Action Taken Reports in respect of Minutes of 1738th meeting held on 28.12.2023.

1. Action Taken Reports in respect of Minutes of the 1738th meeting held on 28.12.2023 were discussed.

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 a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the discussion held online and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the submitted 3D views lack annotations, making it difficult to comprehend the materials and other details on the façade, which could significantly impact the visual and urban aesthetics of the complex. Additionally, it was noted that a bird's eye view of the design scheme is absent in the submission. The Commission recommends the submission of a sufficient number of self-explanatory, annotated 3D views, including a bird's eye view to understand the placement of elements such as solar PV panels, AC units, water tanks, etc. This should be presented from various angles, clearly depicting the proposed design scheme with proper annotations corresponding to the proposal drawings. This comprehensive submission is essential for a better understanding of the proposal.

b) The Commission observed that various utilities, including a toilet under SBM, a guard room, transformers, DG sets, and electric substations, have been planned along the front and rear setbacks. However, these essential elements are noticeably absent in the submitted 3D views. The exclusion of these utilities in the visual representation may impact the visual and urban aesthetics of the area. Consequently, the Commission recommends updating the 3D views to incorporate all these elements, providing a comprehensive visualization for the Commission's judicious review.

c) It was observed that the proposal is at the formal stage, but very basic elevations & sections have been submitted. The elevations and sections (detailed sections, including longitudinal and cross-sections that encompass the entire site) must be meticulously detailed, clearly showcasing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, and other pertinent features. Additionally, submit comprehensive skin sections that provide a detailed understanding of the facade's elevation, including the materials employed. By providing these detailed elements, a comprehensive overview of the architectural design and facade can be obtained.

d) A combined mobility circulation plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plans from outside to the various parts of the 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.

e) It was observed that the location of the public toilet and the guard room etc. are also part of the formal submission but their detailed drawings (including screening mechanism, elevations, sections, 3D views etc.) 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 revised appropriately and incorporated for review by the Commission.

f) The area accommodating the DG set, transformers etc. shall be suitably screened, including DG exhaust pipes, using appropriate architectural mechanisms so as not to remain visible, and mar the aesthetics of the complex. The same shall be elucidated with appropriate details including 3D views with screening mechanism for a better understanding of the Commission.

g) The design of the gate and the boundary wall could have a bearing on the overall aesthetics of the hospital, the same needs to be detailed for gate/grill detail/material applications coordinated with plans/elevations/sections/3D views etc.

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, shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) 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, transformers, 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.

3. Overall, the design proposal received at the formal stage lacks clarity in explaining the design scheme (including the materiality of the façade) which could not be examined judiciously by the Commission.
4. 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 South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2.   The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 06, 2023, specific observations were given.
3.  The building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) At the meeting, the Commission addressed the matter concerning the building plan proposal (formal stage) submitted by the local body, MCD. It was noted that this proposal had been previously reviewed during the meeting held on December 06, 2023. The Commission's decision to grant 'Approval' for the proposal was communicated to MCD through a DUAC OPAAS vide Approval Letter no. OL-03122355010 dated December 08, 2023.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on October 04, 2023, November 09, 2023, and December 21, 2023, respectively, specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of balcony, and the extension of drawing room) 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: F. No-22(77)/2023-DUAC, OL-19122322077 dated 26.12.2023. 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 (construction of combined parking facilities under the podium, expansion of the drawing room and expansion of the balcony) only.

b) All temporary extensions must be removed to ensure adherence to the approved plans and maintain the integrity of the design proposal.

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

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 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 DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on April 10, 2001, and accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on July 04, 2005.
3. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on November 30, 2023, but did not approve the revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on December 28, 2023 specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plans for additions/alterations (extension of drawing room and balcony, addition of servant room, toilet and balcony) 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: F. No-22(79)/2023-DUAC, OL-23122322079 dated 02.01.2024. Based on the replies submitted, and 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 (extension of drawing room and balcony, addition of servant room, toilet and balcony) only.

b) All temporary extensions must be removed to ensure adherence to the approved plans and maintain the integrity of the design proposal.

c) All requisite parking provisions 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 service equipment, water tanks, rainwater 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 DDA (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 Commission noted that the architect has proposed HPL cladding and terracotta cladding as the primary materials for the façade. However, the representation of these materials through markup arrows was not clearly understood and appears to be misspelt. Recognizing the significant impact of these materials on the overall visual and urban aesthetics, the Commission requests a more elaborate and appropriately detailed presentation. The clarification should include a precise description and visual representation of the envisaged HPL cladding and terracotta cladding to facilitate a comprehensive understanding and assessment by the Commission

b) The Commission observed that the proposal is at the formal stage but only three side elevations of the proposed design envisaged have been submitted. Also, very basic elevations & sections have been submitted. The elevations and sections (detailed sections, including longitudinal and cross-sections) must be meticulously detailed, clearly showcasing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, and other pertinent features.

c) Additionally, submit comprehensive skin sections that provide a detailed understanding of the facade's elevation, including the materials employed. By providing these detailed elements, a comprehensive overview of the architectural design and facade can be obtained.

d) The area accommodating the DG set etc. shall be suitably screened, including DG exhaust pipes, using appropriate architectural mechanisms so as not to remain visible, and mar the aesthetics of the complex. The same shall be elucidated with appropriate details including 3D views with screening mechanism for a better understanding of the Commission.

e) The design of the gate and the boundary wall could have a bearing on the overall aesthetics of the building, the same needs to be detailed for gate/grill detail/material applications coordinated with plans/elevations/sections/3D views etc.

f) 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, shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

g) 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.

h) 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.

3. Overall, due to incompleteness and lack of clarity in explaining the materiality on the façade the proposal received at the formal stage could not be examined judiciously by the Commission.
4. 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 Commission did not approve the building plans proposal at its meeting held on November 23, 2023, 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 previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: F. No-22(72)/2023-DUAC, OL-15112322072 dated 28.11.2023. 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) as 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.

Building plan proposal in respect of Residence at 16/64E situated at old Chandrawal, Civil Lines. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal at its meeting held on October 26, 2023, and did not accept the concept of the building plans proposal at its meeting held on December 14, 2023, and specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-19102323012 dated 27.10.2023, and OL-06122327027 dated 18.12.2023 respectively, and 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 service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, 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 North-DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on July 03, 2002, and accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on November 01, 2007.
3. The Commission approved the building plans for additions/alterations at its meeting held on June 01, 2016.
4. The proposal for NOC for Completion (part -Block 3) received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised and found to be acceptable.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the CPWD (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 Commission noted that an incomplete proforma without the requisite information related to the proposal (at the formal stage) including without necessary details of the architect has been enclosed, the same shall ensure that all the requisite details related to the proposal. 

b) The Commission observed that the proposal is part of a large campus with existing development in the vicinity. The Commission observed that the proposal cannot be studied in isolation i.e., it needs to be reviewed in conjunction with the surrounding facilities, therefore, 3D views of the site (including aerial views, night-time views etc.) shall be superimposed with the existing context of the surroundings including road networks, structures around the site, for better understanding of the proposal in the actual environment to make it clearer.

c) It was noted that all four sides and the aerial view of the proposed building appear to have not been submitted for a submission received at the formal stage, it shall be ensured that all four sides annotated 3D views along with an aerial view including public interface areas shall be submitted for the judicious review of the Commission.

d) The Commission observed that various utilities, including transformers, DG sets, an electrical room etc. have been planned in one of the setbacks. However, these essential elements are noticeably absent in the submitted 3D views. The exclusion of these utilities in the visual representation may impact the visual and urban aesthetics of the area. Consequently, the Commission recommends updating the 3D views to incorporate all these elements, providing a comprehensive visualization for the Commission's judicious review.

e) The proposal has been submitted at the formal stage but basic elevations & sections have been submitted more so, all four side elevations are not presented. The elevations and sections must be meticulously detailed, clearly showcasing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, and other pertinent features. Additionally, it is crucial to submit comprehensive skin sections that provide a detailed understanding of the facade's elevation, including the materials employed. By providing these detailed elements, a comprehensive overview of the architectural design and facade can be obtained.

f) 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) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

g) 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.

h) 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.

3. Overall, due to the incompleteness of the proposal received at the formal stage and its no comprehensiveness, the proposal could not be appreciated judiciously by the Commission.
4. 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.