, suitable measures shall be provided to prevent ingress of surface runoff during rains, in accordance with applicable norms and standards.

d) 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.

e) The proposal also indicates the expansion of the Right of Way (ROW). The same shall be examined and ensured by the concerned local body, subject to feasibility and in compliance with applicable norms, regulations, and statutory provisions.

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.

4. Overall, the architect is advised to ensure the compliance to the above observations in the next submission (formal stage) and furnish a pointwise incorporation and reply.
    

Found conceptually suitable (not limited to these observations).

‘The conceptual suitability is only with reference to the mandate of the Commission. However, it would be reassessed at the formal stage based on the 20-point criteria as available on the DUAC website.  It would not be a substitute for formal approval of the proposal referred through the concerned local body in terms of section 12 of the DUAC Act, 1973.

1. The North DMC forwarded (through online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meetings held on November 27, 2025, December 24, 2025 and February 5, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for a residential building (comprising of basement + Ground + 3 floors) received (through online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no. OL-04022623004 dated 12.02.2026. Based on the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The local body shall ensure that all applicable norms, regulations, and provisions under the Unified Building Bye Laws (UBBL) are duly complied with, particularly with regard to providing adequate clear headroom between the ground floor and basement level to facilitate safe, convenient, and unobstructed ingress and egress. Further, all parking provisions and weather protection measures for external openings/windows shall be designed and executed in conformity with the relevant norms, guidelines, regulations, and statutory requirements.

b) 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.

c) 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 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 girls and boys hostel (B+G+9 floors) and amenities block (B+G+2 floors)) received (through online) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including project report, drawings, documentations etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the quality of the submitted drawings lacks clarity and is inadequate for proper review. Discrepancies have been noted in the submission, particularly wherein the 3D views (Views 13, 14, and 15) do not correspond or correlate with the locations indicated in the layout plan. It is, therefore, advised that the revised submission include high-resolution, clearly legible, and well-coordinated drawings, comprising plans, elevations, sections, and annotated 3D views (with façade materiality distinctly indicated), along with appropriate nomenclature, to facilitate a comprehensive and judicious review in terms of points nos. 4 and 8 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) While the submission includes a comprehensive site layout plan, it is not supported by a detailed ground floor plan illustrating access and circulation at the ground level. It is, therefore, advised that the envisaged design scheme be presented, including a separate and clearly defined ground floor plan, so as to adequately demonstrate access, movement patterns, and circulation within and between the blocks at the ground level, which constitutes the primary public interface (in terms of points no. 17 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c) A combined mobility plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plan including fire from outside to the various parts of the building to be submitted, to understand the movement pattern within the site. It shall be indicated clearly with clear segregation of pedestrian and vehicular movement 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.

d) The Commission observed that, although a service yard has been indicated in the site plan, detailed information regarding its components has not been adequately illustrated or reflected in the overall scheme. Similarly, the proposed vehicular ramps and the proposed parking spaces marked on the layout have not been captured in the proposed 3D views, bird’s-eye view, thereby limiting a comprehensive understanding of the proposal. The Commission reviews proposals holistically, considering all design elements, their location, and their impact on the overall built form. Accordingly, it was advised that the complete design scheme be presented in an integrated manner, including parking areas, ramps, all service components (such as DG sets and exhaust systems), supported by detailed plans, elevations, sections, and 3D views, clearly indicating screening mechanisms and materiality. All drawings shall be properly coordinated, correctly labelled, and consistent with the 3D representations to facilitate a comprehensive review (in terms of points nos. 1, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) The amenities block is proposed as G+2, whereas the adjoining boys’ and girls’ hostels are G+4. Owing to the close proximity, particularly at the terrace level of the amenities block, privacy concerns may arise for the lower floors (ground to second). It shall be ensured that balconies are appropriately screened or other techniques used to maintain privacy. Further, the existing block configuration results in the creation of negative spaces between buildings, which may be difficult to maintain over time; such spaces shall therefore be minimised in the design. 

f) The proposal being a hostel block for boys & girls, aappropriate provisions for drying clothes and their screening mechanisms shall be made so as not to affect the aesthetics of the façade shall be ensured and presented with necessary design scheme for the review of the Commission. 

g) As the project is being submitted at the Formal stage, detailed end-to-end longitudinal sections and cross-sections across the site shall be provided. In addition, detailed skin sections shall be submitted to clearly illustrate the façade treatment, including material specifications and provisions for weather protection.

h) It was observed that the site has two open ramps providing access to the lower and upper basements; however, no design scheme has been presented for their covering or structural arrangement to protect them from extreme weather conditions, including rain. The Commission opined that such ramps may be covered at a later stage, which could adversely impact the aesthetic character of the campus. To avoid such a situation, it was advised that a comprehensive design scheme for the covering of these ramps be developed at this stage itself, including details of materials and structural systems.

i) The Commission observed that the design of the main gate and boundary wall of such a large campus would significantly influence the overall aesthetics of the complex; however, these elements have not been adequately addressed in the proposed scheme. It is, therefore, advised that detailed sections, complete in all respects including gate/grill design, material specifications, and construction details be provided. The design shall be relooked at to ensure it is contextually appropriate and expressed through simple, coherent architectural elements. Further, the main entry gate shall be designed in accordance with the significance of the building and its context, with due consideration to Point No. 13, 19 of the CPAA (Criteria for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

j) A lot of waste (dry and wet, food items, etc.) supposed to be generated in the campus, a detailed solid waste management plan proposal along with its location on the site plan be submitted.

k) 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.

l) The Commission observed that the proposed green areas are fragmented and dispersed across the site, which limits their usability and poses challenges for maintenance due to their location as well as inadequate light. It is, therefore, advised that the green spaces be planned as cohesive and consolidated areas to ensure their effective utilisation and ease of maintenance. The revised proposal shall duly illustrate these modifications through updated drawings and annotated 3D views. Further, aspects such as signage and landscape elements shall be appropriately integrated to optimise the use of available space, in accordance with the relevant provisions of CPAA (Criteria for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website (www.duac.org.in).

m) 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.

n) 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.

o) 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.

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