Action Taken Reports regarding Minutes of 1749th and 1750th (extra-ordinary) meetings held on 07.03.2024 and 11.03.2024 respectively.

1. Action Taken Reports regarding the Minutes of the 1749th and 1750th (extraordinary) meetings held on 07.03.2024 and 11.03.2024 were discussed, respectively.

1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal (formal) at its meeting held on October 20, 2022, where specific observations were made.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinized, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect at the Cisco WebEx meetings, who clarified the Commission's queries. Based on the online discussion and submission, the proposal for NOC for Completion is acceptable.

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 submission lacks clarity, i.e., the site plan is unclear when explaining the access road, entry to the plot, and site surroundings. The same needs to be detailed in respective drawings.

b) There is a mismatch in the submission i.e. the windows shown in the plans do not match those shown in the elevation and 3D views. Also, the staircase window is not shown clearly in the elevation and 3d views; therefore, the Commission is not able to appreciate the proposal judiciously.

c) The Commission does not appreciate the submitted elevations; the same needs to be improved, i.e., the railing design, door and window details, and other architectural elements need to be revised to improve the façade. It was suggested to prepare two or three alternative options for elevations and submit them for the review of the Commission.

d) Plumbing shafts of kitchen and toilet pipes need to be clearly shown and marked on the floor plans. Screening mechanisms to conceal the utilities to be shown to ensure they do not mar the aesthetics of the facade.

e) 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.

f) 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.

4. The architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations. 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 North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on January 04, 2024, where specific observations were made.
3. The revised building plans received (online) at the formal stage were 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 23(94)/2023-DUAC, OL-28122323094 dated January 05, 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 replies submitted, the discussion held online, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The pollution checking kiosk has been proposed in middle of green area along the front edge facing the access road, which would cause traffic congestion. It shall be relocated to a suitable location to ensure it does not disrupt the vehicles moving in and out of the petrol pump.

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 North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 19, 2018, where specific observations were made. The Commission accepted the Concept of the revised building plans proposal at its meetings held on July 31, 2020 and September 18, 2020. The Commission approved the proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on May 06, 2021, where specific observations were made.
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion (Part-Phase 1: Tower A, B, C and Community Club) received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinized. Based on the submission, the proposal for NOC for Completion (Part- Phase 1: Tower A, B, C and Community Club) is acceptable.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal 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 February 22, 2024.​​​​​​​
3. The building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized, and the following observation is to be complied with:

a) 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.

b) 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 North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal 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. Subsequently, the Commission accepted the Concept of the revised building plans proposal for demolition and reconstruction at its meeting held on March 14, 2024, where specific observations were given.
3. The revised building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized, and the following observation is to be complied with:

a) 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.

b) 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 DDA forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal (hospital block-A-3B+G+7; Nurse hostel: B+G+6; Dormitory: B+G+5; Mortuary: B+G+1; Dr Residence: B+G+6, and Guest house) at its meeting held on November 18, 2009.
3. The Commission approved the revised building plans proposal (hospital- B + G + 8 floors) at its meeting held on March 31, 2017. The Commission approved the building, plans proposal for additions/alterations for addition of two floors (9^th &10^th floor over existing hospital building B+G+8 floors), proposed new Hospital Block (3B + G +1 floor) and Utility Block (3B+G floor) at its meeting held on December 15, 2022 specific observations were given, and NOC for Completion (part – Block A and ESS) was not accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on February 22, 2024; specific observations were given.
4. The revised proposal for NOC for Completion (Part-Block A and ESS) received (online) at the Completion 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: OL-31012448029 dated 13.02.2024 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 replies submitted, the discussion held online, and the revised submission made, the proposal for NOC for Completion (Part- Block A only) is acceptable.

1. The DDA forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout of Wazirpur District Centre at its September 21, 2016, meeting, specific observations were given, and the Concept of the building plans proposal (Plot no. 4,5,6) was considered at its meeting held on May 31, 2006.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions and alterations (addition of second floor above tower-A, and addition of floors (partial on 4^th & 5^th) and 6^th to 10^th above on Tower-B) at its meeting held on March 23, 2023, and specific observations were given.
4. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of office area from 2^nd to 8^th floor) in respect of Commercial Building at Plot no. 4,5,6 at District Centre Wazirpur received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized. Based on the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

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

b) The requisite parking provisions shall be as per applicable norms/regulations.

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

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

e) All water tanks, plumbing pipes, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG Sets, DG exhaust pipes, etc. must 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 Federation of India Chamber of Commerce & Industry Centre at Tansen Marg. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded (online) by the architect for consideration by the Commission.
2. The building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinized, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect online on Cisco Web Ex meetings, who clarified the Commission's queries. Based on the discussion held online and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The building is situated at a prime location with significant context providing a tremendous opportunity that should be capitalized.  It was also felt that with the role of the client as a leading champion of commerce and industry, the proposed design insufficiently reflected Indian enterprise ambitions, and perhaps further consideration could be given to the proposal in terms of better reflecting rapidly improving Indian capacities, embracing technology, and integrating green.  The effort to blend tradition with a futuristic outlook could be proposed in alternative ways that are better reflective of the country’s aspirations and those of its enterprises.

b) The submission needs to detail the building's response to environmental concerns, including heat, pollution, noise, etc. and provide an appropriate number of annotated 3D views and drawings/graphics to ensure the same is addressed through design.

c) It shall be ensured that the glass portion at the upper level be designed in such a way that it does not gather dust etc. i.e. the façade treatment should be low maintenance. Also, the cleaning mechanism for the same needs to be clearly explained in the submission to ensure the façade does not appear worn out or unkempt over the period. 

d) Skin sections detailing the façade treatment are to be included in the submission (especially for the glass façade at upper levels).

e) 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.

f) 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. The architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations. 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 North-DMC 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 Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (formal) for additions and alterations at its meeting held on February 08, 2024, where specific observations were made.
4. The building plan proposal for additions and alterations 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 23(101)/2024-DUAC, OL-07022423101 dated February 13, 2024. Based on the previous observations given and the submission made, the following observation is to be complied with:

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

b) In terms of the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: F.no 23(101)/2024-DUAC, OL-07022423101 dated February 13, 2024, unsatisfactory compliances for the same has been made.

c) Based on the photographs provided by the architect, it was clear that the building (superstructure) had already been constructed on the site. However, there is no record of previous formal approvals obtained from the Commission. It is requested that the approvals obtained (on which basis the building was constructed on the site) be submitted for the Commission's consideration.

d) The design scheme for the proposed additions and alterations, as submitted by the architect, lacks clarity and is not self-explanatory. Since the scheme pertains to additions and alterations, the proposed changes should be clearly marked on the drawings (plans, elevations, sections, 3D views, etc.) for easy identification and review by the Commission.

5. Overall, the proposal for additions/alterations received at the formal stage is not comprehensible; it is returned to the MCD without consideration by the Commission.
6. The architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations. 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 North-DMC 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 Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (formal) for additions and alterations at its meeting held on February 08, 2024, where specific observations were made.
4. The building plan proposal for additions and alterations (alterations in ground floor and proposed first to third floor over the existing ground floor) 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 23(102)/2024-DUAC, OL-07022423102 dated February 13, 2024 and the following observation is to be complied with:

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

b) In terms of the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: F.no 23(102)/2024-DUAC, OL-07022423102 dated February 13, 2024, unsatisfactory compliances for the same has been made.

c) The proposal is titled "additions/alterations"; however, based on the submission received, including drawings and documentation at the formal stage, it seems to involve demolition and reconstruction instead.

d) Given that the proposal pertains to additions and alterations, and there is no record of prior formal approvals obtained from the Commission, it is requested that any previous approvals obtained be submitted for the Commission's review.

e) The design scheme for the proposed additions and alterations, as submitted by the architect, lacks clarity and is not self-explanatory. Since the scheme pertains to additions and alterations, the proposed changes should be clearly marked on the drawings (plans, elevations, sections, 3D views, etc.) for easy identification and review by the Commission.

5. Overall, the proposal for additions/alterations received at the formal stage is not comprehensible; it is returned to the MCD without consideration by the Commission.
6. The architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations. 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 North-DMC 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 for additions/alterations received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized, and the following observation is to be complied with:

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

b) The proposal is titled "additions/alterations"; however, based on the submission received, including drawings and documentation at the formal stage, it seems to involve demolition and reconstruction instead.

c) Given that the proposal pertains to additions and alterations, and there is no record of prior formal approvals obtained from the Commission, it is requested that any previous approvals obtained be submitted for the Commission's review.

d) The design scheme for the proposed additions and alterations, as submitted by the architect, lacks clarity and is not self-explanatory. Since the scheme pertains to additions and alterations, the proposed changes should be clearly marked on the drawings (plans, elevations, sections, 3D views, etc.) for easy identification and review by the Commission.

4. Overall, the proposal for additions/alterations received at the formal stage is not comprehensible; it is returned to the MCD without consideration by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations. 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 EDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal (formal) at its meeting held on March 09, 2019, where specific observations were made. 
3. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinized. Based on the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Based on the submission, the work appears to be ongoing, as evidenced by incomplete facades, scaffolding in certain areas, unfinished landscaping, and incomplete access roads. The building shall be complete in all respects, including civil, landscape, etc., as per formal approval before submitting the case to obtain a Completion certificate. 

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.

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.

d) In view of the insufficient information provided, the Commission could not judiciously appreciate the proposal for NOC for the completion plan.

4. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and ensure that the building is complete before submitting the case for obtaining a NOC for completion certificate and furnishing pointwise incorporation & reply.

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, and March 14, 2024, respectively, 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(33)/2024-DUAC, OL-20032462033 dated March 18, 2024. Based on the earlier observations and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

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

b) 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.