Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1636th meeting held on 10.02.2022.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1636th meeting held on 10.02.2022 was discussed.

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 July 17, 1998, and the NOC for completion plan proposal was approved in the meeting held on May 26, 2005. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on January 20, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations (expansion of the kitchen, store area and balcony area in various dwelling units, construction of a public toilet) received (online) at the formal 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-18012222005 dated 25.01.2022 and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx meetings wherein the architect provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the replies submitted, a discussion held and revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was observed that in terms of the earlier observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observations letter no: OL-18012222005 dated 25.01.2022 inadequate compliances for this has been given.

b) The Commission has also taken note of the fact that the proposal has been considered five times before but not much improvement has been observed and again reiterated that not addressing parking requirements for the site would spoil the visual, environmental, urban aesthetics of the area. Accordingly, it is suggested to provide appropriate solutions to accommodate requisite parking requirements (existing + proposed) and shown clearly on the relevant plans with the bifurcation of the two.

c) In view of the inadequate compliances given by the architect, it could not be examined appropriately by the Commission.

4. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on October 17, 1997. The proposal for additions/alterations was approved in the meeting held on March 20, 2019, specific observations were given. The Commission did not approve the revised proposal for additions/alterations in the Blocks for type-A, B, C and D (addition of a balcony, toilets, and extension of a basement) at its meeting held on January 20, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The layout and building plan proposal for additions/alterations in the Blocks for type-A, B, C and D (addition of a balcony, toilets, and extension of a basement) received (online) at the formal 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-05012222002 dated 25.01.2022. Based on the replies submitted and 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) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioning units, solar panels, water tanks etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) 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 additions/alterations at its meeting held on July 03, 2020, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal for demolition and reconstructions received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the comments received from the concerned local body i.e. NDMC. Based on the revised submission made and the comments given by the NDMC, 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) 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, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioning units, solar panels, water tanks etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) 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) was scrutinised and the Commission intended to discuss the design proposal with the architect on Cisco Web Ex meetings (online), but he was not available, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Annotated 3D views of the proposed design scheme shall be superimposed on the existing context of the surroundings, including road networks, structures around the site, for a better understanding of the proposal in the actual environment to make it clearer.

b) The project is submitted at the Formal stage should submit detailed drawings of sections (longitudinal and cross-section across the site as well) and elevations. Also, the skin sections (in detail) shall be submitted to understand the elevation of the façade with materials.

c) The provision of air-conditioning units on the façade is not given in the proposal (drawings/3d views). The air-conditioners could be an eye-sore to the building façade. To avoid the same, the provision shall be made to accommodate the outdoor units, so as not to mar the aesthetics.

d) Further, the requisite parking requirements for the proposal has not been resolved appropriately. Scooter parking has been provided at 6.00. M side setbacks (also shown as fire tender movement path) appears to be not realistic. Commission strongly suggests that set-back areas/roads counted towards achieving ECS calculations (for car parking) is not acceptable. These areas are suggested to be kept free from all vehicular parking requirements, it shall be kept free for emergencies. Alternative mechanisms shall be explored to accommodate all the proposed parking requirements in the stilts etc. by exploring the provisions for double-stack/puzzle parking.

e) Appropriate signages/ graphics shall be installed in the building complex to ensure proper wayfinding.

f) The proposal is at the formal stage and the design of the main gate and the boundary wall would have a bearing on the overall aesthetics of the complex, thus a detailed proposal for gate, boundary wall, grill details, material applications etc. complete in all respect (plans/elevations/sections/3D views etc.) shall be provided.

g) The work of art is not shown. Work of art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at the appropriate level (human eye) which is also visible from outside, to be installed.

h) The elements of sustainability are missing in the design scheme. These shall be identified and marked on the plans.  Roof-top utilities are not shown in the plan/ 3D views and thus require to be shown on the relevant drawings. The screening for the same shall also be mentioned and marked clearly in the plans/3D views.

i) 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.

j) All water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, DG set, DG exhaust pipe, outdoor air-conditioner 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) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

3. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the CPWD (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The proposal for Installation of Statue of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose at Canopy at India Gate received (online) was scrutinised and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx meetings wherein the architect provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission, it is found acceptable.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the CPWD (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The concerned local body (CPWD) vide their letter no: SA (RD-2)/14/2022/156-157 dated 23.02.2022 has requested the withdrawal of the proposal.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the PWD GNCTD (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on January 27, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal received (online) 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-19012261002 dated 03.02.2022. Based on the replies submitted and revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Some landscape elements (planter etc.) be placed around the rear staircase (facing play area) to avoid injury due to head banging etc. to the users (students).

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 water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner 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) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Building plans proposal for Additions/Alterations in respect of Senior Secondary School for Sanatan Dharam Adarsh Sikshan Sansthan at Mayur Vihar, Phase-I. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was directly submitted by the architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on August 04, 1995, and the NOC for completion plan was approved in the meeting held on February 09, 2019. The concept of the building plan proposal for addition/alterations (additions of a fourth floor) was not accepted in the meeting held on January 13, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal for addition/alterations (addition of a fourth floor) received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised along with the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-01012227001 dated 18.01.2022. The Commission intended to discuss the requisite parking provisions proposed on the site with the architect on Cisco Web Ex meetings (online), but he was not available. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) To accommodate the additional necessary parking requirements due to the increase in FAR, double-stack parking provisions have been made in the side setbacks (along the boundary wall) with one level below the ground. The Commission could not understand its working mechanism/functioning/maintenance etc.  The material provided by the architect to address such provisions could not be correlated.

b) The Commission has also taken note of the fact that the proposal has been considered three times before (at the conceptual stage) but not much improvement has been observed in the submission.

c) In absence of sufficient information provided by the architect, the proposal could not be examined appropriately by the Commission.

4. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the North-DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on January 27, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (demolition of existing structures on the ground floor and addition of a new structure on the ground floor, first floor, second floor, and third floor above) received (online) at the formal 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-24012223004 dated 03.02.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the revised submission made, the following observation is to be complied with:

a) All water tanks, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.