Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1728th meeting held on 19.10.2023.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of the 1728th meeting held on 19.10.2023 were discussed.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the North DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the revised layout plans proposal for Sir Ganga Ram Hospital at its meeting held on March 23, 2011.
3. The Commission approved the building plans proposal in respect of additions/alterations {Hospital Building Block B1-(2B+G+8 floors) and MLCP Block- (3B+G+10 floors)} at its meeting held on March 21, 2014, specific observations were given.
4. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions/alterations (addition of 2 floors over the existing Hospital Block-2B+G+8) at its meeting held on July 27, 2023, and August 24, 2023, respectively, specific observations were given.
5. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of two floors over the existing Hospital Block-2B+G+8) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No. F. No. 23(65)/2023-DUAC, OL-18082323065 dated 31.08.2023.  Based on the previous observations given, 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. Also, it was noted that the work on site is in progress based on the previous approval (formal) given by the Commission.

b) A proposal has been submitted to expand an already under-construction building, which currently consists of a ground floor and eight additional floors (2B+G+8). This expansion involves adding two more floors, and the new structure must be designed to support the increased load (both live and dead loads) while ensuring it can withstand various environmental factors, including adverse weather conditions and potential calamities such as earthquakes. This is crucial since the additional floors will be integrated into the existing superstructure.

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

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

e) 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 water tanks, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner 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 plans proposal in respect of the Sports Facility- Extension of Community Facility at GPRA Complex, New Moti Bagh at its meeting held on February 05, 2020.
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-27012024006 dated 07.02.2020, and found the proposal for NOC for Completion acceptable.

Layout and Building plans proposal in respect of motel at UER-II Road Khasra No.- 3/16/2 Min, 3/25, 4/19/2, 4/20/2 Min, 4/22 Min, 4/23 Min, 4/21/1, 4/21/2, 4/21/3, 9/1/1, 9/1/2, 9/2/1, 10/5 Min, 10/6min, 9/10min, 9/3, 4/18/2 in village Samalkha, Tehsil Vasant Vihar. (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 received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) All requisite parking requirements shall be as per the applicable rules/regulations of the area.

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

d) All service equipment, rainwater pipes, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels 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.

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.

Proposed Building plan proposal in respect of Office building for CBSE at Plot no. 8, PSP Pocket (FC-16), Sector-30, Rohini.  (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 received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Zoho, 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) The Commission noted that the conceptual design proposal for the construction of the CBSE regional office has utilized 54.82% of the allowable Floor Space Index (FSI) out of the permitted 120%. Furthermore, a portion of the rear area has been reserved for potential future expansion. The proposal also includes only one basement to accommodate 70 Equivalent Car Spaces (ECS), out of the required 126 ECS. The remaining 56 ECS are planned to be placed on the surface within open areas along the front setbacks. The Commission did not agree with the proposed arrangements and suggested that the proposal should be reconsidered, taking into account the maximum FSI and including the provision of two basements. This would allow for the inclusion of all car parking requirements (both current and future) within the basements, while the available space could be efficiently utilized for purposes such as open landscaped areas and permeable green spaces.

b) Also, the skin sections (in detail) shall be submitted to understand the elevation of the façade with materials.

c) The air-conditioning mechanism of the proposal is not clear. 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). It is accordingly suggested to prepare a design scheme for air conditioning in terms of point no. 11 (related to Method of Concealing Air Conditioning Equipment) of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in for the consideration of the Commission.

d) The design scheme presented for the main/other gates needs to be detailed to be fully appreciated by the Commission.  The design of the boundary wall and the main gates have the greatest external public interface and will have a bearing on the overall public perception of the aesthetics of the complex, the same needs to be detailed for gate/grill detail/material applications coordinated with plans/elevations/sections/3D views (including night-time views) etc.

e) 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.

f) It was observed that toilets and pantry areas have been provided 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.

g) It was observed that the location of the public toilet etc. is also part of the overall design proposal but their detailed drawings (including screening mechanism, elevations, sections, 3D views etc.) appear to have not been submitted. The Commission observed that these components have a bearing on the overall visual, urban, and aesthetic quality of the complex. The same is to be submitted for review by the Commission.

h) 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.

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

j) All service equipment, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG set, 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 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.