1. Action Taken Reports in respect of Minutes of the 1726th meeting held on 04.10.2023 were discussed.

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 (2B+S+G+4 Floors) at its meeting held on December 28, 2018, and specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not approve the revised building plans proposal for additions/alterations (addition of the 5^th floor over the existing building 2B+S+G+4 Floors) at its meeting held on November 24, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plans proposal for additions/alterations (addition of 5^th floor over the existing building 2B+S+G+4 Floors) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No: OL-18112223073 dated 28.11.2022, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Zoho Web EX (online) who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the replies submitted, the discussion held online, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) From the site photographs provided by the architect/proponent, the Commission took note that the structural work on the site is in progress to the extent that the structure has been erected till the fourth floor.

b) 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.

c) Work of art as per the terms of the public art provisions as stipulated under point no. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in needs to be provided.

d) All water tanks, rainwater pipes, 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 accepted the concept of the building plans proposal for demolition and reconstruction at its meeting held on October 04, 2023, specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Conceptually Suitable Letter No: OL-03102327007 dated 11.10.2023. Based on the previous observations of the Commission, and the 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, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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 North DMC (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) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) 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.

c) All service equipment, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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 North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission accepted the concept of the building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 09, 2021, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission accepted the building plans proposal at its meeting held on January 06, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised layout and the building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Zoho Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the revised submission made, discussion held online, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) 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.

c) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, water tanks, solar panels, DG set, DG exhaust pipes etc. shall be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the 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 DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on March 09, 2011, specific observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Approval Letter No: 22(02)2010-DUAC dated 05.04.2011. Based on the previous observations of the Commission, and the submission made, the proposal for NOC for Completion is found to be accepted.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on August 23, 1996, and the revised building plans proposal for additions/alterations was approved at its meeting held on April 05, 2018.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on January 25, 2023, and April 27, 2023, respectively, specific observations were given.
4. The revised 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-21042348012 dated 02.05.2023. Based on the replies submitted, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that in terms of the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-21042348012 dated 02.05.2023 unsatisfactory compliances for the same have been made.

b) In one of its replies the architect indicated that:

“……. Society all got completion certificate from DDA before extension work…...”

The Commission desired that the scanned copies of the completion received from DDA shall be submitted for the understanding & record of the Commission.

c) Further, the architect has replied that:

“……. for the area where RWP are visible, NOC is already received. …..”

The exposed RWP’s are spoiling the visual & urban aesthetics of the complex, the NOC received for that area from DDA & DUAC shall also be submitted substantiated with before and after photographs to understand actual deviations made after getting the Completion to ensure that similar issues are not repeated in the future. 

d) Similarly, the Commission insists on removing all the temporary coverings/extensions before applying the case for NOC for Completion.

e) A limited number of photographs of the constructed building have been provided, and these images lack clear annotations and delineations, making it challenging to identify the precise areas to be considered for NOC. Comprehensive, uncut photographs of the entire superstructure must be submitted, along with appropriate delineations, to facilitate the Commission's better understanding of the areas under consideration for NOC.

f) The Commission again reiterated some of its previous observations communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-19012348002 dated 31.01.2023:

“…….…c)          All temporary coverings/extensions must be removed.

 d)       Approval received from DUAC (at the formal stage) shall be superimposed on the plans/elevations/sections etc., over the actual built structure on the site, existing & proposed changes done in the design from the approval (by DUAC), to understand the extents of deviations made internally as well as external changes made with respect to the sanctioned plan….…..”

5. In view of the inadequate compliance given to its previous observations, the proposal for NOC for the completion plan could not be appreciated judiciously by the  Commission.
6. The architect is advised to carefully follow and address all the observations provided by the Commission above including observation letter nos: OL-19012348002 dated 31.01.2023, OL-21042348012 dated 02.05.2023. It is requested that the architect submit a detailed response, incorporating each point raised by the Commission in a clear and point-by-point manner.

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 26, 2005, and did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on February 16, 2023, specific observations were given.
3. The revised 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-13022348007 dated 20.02.2023. The Commission intended to discuss the proposal (online) with the architect but he was not available. Based on the replies submitted, non-availability of the architect (online), and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission has observed that the earlier recommendations communicated through DUAC observation letter number OL-13022348007 dated 20.02.2023, have not been adequately addressed and met, particularly points 3(a), 3(b), 3(c) and 3(d). These specific issues require the immediate attention of the architect and the compliances shall be made in the entirety.

b) The Commission took note of the letter no: 974/JVCGHS/E/2023-24/2 dated 03.10.2023 for the Secretary, Jan Vikas, Co-operative Group Housing Society Ltd. which indicates that:

“……..the building is complete except the external finishing, minor repair work and painting which is in progress, however, it has been fully completed in Block A & B and progressing fast in remaining blocks-C & D which will be completed within 4-5 weeks……”

As per the statement provided by the Society's Secretary, there is a high likelihood that the entire project will be finished within the next 4-5 weeks. Therefore, it was opined to review the entire proposal in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the visual and urban aesthetics of the Complex.

c) Furthermore, given that the proposal is for obtaining a NOC for completion, it is essential to include uncut and well-defined photographs of each block from all perspectives. These images would substantiate the actual work carried out at the site, encompassing aspects such as the stilt area, boundary wall, gate, guard room, terrace area, parking, landscaping, elevational facade, and the concealment of services, among others.

4. In view of the inadequate compliance given to its previous observations, the proposal for NOC for the completion plan could not be appreciated judiciously by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to carefully follow and address all the observations provided by the Commission above including observation letter nos: OL-13022348007 dated 20.02.2023 especially indicated at 3(a), 3(b), 3(c) and 3(d). It is requested that the architect submit a detailed response, incorporating each point raised by the Commission in a clear and point-by-point manner.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The layout and building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Zoho Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the submission made, discussion held online, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) 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.

c) All service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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. Earlier, the Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on April 23, 2020, specific observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Approval letter no: OL-21042024018 dated 01.05.2020. Based on the observations (formal stage) of the Commission and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was observed that the proposal has been received at the NOC for the Completion stage but all side photographs of the completed structure appear to have been missing in the submission including superimposed plans etc. It needs to provide uncut/clear all-side photographs of the superstructure from all sides to substantiate the actual work executed at the site including parking, basement, landscape, terrace, and screening of services etc.

b) Further, it was noticed that the loose materials lying scattered all over the site which gives an impression that construction work is still in progress. The proposal for NOC for Completion shall be submitted for approval once all the work at the site is complete.

c) Also, approval received from DUAC (at the formal stage) shall be superimposed on the plans/elevations/sections etc., over the actual built structure on the site, existing & proposed changes done in the design from the approval (by DUAC), to understand the extents of deviations made internally as well as external changes made with respect to the sanctioned plan, if any.

d) For a better understanding of the proposal side-by-side photographs ‘Before (submitted at the time of DUAC formal approval) and After (current actual built construction)’ of the constructed building blocks are to be provided.

4. Overall, the proposal for NOC for Completion (part) has been submitted without acceptable clarity. In view of the above, the proposal for NOC for completion could not be examined judiciously by the Commission.

5. The architect is advised to carefully follow and address all the observations provided by the Commission above. It is requested that the architect submit a detailed response, incorporating each point raised by the Commission above in a clear and point-by-point manner.

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 DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on May 26, 1995, and did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on June 01, 2023, specific observations were given.
3. The revised proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: F. No. 48(15)/2023-DUAC, OL-29052348015 dated 07.06.2023. Based on the previous observations and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission has observed that its earlier recommendations communicated through DUAC observation letter number F. No. 48(15)/2023-DUAC, OL-29052348015 dated 07.06.2023 have not been addressed satisfactorily. These specific issues require the immediate attention of the architect and the compliances shall be made in the entirety.

b) From the photographs submitted by the architect, it is evident that some of the residential units appear to have covered the balconies/windows etc. with temporary coverings which are spoiling the visual & urban aesthetics of the complex. The same shall be removed and the façade be brought to its original form (formal stage) to enable the Commission to examine & make comments.

c) Also, Outdoor air-conditioning units are clearly visible on the façade spoiling the visual/aesthetics of the complex, the same shall be appropriately screened so as not to remain visible.

d) The following is again reiterated:

“……3(a) Cropped photographs of the completion plan proposal have been submitted which do not indicate the required details. An appropriate number of existing site pictures of the building blocks (including all blocks A, B, C, main gate, boundary wall, toilet under SBM, guard room, ESS, Community facilities, parking areas etc.) for which completion has been required are to be provided to understand the existing site condition. They need to be resubmitted with proper uncut views from all sides to comprehend the proposal.

3(b) Approval received from DUAC (at the formal stage) shall be superimposed on the plans/elevations/sections etc., over the actual built structure on the site, existing & proposed changes done in the design from the approval (by DUAC), to understand the extents of deviations made internally as well as external changes made with respect to the sanctioned plan as reported by the sanctioning authority.

3(c ) For a better understanding of the proposal side by side photographs ‘Before (submitted at the time of DUAC formal approval) and After (current actual built construction)’ of the constructed building blocks is provided…..”

4. In view of the inadequate compliance given to its previous observations, the proposal for NOC for the completion plan could not be appreciated judiciously by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to carefully follow and address all the observations provided by the Commission above including F. No. 48(15)/2023-DUAC, OL-29052348015 dated 07.06.2023. It is requested that the architect submit a detailed response, incorporating each point raised by the Commission in a clear and point-by-point manner.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the PWD-GNCTD (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans in respect of Guru Gobind Singh University Campus at its meeting held on May 01, 2006 but did not accept NOC at the Completion stage at its meeting held on April 16, 2019, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal in respect of the expansion of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (Under phase II) at its meeting held on August 10, 2023, specific observations were given.
4.  The building plan proposal for the expansion of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (Under phase II- Academic block, Boys Hostel, Dining and multipurpose and Indoor sports, Girl’s hostel, Warden residence, Community centre- Guest house extension, Faculty hostel (Type-II, Type-III, IV, V, Health centre extension,  Atal Lab) 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: F.No. 61(7)/2023-DUAC, OL-07082361007 dated 16.08.2023. Based on the replies submitted and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) 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.

c) All service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for the Contemporary Art Centre, Bikaner House at its meeting held on July 26, 2017, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on September 14, 2023, and October 12, 2023, respectively, specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations {(addition of Cultural & office block, Guest House, Amphitheatre & shops) and (extension of C.M. security block, and toilet under Swachh Bharat Mission) after demolishing existing office blocks, servant quarters, staff quarters, kitchen and garage} received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with replies submitted by the architect in response to observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: F. No. 24(28)/2023-DUAC, OL-03102324028 dated 16.10.2023.  Based on the replies submitted, 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. The Commission also noted that the “Bikaner House” is a Grade-II heritage property listed at Sr. no. 4 of the heritage list for the NDMC area.

b) All requisite parking requirements shall comply with relevant rules, regulations, guidelines, and other applicable requirements.

c) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d) 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.

e) All service equipment water tanks, plumbing pipes, rainwater 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) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Proposal for additions/alterations in respect of the front façade of the Commercial building on plot no. 2048 to 2057 situated at Dr. H. C. Sen Road, Near Kauria Pul, Chandni Chowk. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on January 04, 2019, and the revised building plan proposal was approved at its meeting held on September 12, 2019, and specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on August 10, 2023, May 18, 2023, November 17, 2022, and November 10, 2022, respectively, specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plans proposal for additions/alterations received (online) at the conceptual 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-07082349011 dated 16.08.2023, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Zoho Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission.  Based on the replies submitted, discussion held online, and revised submission made, the following observation is to be complied with:

a) Two options for the façade upgrade have been presented before the Commission; option 2 was found to be more acceptable to the Commission.

5. The architect is accordingly advised to prepare a detailed, comprehensive submission for the next submission (Completion Stage) after incorporating all the previous observations of the Commission.

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.

Demolition and reconstruction plans proposal in respect of the Residential building at 3 Flag Staff Road, Civil Lines.  (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The building plan proposal for demolition & reconstruction received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, 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 plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning 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.

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.

Revised Layout and Building plan proposal in respect of the Motel on Khasra no. 43/1 Min, 43/2 Min, 43/3 Min, 43/9 Min, 43/12 Min, 43/19 Min, 43/20 Min, 43/11 Min at Village Bakoli. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on June 29, 2016, and did not accept the concept of the building plan proposal at its meeting held on April 27, 2023, specific observations were given.
3. The revised building plans proposal received (online) at the Conceptual stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Conceptually Unsuitable Letter No: OL-19042327029 dated 02.05.2023. Based on the previous observations of the Commission, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission understands that the proposal is currently in the Conceptual stage. In the next submission (formal stage), it is imperative to enhance the quality of elevations and sections, ensuring to provide a detailed and clear representation of architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, plumbing details, and other aspects. Additionally, detailed skin sections should be included to comprehensively depict the facade's elevation with the use of materials etc.

b) All architectural features presented in the elevations, including projections, windows, and other elements, should be consistently reflected in all architectural plans and documentation included in the formal submission.

c) The absence of structural arrangements in the basements and other plans is likely to impede the parking layout in the basements as well as the placement of furniture on other floors, including in the large banquet halls. To address this issue, it is advised to incorporate structural arrangements in all the plans and present with comprehensive details, for its judicious review by the Commission.

d) The proposed design lacks clarity regarding how the site intends to meet its total parking requirements. To better evaluate the proposal, the Commission requires a comprehensive parking plan that includes specific details such as the number of parking spaces, their locations, and the flow of vehicular traffic.

e) The proposed design does not effectively illustrate the pedestrian and vehicular circulation within the site, raising concerns about potential conflicts. To enhance a better understanding of the site's movement patterns, it was suggested to submit a comprehensive mobility plan that clearly delineates seamless and conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular routes from the exterior. The plan should include distinct segregation of pedestrian and vehicular movement.

f) An intricate design plan outlining the screening mechanism for the area that houses the DG set, AC plant, and other components should be provided. This plan should encompass the concealment of DG exhaust pipes through suitable architectural techniques to ensure they are not visible and do not detract from the overall aesthetics of the complex.

g) A design scheme to address the likely waste (dry and wet, food items, etc.) generated on the site is not understood the same shall be elucidated with appropriate details including a detailed solid waste management plan to understand the overall design scheme better.

h) It was observed that a significant number of toilets and kitchen areas have been incorporated without due consideration for plumbing arrangements and their potential impact on the visual and urban aesthetics of the complex. The same shall be elucidated with appropriate details including incorporation of a screening mechanism, material application etc.

i) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

j) 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.

k) All service equipment water tanks, plumbing pipes, rainwater 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) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. The architect is advised to carefully follow and address all the observations provided by the Commission above, and communicated through vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-19042327029 dated 02.05.2023. It is requested that the architect submits a detailed response, incorporating each point raised by the Commission in a clear and point-by-point manner in the formal submission for its judicious review.

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.

Layout and Building plan proposal for additions/alterations in respect of Hansraj College. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal in respect of Hansraj College at its meeting held on July 29, 2009, specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations [{(addition of 3^rd floors over the existing college main building (G+2 Floors), Science Block (G+2 Floors), Zoology and botany dept. building (G+2 Floors), Library Block (G+2 Floors)}, {addition of 2^nd and 3^rd Floors over the existing Canteen building (G+1 Floors), addition of 1^st Floor over the existing Principal’s Residence (Single Floor), addition of Girls hostel (B+G+5 Floors), the addition of Warden’s residence cum Guest House (G+3 Floors), addition of Staff housing (G+3 Floors), addition of Servant housing (G+3 Floors), demolition and reconstruction of Boy’s Hostel(B+G+5) and demolition of Teacher’s Housing}]  received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission has noted that the proposal involves extensions in an existing college campus containing various existing structures. However, the current proposal lacks clarity in articulating its design scheme for these additions within the context of the existing superstructure. To address this, the drawings must be self-explanatory, distinctly indicating the new additions while superimposing them onto the existing structures. Additionally, these drawings should be accompanied by precise annotations specifying the materials to be used. This will facilitate a clear understanding of the proposed changes and their careful consideration.

b) The 3D views provided create an impression of an entirely new proposal, failing to distinguish between the existing structures and the proposed additions, making it challenging to comprehend the design scheme. To enhance clarity and understanding, the proposed additions should be superimposed onto the existing superstructure in the visuals.

c) The college campus is already functional, and the pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the site be elucidated appropriately. A combined mobility circulation plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plans from outside to the various buildings is to be submitted, to understand the movement pattern within the site better. It shall be indicated clearly with clear segregation of pedestrian and vehicular movement.

d) Large additions have been proposed to an existing college campus. Provisions made for proposed parking are not clearly understood. Existing parking and parking from additional FAR (proposed) are to be shown clearly on the layout plan with a bifurcation of two. To better evaluate the proposal, the Commission requires a comprehensive parking plan that includes specific details such as the number of parking spaces, their locations, and the flow of vehicular traffic.

e) An intricate design plan outlining the screening mechanism for the area that houses the DG set, AC plant, and other components should be provided. This plan should encompass the concealment of DG exhaust pipes through suitable architectural techniques to ensure they are not visible and do not detract from the overall aesthetics of the complex.

f) A design scheme to address the likely waste (dry and wet, food items, etc.) generated on the site is not understood the same shall be elucidated with appropriate details including a detailed solid waste management plan to understand the overall design scheme better.

g) The landscape plan shall be detailed with appropriate treatment (Hardscape and Softscape). The landscape plan should indicate the details of the trees planted, existing trees, levels, and types of species on an appropriate scale, (in terms of point nos. Six of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

h) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

i) 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.

j) All service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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. Overall, the design proposal for additions/alterations received at the conceptual stage lacks clarity in explaining the design scheme which could not be examined judiciously by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to carefully follow and address all the observations provided by the Commission above. It is requested that the architect submit a detailed response, incorporating each point raised by the Commission above in a clear and point-by-point manner.

Not accepted, observations given.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the Master plan of AIIMS, Ansari Nagar at its meeting held on July 10, 2013.
3. The building plan proposal with respect to the addition of a Service Block at AIIMS, Masjid Moth received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was noted that the proposal is at the formal approval stage for the addition of a Service Block at AIIMS. However, the submission appears to be incomplete, as the following drawings are noticeably absent in the submission:

i) Site Plan

ii) Landscape Plan

iii) Parking Plan

iv) Site Photographs

v) All side 3 D views

vi) Project Report

vii) Fourth floor Plan etc.

4. In view of the incompleteness of the proposal received at the formal stage, it could not be reviewed by the Commission.
5. The architect should ensure that a comprehensive and fully submitted proposal is received by the Commission for its consideration.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Zoho Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the submission made, and the discussion held Online, 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) The plumbing/rain water/sanitary pipes on all facades shall ensure to be screened using appropriate screening mechanisms so as not to mar the aesthetics.

c) 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.

d) All service equipment, rainwater pipes, water tanks, outdoor 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 approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The plumbing/rain water/sanitary pipes on all facades shall ensure to be screened using appropriate screening mechanisms so as not to mar the aesthetics.

b) 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.

c) All service equipment, water tanks, rainwater pipes, outdoor 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. The Commission approved the layout and the building plan proposal for multi-storied group housing after demolishing the existing single-story structure in the premises vide DUAC letter no: 24(6)/98-DUAC dated November 18, 1998 specific observations were given. But the same was not constructed by the proponent.
3. The Commission approved the building plans proposal for addition/alteration at its meeting held on January 22, 2021, and did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on August 24, 2023, specific observations were given.
4. The revised proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Approval letter no: F.No. 50(14)/2023-DUAC, OL-22082350014 dated 31.08.2023, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Zoho Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission.  Based on the previous observations of the Commission, the discussion held online, and the revised submission made, the proposal for NOC for Completion was found to be accepted.