MINUTES OF THE 1751st MEETING OF THE DELHI URBAN ART COMMISSION (DUAC) HELD ON THURSDAY, MARCH 14, 2024

A.   The minutes of the 1749th and 1750th meetings of the Delhi Urban Art Commission held on 07.03.2024 and 11.03.2024 were confirmed and approved respectively.

SL. No.PROPOSALOBSERVATIONS /SUGGESTIONSDECISIONREMARKS

B.

Action Taken Reports regarding Minutes of 1748th meeting held on 29.02.2024.

  1. Action Taken Reports regarding the Minutes of the 1748th meeting held on 29.02.2024 were discussed.
Noted by the Commission.

C. PROJECT PROPOSALS:

1Building plans proposal in respect of Commercial building on plot no. 4296-97, Gali no. 3, Ansari Road, Daryaganj.
  1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
  2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the Commission's available record.
  3. The building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized, and the following observation is to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that while the proposal is at the formal stage, the quality of the submitted drawings is unsatisfactory, as scanned copies have been used, rendering them incomprehensible. Additionally, the 3D views provided are unclear and fail to accurately depict the materials on the façade, which are crucial for assessing the visual and urban aesthetics of the building.

b) Drawings shall be submitted as PDF drawings, ensuring adequate line thickness and colour coding as prescribed by the local body/bylaws for a better understanding of the proposal.

  1. Overall, the proposal submitted at the formal stage is of the incomprehensible quality of scanned copies. It is recommended that the architect submit a self-explanatory submission of legible quality for the Commission's review.
Not approved, observations given.
The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

2Proposal in respect of Nav Bharat Udyan - a part of Amrut Bio-Diversity Park on Western banks of River Yamuna near Pragati Maidan.
  1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
  2. The Commission did not approve the proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on November 16, 2023, where specific observations were made.
  3. The revised proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Letter No.: F.no 62(21)/2023-DUAC, OL-10112362021 dated November 21, 2023, and a detailed presentation was given by the architect who also provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the presentation given, the earlier observations 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 F.no 62(21)/2023-DUAC, OL-10112362021, dated November 21, 2023, has been given.

b) Given its national significance and location within an important context, the proposal shall be methodically planned and designed carefully considering the site surroundings, accessibility, connectivity, and environmental sustainability, particularly due to its placement on the Yamuna River floodplain.

c) As the site encompasses various components and areas, each possessing its own inherent character and architectural elements, it is critical to design them comprehensively.

A. Access to the site:

a) Special attention must be given to planning the entry of the complex, considering the significant vehicular movement on the main road facing the site, especially during peak times. Current proposed configuration requires additional attention to optimize.

B. Overhead bridge:

a) For the convenience of the visitors accessing the site from the Sarai Kale Khan side, the architect has envisioned a foot overbridge. The details of the starting and termination point of the foot over bridge (FOB) outside the site shall be elucidated with appropriate details, including the pedestrian connectivity of the FOB with the site to ensure seamless and safe connections.

C. Parking:

a) The Commission reiterated its earlier observation that:

"……. it does not accept the provisions outlined for the suggested surface parking, as it occupies valuable space that could be more wisely utilized for permeable green areas and recreational purposes. Instead, it is recommended to consider the feasibility of a proposed Multi-Level Car Park (MLCP) positioned perpendicular to the river. Such a structure could accommodate more cars within a smaller footprint, and its capacity could be expanded to accommodate future needs…..."

However, the architect has replied that:

"…….1. As per UBBL 2016, Section 9.7 Bio-Diversity Park, building height shall be restricted to 12m and it shall comprise only two stories. In view of the above, surface parking with grass pavers is proposed, considering the existing green areas at this location.

2. However, a multi-level car parking structure shall be proposed in the adjacent area (Millennium Depot), which is approximately 54.0 acres, and it shall be developed as a public park. At that time, the multi-level car parking shall be a part of the common parking for the proposed Nav Bharat Udyan and the public park…."

b) The Commission believes that the proposal cannot be considered without reviewing and considering the parking provisions as suggested previously. Given the anticipated influx of visitors to the complex, including those from outside the city, adequate parking provisions are imperative for the smooth functioning of the facility. These parking provisions must be elucidated with appropriate details, including the parking plan, vehicular movement, multi-level car parking (MLCP) provision, calculations, etc., to ensure that the requisite parking is provided.

c) A parking plan shall also include pedestrian connections, including shaded pathways, from the facility to the parking area to ensure seamless movement for users.

D. Boundary wall:

a) The stone proposed for the boundary wall is Lakha Red granite. It is suggested that this be replaced with grey stone, which would better complement the natural theme.

E. Deck design:

a) The design incorporates circular patterns of varying sizes as perforations with the converse forming an elevated deck. It is recommended that these circles are designed with significance, considering factors such as the necessity of multiple circles, their intended purpose, the views from each circle, etc., as they will significantly impact the overall design of the complex.

b) The deck is a large open-to-sky structure without any proposed mechanism for shading from harsh weather conditions. Given Delhi's temperate climate, it is crucial to provide appropriate shading mechanisms to ensure the usability of the deck area, especially during summer.  Also, some seating, concessions, facilities, or planting could be considered given the significant distances to be traversed on the deck.

c) The deck is proposed to be supported on steel columns for structural requirements. In the submission, it is imperative to include appropriate details of the steel columns, such as their locations in the plans, columnar sections, typical details of each column (including materiality marked in the 3D views), and structural design of the deck.

d) Details of access to the deck area, including ramp details, staircase details, fire access, etc., also require submission.

F. Information Centre:

a) The details of the steps at the entry show them to be 18mm thick granite with rounded edges. Given that it is an external staircase exposed to weather conditions, including rain, it is likely to become slippery. Additionally, the thickness of the stones may lead to chipping. To enhance strength and durability, it is recommended that the stone thickness be increased to at least 25mm. Furthermore, the finish of the staircase should be rough to minimize slippage.

G. Martand Gate:

a) The proposed view depicting the Martand gate appears to be out of proportion. It should accurately reflect the proportions contextual to the site setting and the available space.

b) The horizontal projection provided at the middle height of the gate is unnecessary and could attract birds to perch on it. It shall be provided similar to the original precedence and not as shown.

H. Cafeteria:

a) The 3D views depict the provision of shade-loving plants, whereas the plan shows grass in the areas between outdoor seating, indicating a mismatch.

b) A typical detail of the seating shall be provided to explain the dimensions, materiality, and function of the sitting area. The low-height walls surrounding some of the open seating areas are proposed to be made of textured paint. It was suggested that the exposed Delhi quartzite stone be used for better visuals and aesthetics and substantially lower maintenance.

c) It's essential to detail the termination of the bamboo columns as it directly impacts load distribution and structural integrity. However, the provided plans don't correspond accurately with the 3D views, indicating a mismatch.  Furthermore, there is inconsistency in the use of the detail provided.  Some locations show a base and some directly have the bamboo on the floor or in the ground.  The base should be specified appropriately and also the top of the base should be higher at its centre and sloping towards sides, to prevent accumulation of moisture or dirt.

d) It was noted that a considerable amount of furniture, including tables and chairs, has been proposed to serve many people in outdoor areas that may need to be stored for lawn/garden maintenance. It is advised that appropriate spaces be designated for storage to house furniture and heavy goods, etc. These areas shall be identified and elucidated with proper details in the layout plan to facilitate the Commission's understanding and review.

e) A significant portion of the cafeteria is proposed to be covered with a thatched roof. It is suggested that detailed information regarding the ridge at the intersection where two ridges meet, gutter details, and joinery details be provided. Additionally, the detail should clearly illustrate the weatherproofing mechanism of the roof system.

f) The materials intended for the cafeteria area must be clearly indicated in the plans and 3D views. It is recommended that the material for the steps be grey granite instead of red.

I. Arboreal walkway:

a) The section and detail illustrates bamboo wood posts as 150x150mm, which is not a standard post size. The fencing in 3D rendering is also inconsistent with the 150mmx150mm posts indicated in detail.  Clear details, including cross-sections showing dimensions and materials, must be provided to elucidate its engineering, and the same must be reflected in the 3D renderings.  150mmx150mm bamboo post literature showing specifications should also be provided.

b) Additionally, the 3D views show thin rectangular wooden sections that do not match the dimensions specified in the section. Ensuring consistency among the 3D views, sections, and plans is necessary for reviewing a design scheme comprehensively for each element.

c) There appears to be an inconsistency in the detail at the base of the bamboo wooden post. The view indicates it to be on the inside face, whereas the section shows it to be on the outside edge, resulting in an inconsistency in the drawings.

d) Benches are depicted in the plan but are absent in the section, indicating a mismatch. Other street furniture such as water fountains and dustbins are also marked in the plan but do not appear in the plans or in 3D views.

J. Street furniture:

a) The 3D view of the dustbin depicts a fixed mechanism, whereas the dustbin should have provisions for emptying the waste. Details regarding this aspect need to be developed and included in the relevant drawings and 3D views.

K. Driveway: ​​​​​​​

a) The driveway depicted in the site section appears as a flat road, lacking any camber or elevated level for efficient water drainage. Levels also don’t appear to have been given sufficient thoughts. 

  1. In general, the design scheme requires much greater coordination and attention to detail to achieve consistency. It's necessary to submit 3D views and plans for each separate area to ensure meticulous design and planning for each component. An appropriate number of plans, sections, elevations, and 3D views should be provided for each element to enhance the understanding of the proposal.
  2. The design should also exhibit coherence, meaning that architectural elements and their designs need to harmonize by using similar materials, design language, and attention to detail.
  3. The architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations. It is suggested that the architect submit a detailed response, incorporating each point raised by the Commission in a clear and point-by-point manner.
Not approved, observations given.
The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

3

Revised building plan proposal in respect of demolition and reconstruction of Residential Building on Plot no. 03 at Bela Road, Civil Lines  (Conceptual stage).

  1. The proposal was forwarded (online) by the architect 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, and approved the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on October 19, 2023, observations were made.
  3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinized, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted the absence of photographs depicting the surrounding context in the submission. These photographs must be included in the formal submission.

b) 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.

c) 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.

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.

The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

D. ADDITIONAL DETAILS:

1Building plan proposal in respect of addition of Conference Hall at Nirvachan Sadan at Ashoka Road.
  1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
  2. The Commission did not approve the proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on February 22, 2024, where specific observations were made.
  3. The revised proposal (for the addition of a Conference Hall) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Letter No.: F.no 62(30)/2024-DUAC, OL-19022462030 dated February 27, 2024, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the earlier observations, discussion held online, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted a discrepancy in the submission regarding the opening direction of the windows as depicted in the plans, which does not correlate with those shown in the 3D views. Furthermore, the direction of the windows is not harmonious with those in the existing building. As this is a formal submission, all elements (plans, elevations, sections, 3D views, etc.) must be correctly correlated for the consideration of the Commission.

b) 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.

c) 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.

  1. 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 approved, observations given.
The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.
2Revised Building plan proposal in respect of Family Courts Building at plot no. PSP-2A, Sector-14, Rohini.
  1. The PWD-GNCTD (online) forwarded the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
  2. The Commission accepted the concept of building plans proposal at its meeting held on May 25, 2023, and formal approval (comprised of 2B+G+9 floors) was given at its meeting held on August 10, 2023, respectively, with specific observations.
  3. The revised building plan proposal (comprised of 2B+G+8 floors) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized; 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, 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.

b) 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.

c) 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.

Approved, observations given.
The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

The following were present at the Meeting of the Commission held on Thursday, March 14, 2024, from 11.00 AM onwards:

  1. Shri Ajit Pai, Chairman, DUAC
  2. Prof. Dr Mandeep Singh, Member, DUAC
  3. Shri Ashutosh Kumar Agarwal, Member, DUAC
  4. Smt. Nivedita Pande, Member, DUAC