Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1874th meeting held on 18.06.2026.

1. Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1874th meeting held on 18.06.2026 were discussed.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (through e-mail) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans with (Lower Basement + Upper Basement + Stilt + Ground + 3 Upper Floors) in its meeting held on November 23, 2015.
3. The proposal for NOC for the completion for (Cultural and Information centre at DSIIDC facility centre), received (through e-mail) at the completion stage, was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs and email dated June 29, 2026 etc., the proposal for NOC for Completion (Cultural and Information centre at DSIIDC facility centre), is accepted.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through e-mail) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the addition of faculty block at its meeting held on April 28, 2022 and Redevelopment of Boys’ Hostel at its meeting held on July 27, 2023 specific observations were given.
3. Further, the Commission did not accept the Part NOC for Completion (Boys’ Hostel and Faculty Block) at its meeting held on June 10, 2026 specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for Part NOC for the completion for (Boys Hostel and Faculty Block), received (through e-mail) at the completion stage, was scrutinised along with the replies submitted in response to the DUAC observations communicated vide letter no: OL-09062649031, 49(31)/2026-DUAC dated 15.06.2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs and replies submitted etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal has been submitted for Part NOC for Completion (Boys Hostel and Faculty Block); however, the submission is incomplete and lacks requisite documentation, including the duly filled project proforma, terrace photographs indicating completed work including the installation of services, and a comparative parking statement showing the parking approved by the Commission vis-à-vis the parking provided at the Completion Stage. Since the proposal is under consideration for NOC for Completion, the Architect shall ensure that all requisite documents are submitted in a complete manner to facilitate a comprehensive review by the Commission.

b) Based on the submitted site photographs, including those of the Boys' Hostel Block, the Commission observed that construction activities are still in progress at the site. These include scaffolding at the stilt-level entrance, road development works at the rear, installation of services on the terrace, landscaping within the internal courtyard, and other associated works. Since the proposal is under consideration for NOC for Completion, the building and all associated site development works shall be fully completed in all respects prior to its consideration by the Commission.

c) The submitted site photographs indicate deviations from the design approved at the Formal Stage. While the approved 3D views depict continuous glazing at the first-floor level, the as-built condition shows the glazing divided into two parts by a beam. The Architect shall clearly identify and highlight all such deviations to facilitate a clear assessment of the changes carried out vis-à-vis the DUAC approved design scheme.

5. Overall, the current submission, received at the part NOC for Completion stage (Boys Hostel and Faculty Block), is incomplete, work is in progress at the site, and has discrepancies. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above and furnish a point-by-point incorporation and response.

1. The NDMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission earlier accepted the concept of the proposal at its meeting held on March 27, 2019; specific observations were given. Additionally, the Commission approved the Redevelopment of GPRA colony, Sarojini Nagar at its meeting held on 17 January 2020, specific observations were given
3. Thereafter, the Commission approved the revised building plan proposal for the (Office-cum-Shopping Centre) at its meeting held on April 24, 2025; specific observations.
4. The proposal for Part NOC for the completion for (PKG IVA LSC and CGHS Dispensary-1), received (through OPAAS) at the completion stage, was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, and photographs etc., the proposal for Part NOC for Completion (PKG IVA LSC and CGHS Dispensary-1), is accepted.

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”. 

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was earlier approved at the conceptual stage by the Commission in its meeting held on 08.01.2020 for additions and alterations comprising three basement levels and a building from Ground to Fifth Floor.
3. Subsequently, a revised proposal for the construction of the Ground and First Floors with two additional floors over the existing building, including a double-height space above the Ground Floor at the Second-Floor level, was considered by the Commission at conceptual stage in its meetings held on 02.04.2026 and 23.04.2026 found not accepted, specific observations were given.
4. The building plans proposal for (additions/alterations in Existing Motel Building) received (through architect) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL- 14042627017 dated May 04, 2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, and replies submitted, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) 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 requisite documentation is incorrect, as identical particulars have been furnished for both the Architect and the owner/proponent. The Architect shall submit the correct details of both the Architect and the owner/proponent as part of the revised submission to ensure completeness of the documentation at the Conceptual Stage.​​​​​​​

c) The Commission observed that the unsatisfactory replies and complinaces to its earlier obsevations commuincated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL- 14042627017 dated May 04, 2026 have been given.

5. Overall, the proposal received at the conceptual stage is incomplete and lacks clarity, especially in view of the unsatisfactory compliance to its previous observations communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-14042627017 dated May 04, 2026. The architect is again advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish a pointwise incorporation and reply.

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 Commission approved the Redevelopment of GPRA Kasturba Nagar at its meeting on January 28, 2020. The Commission approved the Redevelopment of GPRA Colony Phase 2 Kasturba Nagar at its meeting held on June 26, 2025.
3. The Commission did not accept the Part NOC for Completion (15 nos. Residential towers i.e. T-II-9 nos. T-III-6 nos.) at its meeting held on October 16, 2025 and Novemeber 20, 2025 specific observations were given.
4. The building plans proposal for (Part Artwork) received (through architect) at the conceptual 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, etc, and the discussion held, 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").

b) The proposal pertains to the installation of artworks at the 20 residential towers (T-1 to T-20) within the GPRA, Kasturba Nagar. The submission includes conceptual artwork proposals for multiple residential towers, along with site photographs, artwork dimensions, thematic descriptions, and visual representations. The architect in its report has indicated that “the proposed themes broadly encompass nature, community life, Indian culture, environmental awareness, sports, kindness, wildlife, rural life, abstract compositions, urban life, and other contemporary artistic expressions.”

c) The Commission observed that the proposed locations for certain artworks, being confined to isolated and narrow spaces, do not adequately enhance their visual impact or public appreciation. The artwork locations shall, therefore, be reviewed and relocated to more prominent and publicly accessible areas, such as the entrance lobbies and other common spaces, where they can contribute more effectively to the architectural character and user experience of the development.

d) Since the GPRA comprises a large residential campus with several towers already constructed and additional towers proposed under Phase-II of the redevelopment, the Commission suggested that the Architect prepare a comprehensive Public Art Master Plan for the entire development. The submission shall present a cohesive thematic art strategy, clearly indicating the locations of artworks across all residential towers, commercial areas, and common public spaces, to facilitate a holistic assessment by the Commission.

e) The artwork strategy shall extend beyond the tower lobbies and incorporate sculptures, installations, murals, and other appropriate forms of public art within landscaped areas, plazas, and other shared spaces, so as to establish a unified artistic identity and enrich the overall public realm of the campus.

f) The dimensions of art work indicated in the submission are incorrect and shall be revised. The drawings shall clearly indicate the dimensions, location, and extent of each artwork in relation to the adjoining walls, furniture layout, services, and other architectural elements to facilitate a comprehensive assessment by the Commission.

g) The material specifications of the proposed artworks have not been clearly indicated. During the presentation, the Architect informed the Commission that the artworks are proposed to be executed using acrylic wall paint. The Commission did not encourage this approach, considering its long-term durability and maintenance requirements. The Architect is advised to explore durable, low-maintenance, and aesthetically appropriate materials that are compatible with the architectural character of the development and suitable for long-term public art installations.

h) Adequate natural and artificial lighting provisions shall be integrated into the design to ensure that the artworks remain appropriately illuminated, prominently visible, and aesthetically highlighted during both daytime and nighttime conditions.

5. Overall, the proposal received at the conceptual 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.