SL. No. | PROPOSAL | | OBSERVATIONS /SUGGESTIONS | | DECISION | | REMARKS |
---|
|
B. | Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1603rd meeting held on 29.07.2021. | | 1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1603rd meeting held on 29.07.2021 was discussed.
| | Noted by the Commission. | | |
|
C. PROJECT PROPOSALS: |
1 | Building plans proposal in
respect of Group Housing on Khasra no 219/220 part at Sindhora Kalan Village
Near Gulabi Bagh.
| | 1. The proposal was forwarded by
the North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission. 2. The building plan proposal
received (online) was scrutinised and a detailed discussion was held with the architect
on Cisco WebEx meetings (online) who provided clarifications to the queries of
the Commission on various aspects related to incomplete elevations &
sections, details of boundary wall and gate, details skin sections, green area
requirements, provision of shafts, plumbing arrangements & screening of
pipes, outdoor air-conditioning units, VRV arrangements, overall structural
arrangements, basement parking arrangements, location & screening of ESS,
DG set its exhaust pipes etc. Based on the detailed discussion held and the
proposal submitted, the following observations are to be complied with: a) The
3D views have been submitted without annotations thus making it difficult to
comprehend the materials etc. on the façade, which could have a bearing on the
visual, urban aesthetics of the complex. A sufficient number of
Self-explanatory, annotated 3D views (at least 6 in numbers), at various
angles, clearly showing the proposed design scheme with proper annotations and
corresponding to proposal drawings be submitted for a better understanding of
the proposal. Utilities including DG set, ESS, pump room etc. (with screening
mechanisms) to be reflected in the 3D views as well as the drawings wherever
provided. b) The
elevations and sections need to be detailed clearly showing the architectural
elements, sun shading mechanisms, plumbing details etc. The balconies need to
be screened appropriately along with the provision of screening of drying
clothes, dish antennas etc. Also, the skin sections (in detail) shall be
submitted to understand the elevation of the façade with materials. c) The
air-conditioners could be an eye-sore to the building façade. To avoid the
same, the provision shall be made in the design to accommodate the outdoor
units, at this stage, so as not to mar the aesthetics. A scheme needs to be
submitted to show the placement, screening and material of screening for the
same in plans/elevations and 3d views. In the case of VRV systems, their
location shall be highlighted in the relevant drawings etc. and shown. d) The
boundary wall and entrance gate would have a bearing on the overall aesthetics
of the area and need to be designed appropriately and shown with relevant
details (plans/elevations/sections/3D views etc.). e) The
elements of sustainability are missing in the design scheme. These shall be
identified and marked on the plans.
Roof-top utilities are to be shown in the plan/ 3D views and thus
require to be shown on the relevant drawings. Sustainability features shall be
as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and
Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. f) The structural arrangement
of the building is not shown in the submission. The structural arrangement in
the basement may impact the vehicular movement and the parking arrangements
needs to be revised in the submission with structural arrangements. g) The Plumbing mechanism in
the building is not clear. The arrangement for pipes (shafts) in the toilets is
not shown in the plans. Location of plumbing shafts, openings, accessibility,
screening mechanism for the pipes etc. on the facade needs to be clearly marked
on the plans/elevations/3D views etc. be treated appropriately, along with
appropriate means of screening. A coherent scheme shall be prepared and
submitted. h) The
location of the ESS, STP, UGT, pump room, DG set (including exhaust pipes) etc.
shall be indicated in the layout plans with screening mechanism & 3D views
etc. as appropriate to be submitted. The Commission observed that these
components have a bearing on the overall visual, urban and aesthetic quality of
the complex, accordingly, the submission shall be revised and resubmitted. i) All service equipment
ensured to be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11
&12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available
on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.
3. The
architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the
Commission and furnish a pointwise incorporation/reply. | | Not
approved, observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
2 | Revised layout and building
plan proposal in respect of K.K. Birla Academy at Plot no.2, Institutional
Area, Vasant Kunj. | | 1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online)
for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plan
proposal at its meeting held on June 05, 2007. The Commission did not approve
the revised layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on June 17,
2021, specific observations were given.
3. The revised layout
and building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was
scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the
architect in response to the observations of the Commission communicated vide
DUAC observation letter no: OL-14062155023 dated 23.06.2021 and a detailed discussion was held
with the architect on Cisco WebEx meetings (online) who provided clarifications
to the queries of the Commission on various aspects related to basement parking
arrangements, Utilities including DG
set (its exhaust pipes), ESS,
pump room etc. & its screening mechanism, plumbing arrangements, screening of outdoor
air-conditioning units, water tanks on
rooftops, etc. Based on the response received, revised
submission and a detailed discussion held, the following observations are to be
complied with:
a) Sustainability features shall
be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and
Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.
b) All service equipment ensured to be camouflaged
appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion
for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. | | Approved,
observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
3 | Completion plans proposal
in respect of Redevelopment of Govt. of India Press at Minto Road. | | 1. The proposal was forwarded by the CPWD (online) for
consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for
the redevelopment of the Govt. of India Press at its meeting held on May 18,
2018. The Commission approved the revisions in the elevational elements &
colour scheme at its meeting held on August 16, 2019.
3. The Completion plan proposal
for NOC received (online) was scrutinized and the following observations are to
be complied with:
a) The
proposal being at the Completion stage needs to provide an appropriate nos. of
uncut/clear photographs to substantiate an actual work executed at the site
including boundary wall, gate, parking, landscape, elevational façade,
screening of services like DG set, ESS etc. and to get in-depth clarity of the
site and surroundings.
b) The
site photographs (site photograph no-6) shows exposed DG sets and huge exhaust pipes
which are exposed and thus mar the aesthetics. Appropriate provisions shall be
explored for their screening so as not to spoil the aesthetics of the facade.
Also, the redundant structure shown behind the DG sets need clarification.
c) Due
thought had been given by the Commission while approving the case at the formal
level, especially the façade, considering its location, architectural elements,
materials, finishes etc. While comparing the approved photographs of the model
with the completed façade, it has been observed that the façade (especially
represented in the photographs 2, 5, & 6) has been substantially altered
thereby spoiling the visual, aesthetics of the façade. These facades shall be
restored to its earlier approval.
4. The architect is advised to
adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish a
pointwise incorporation/reply. | | NOC not approved, observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
4 | Regularization Plans of
WTPBE CGHS Ltd., plot no. 5, Sector-9, Dwarka. | | 1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for
consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the
building plan proposal at its meeting held on January 29, 1998, and the NOC was
approved in the meeting held on March 11, 2002, specific observations were
given.
3. The Commission did not approve
the building plan proposal for regularisation of building plans at its meeting
held on January 15, 2021, specific observations were given.
4. The revised proposal for
regularisation of building plans received (online) was scrutinised along with
the DDA letters no: F23 (38)97/Bldg./269 dated 27.05.2021, F23 (38)97/Bldg./280
dated 16.06.2021 and DUAC letter no: 22(3)/2021-DUAC dated 03.06.2021
respectively. The following
observations are to be complied with:
a) The proposal is for the regularization
of unauthorised construction done by the Society. The submitted site
photographs do not clearly indicate the required details. An appropriate number
of site pictures shall be provided. They need to be submitted with proper uncut
views from all sides.
b) Due thought had been given by
the Commission while approving the scheme in terms of materials, finishes,
architectural elements, façade, features etc. The submitted photographs clearly
establish that a lot of balconies are covered with temporary materials etc. which
is spoiling the overall aesthetic and visual quality of the complex.
c) The Commission favourably viewed the formal additions
presented in the 3D representations but observed informal and disorganized additions
of covering of the balconies that it cannot provide deliberate or inadvertent
approval to.
5. The architect is thereby advised
to remove the covering of all the balconies with temporary materials and
restore the residential building to the position as indicated in the 3D views (submitted
with the scheme for the regularisation) to enable the Commission to examine &
make comments taking into consideration the overall aesthetic and visual
quality of the complex, and adhere to all the above observations given by the
Commission along with a pointwise incorporation/reply. | | Not
approved, observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
5 | Completion plans proposal
in respect of Plot no. 13, Amrita Shergil Marg. | | 1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for
consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the
building plan proposal at its meeting held on September 23, 2015, and did not
approve the NOC for completion plan proposal at the meeting of the Commission
held on January 01, 2021, specific observations were given.
3. The revised completion plan
proposal for NOC received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised
along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the
observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no:
OL-17122050023 dated 08.01.2021. Based on the revised submission and the
replies submitted the following observations are to be complied with:
a) The
entire proposal shall adhere to all the applicable statutory provisions, and
norms/regulations of the prevailing Lutyens Bungalow Zone (LBZ) guidelines. b) All service equipment ensured
to be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of
the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the
DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.
c) Sustainability features
shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and
Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. | | NOC approved, observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
6 | Completion plans proposal
in respect of Type-6, Multi storeyed flats Housing for Rail Vikas Nigam Limited
near Leela Hotel Moti Bagh. | | 1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for
consideration by the Commission.
2. The
Commission approved the building plans proposal for Type-V, Type-VI, and the
Community facilities at its meeting held on January 18, 2017. But, did not approve the NOC for
completion plan proposal for
tower type-VI (basement, stilt + 09 floors) at the meeting of the
Commission held on July 08, 2021, specific observations were given.
3. The revised proposal for NOC for part completion
plan proposal for tower type-VI (basement, stilt + 09 floors) received (online)
at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the replies
submitted by the architect in response to the observations of the Commission
communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-24062150021, 50(21)/2021-DUAC
dated 19.07.2021. Based on the revised submission and the replies submitted it
was found acceptable. | | Part
NOC approved, observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
7 | Plans in respect of
demolition and reconstruction of a residential building at plot no. 27, Golf
Links. | | 1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for
consideration by the Commission.
2. The
building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised
and the following observations are to be complied with:
a) The
entire proposal shall adhere to all the applicable statutory provisions, and
norms/regulations of the prevailing Lutyens Bungalow Zone (LBZ) guidelines.
b) All service equipment ensured to be camouflaged
appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion
for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at
www.duac.org.in.
c) Sustainability features
shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and
Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. | | Approved, observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
8 | Building plans proposal in
respect of Additions/alterations in Management Institute for Rohini Educational
Society at PSA area 2A & 2B, Madhuban Chowk, Rohini. | | 1. The proposal was forwarded by
the North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the
building plan proposal at its meeting held on May 31, 2002, and the proposal
for additions/alterations was approved in the meeting held on July 07, 2011.
The concept for the building plan proposal for additions/alteration was not
accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on July 23, 2021, specific
observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal for
additions/alterations received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies
submitted by the architect in response to the observations of the Commission
communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-20072127055 dated 27.07.2021. Based
on the revised submission and response received, the following observations are
to be complied with:
a) Sustainability features shall
be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and
Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.
b) All service equipment ensured to be camouflaged
appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion
for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. | | Approved, observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
9 | Proposal for Covering of the ramps of all the
underpasses developed in the Construction of Integrated Transit Corridor
Development Plan around Pragati Maidan. (Conceptual Stage) | | 1. The proposal was forwarded
directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by
the Commission.
2. The Commission did not accept
the concept of the proposal for covering the ramps of all the underpasses
developed in the Construction of Integrated Transit Corridor Development Plan
around Pragati Maidan at its meeting held on June 25, 2021, specific
observations were given.
3. The revised conceptual proposal
for covering of ramps received (online) was scrutinised along with the
replies submitted by the architect in response to the observations of the Commission
communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-14062127047 Dated 29.06.2021 the
following observations are to be complied with:
a) Overall, three options to cover
the ramp and proposed work of art were presented before the Commission. In the
order of the preference Option no-1 and 2 for covering of ramps are found to be
more appropriate. Option no-3 is not accepted by the Commission. However, selection/installation
shall be decided by the proponent based on the feasibility, applicability,
availability and procurements.
b) The work of art presented was
not appreciated by the Commission. The Commission observed that the continuous
work of art shown on the walls would distract the motorists and overpower the
ramp covering. Instead, abstract forms of art (such as seen at airports), mosaic,
landscaped elements etc. shall be explored to cover the long-spanning internal
vertical surface of the ramps, which do not create any focal points/generate curiosity
to distract the motorists.
c) Sustainability aspects
including rainwater harvesting features shall be ensured and outlined
thoughtfully with appropriate detailing.
4. Only,
the concept for the covering of the ramps with the order of preference (option
1 & 2) is accepted. For the work of art, a scheme (with three options)
shall be presented separately. The architect is advised to adhere to all the
above observations given by the Commission and furnish a pointwise
incorporation/reply. | | Concept for the covering of ramps is accepted,
observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter
without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |
|
D. ADDITIONAL DETAILS: |
1 | Building plan proposal in respect of filling cum service station at Chirag Delhi, Madangir road. | | 1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on July 08, 2021, specific observations were given.3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) was scrutinised and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx Meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission on various aspects related to screening of the outdoor air conditioning units shown in the existing photographs, screening of Solar panels, water tanks, provision of pollution check kiosks, and advised putting up any later addition which might spoil the visual, urban aesthetics of the area etc. along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-05072155027 Dated 17.07.2021. Based on the discussion held, the response received and revised submission the following observations are to be complied with:a) Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.b) All service equipment, solar panels, air conditioning units, water tanks etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. | | Approved, observations given. | | The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting confirmation of the minutes of the meeting. |