Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1708th meeting held on 01.06.2023.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the East DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on March 07, 2018.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., East DMC in part ‘C’ of Proforma, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the comments received in part ‘C’ Proforma, the discussion held (online), and the submission made, the proposal for NOC for Completion is accepted.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the East DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on December 28, 2020, and specific observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., East DMC in part ‘C’ of Proforma, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the comments received in part ‘C’ Proforma, the discussion held (online), and the submission made, the proposal for NOC for Completion is accepted.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout plan proposal in respect of NPL Residential Colony, Pusa at its meeting held on December 17, 1986, and the building plan proposal in respect of Standard Block of the National Physical Laboratory was approved at its meeting held on June 12, 2009, and subsequently accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on May 01, 2015.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal in respect of the National Facility to provide certification of OCEM and CAAQMS at CSIR-NPL at its meeting held on March 16, 2023, and specific observations were given.
4. The building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: OL-15032323014 dated 23.03.2023, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on previous observations of the Commission, a discussion held with the architect (online), and revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal has been received at the formal stage but the 3D view of the front façade only has been submitted for its consideration. Annotated 3D views from all sides with better viewing angles including birds-eye views clearly indicating the materials to be used on the façade shall be submitted for its better understanding and judicious consideration by the Commission.

b) Also, elevations and sections need to be detailed clearly showing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, plumbing details etc. Also, the skin sections (in detail) shall be submitted to understand the elevation of the façade with materials.

c) The parking plan appears to be missing in the submission. It needs to be clearly indicated in appropriate plans with other parking details including the location of no. of cars, car movement pattern, etc. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations etc.

d) The air-conditioning mechanism of the proposal is not clear. The mechanism for air conditioning needs to be detailed i.e., location, screening mechanism, areas of inflow/outflow in indoor areas and the appropriate treatments used to conceal/screen the air-conditioning system. Also, it shall be ensured that there is no leakage from the AC unit causing deterioration of spaces (indoor and outdoor).

e) The elements of sustainability shall be identified and the screening for the same shall also be mentioned and marked clearly in the plans/3D views to understand the screening mechanism better. The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 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, service equipment, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, water tanks etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

5. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

1. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for addition/alterations (demolishing the existing auditorium and proposing an academic block (now denoted as an office building)) at its meeting held on June 25, 2021.
2. The Commission did not approve the revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on March 29, 2023.
3. The revised building plan proposal for addition/alteration (addition of 2^nd floor, 3^rd floor, 4^th floor & 5^th floor over an existing office building comprising of S+G+01, and a proposed MLCP (S+G+1) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter no.: OL-23032355028 dated 05.04.2023. Based on the previous observations, and the revised submission made, 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) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG set, DG exhaust pipes etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on February 15, 1990. The Commission approved the building plans proposal for addition/alterations at its meeting held on December 12, 2018.
3. The Commission did not accept the Concept of the building plans proposal for addition/alterations at its meeting held on May 18, 2023, and April 13, 2023, specific observations were given.
4. The revised layout and building plan proposal in respect of additions/alterations (alterations to existing superstructure comprising of B+G+4, proposed block-A (2B+G+11), block-B (B+G+4), and a tower parking) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Conceptually Unsuitable letter no: OL-29042327031 dated 23.05.2023. Based on the previous observations, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) The Commission did not accept the provision of a double stack parking (proposed) in the front setback, the same shall be re-adjusted elsewhere. All requisite parking requirements shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

c) The added structure shall be designed so that it withstands weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquakes etc. as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. It shall be ensured it is braced firmly to the building and does not impact the safety of the superstructure.

d) Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG set, DG exhaust pipes etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on April 21, 2022, and specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: OL-13042223021 dated 26.04.2022. Based on the replies submitted, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) All service equipment, water tanks, outdoor air-conditioning units, plumbing pipes etc. should be camouflaged appropriately in terms of 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.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on January 23, 2008, and accepted NOC for the completion stage at its meeting held on May 07, 2014.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., North DMC in part ‘C’ of Proforma. Based on the comments received in part ‘C’ Proforma and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) From the record available with the Commission, it was observed the proposal for NOC for completion had already been accepted by the Commission at its meeting held on May 07, 2014.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on May 23, 2000. The Commission accepted the NOC for completion at its meeting held on June 05, 2007, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal for additions/alterations (bedroom, toilet, extension of drawing room & balconies) at its meeting held on June 01, 2023, May 18, 2023 and April 27, 2023, specific observations were given.
4. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (bedroom, toilet, extension of drawing room & balconies) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the DUAC observation letter no: OL-28052322040 dated 07.06.2023. Based on the replies submitted, and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) The added structure shall be such designed that it withstands weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquakes etc. as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. It shall be ensured it is braced firmly to the building and does not impact the safety of the superstructure.

c) All requisite car parking requirements shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

d) The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of the approval taken from the Commission has been found in the available record of the Commission. 
3. The building plans proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco Web-Ex meetings (online) who presented a detailed walkthrough of the proposal and provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the discussion held (online), walkthrough shown, and submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the blocking arrangement of the proposal appears to be well coordinated & found to be acceptable. But the architectural elements and expression on the external surfaces appears too noisy and active.  While the Commission is not averse to classical or neoclassical European elements, and observes that they do feature in Delhi’s architectural expression, there must be defined and articulated consistency or pattern that is in harmony.   It is suggested that the elevations be relooked to enhance the scale, and grandness of the building with appropriate architectural elements, patterns etc that are coordinated and in harmony without becoming too noisy. Overall aesthetics to be improved, and architectural elements to be simplified.

b) The elevational features on the facade be adequately detailed & resubmitted with skin sections (in detail) to understand the elevation of the façade with materials.

c) The mechanism for air conditioning needs to be detailed i.e., location, areas of inflow/outflow in indoor areas and the appropriate treatments used to conceal/screen the air-conditioning system. Also, it shall be ensured that there is no leakage from the AC unit causing deterioration of spaces (indoor and outdoor).

d) The provision of requisite parking arrangements have been shown in basements including double stack parking (in basement-03), but the movement pattern, location of the cars etc. have not been shown and not understood properly. The parking plan needs to be detailed, i.e., it needs to mark the location of no. of cars, car movement patterns, etc. to have a clear understanding of the parking arrangements better.

e) Considering the use of the building for auditorium and office space, the movement pattern shall be elucidated with a combined mobility plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plan from outside, to understand the movement pattern within the site.

f) The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

g) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. In view of the insufficient information provided to the Commission, the proposal        received at the formal stage could not be appreciated fully by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observation of the Commission and submit three alternative options of the elevations with appropriate architectural elements, geometrical forms, patterns etc. at the conceptual stage first simultaneously furnishing a pointwise compliance & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the CPWD (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal in respect of the Museum of Prime Ministers of India at Teen Murti Bhawan at its meeting held on October 08, 2018. The Commission accepted the NOC for completion at its meeting held on December 12, 2021 specific observations were given.
3. The proposal in respect of Construction of the Main Gate at the Prime Minister Museum at Teen Murti Marg received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Web-Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the discussion held (online), and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Inconsistencies have been observed in the submission i.e., the proposed details (showing the joinery detail) where the grill joins the existing boundary wall are not consistent with the 3d views shown in the submission.

b) The elevation showing the proposed main Iron grill gate is not consistent with the submitted 3d views.

c) The structural element, supporting the main gate as shown in the plans lacks coherence and consistency with the submitted elevation and 3d views.

d)The Commission opines that the proposal being at the formal stage shall have corrected and coordinated drawings (including plans, elevations, sections, 3d views etc.) which need to be submitted for improved understanding of the proposal.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal at its meeting held on June 01, 2023, and April 13, 2023, and specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal received (online) at the Formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to DUAC observation letter no: OL-27052322041 dated 07.06.2023 and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Web-Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the discussion held (online), and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that unsatisfactory compliances to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no:  OL-27052322041 dated 07.06.2023 has been given.

b) The discrepancies observed in the submission are again reiterated related to mechanical tower parking, the architectural elements reflected in the 3D views appear to have not been incorporated in the plans etc. Since the proposal is at a formal stage correlated & coordinated submission shall be submitted for the consideration of the Commission.

c) Also, the architect has not sufficiently resolved the challenges related to plumbing arrangements of the toilets provided as almost all toilets on every floor do not have a provision of direct light & ventilation, plumbing shafts/mechanisms, location of toilets keeps changing on every floor. The same shall be relooked at and elucidated with the required workable details to understand the design scheme better.

d) The sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) All water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, transformers, DG set, DG exhaust pipes etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. In view of the insufficient information provided, the proposal received at the formal stage could not be examined & considered judiciously.
5. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

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 August 25, 2021, and specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for completion at its meeting held on May 18, 2023, and April 13, 2023, specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: OL-12052350006 dated 23.05.2023 and comments of the concerned local body i.e., NDMC in part ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma,  and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the comments received in parts ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma, the discussion held (online), and the submission made, the proposal for NOC for Completion is accepted.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the CPWD (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The proposal was deferred.

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

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on October 09, 2020.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on March 29, 2023, and specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No. OL-20032350003 dated 05.04.2023 and the observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., NDMC in part ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma. Based on the replies submitted, observations/recommendations received and the revised submission made, the proposal for NOC for Completion is accepted.