Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1641st meeting held on 15.03.2022.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1641st meeting held on 15.03.2022 was discussed.

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 May 08, 2020, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Triple and double-stack parking arrangements have been shown in the basement to achieve the requisite parking requirements. The architect/proponent should ensure its actual execution at the site and the same shall be examined at the time of receiving/considering the proposal at the completion stage.

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 service equipment, solar panels, water tanks, DG set, exhaust pipes 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.

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

2. The Commission accepted the concept of the building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 12, 2019, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Triple and double-stack parking arrangements have been shown in the basement to achieve the requisite parking requirements. The architect/proponent should ensure its actual execution at the site and the same shall be examined at the time of receiving/considering the proposal at the completion stage.

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 service equipment, solar panels, water tanks, DG set, exhaust pipes 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. 

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 May 17, 1996, and approved the proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on January 3, 2014. The Commission did not approve the NOC (part) for the completion plan proposal at its meeting held on August 05, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised completion plan proposal (Part completion) for the additions/alterations made on the second & third floor received (online) at the completion 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-04082158018 dated 10.08.2021. Based on the revised submission and the replies submitted, the NOC for completion (part) is found to be acceptable.

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

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on September 20, 2017. However, the Commission did not approve the revised building plan proposal at its meetings held on March 07, 2018, and April 05, 2018, specific observations were given. The building plan proposal for NOC for completion was not accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on January 06, 2022, specific observations were given.

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 observation letter no: OL-05012249001 dated 10.01.2022 and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx meetings who provided clarification to the queries of the members of the Commission. Based on the discussion held and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) In the photographs provided by the architect, it is evident that the building is incomplete and the construction activity appears to be in progress. The proposal for completion plan shall be submitted once all works including civil, landscape etc. is complete as per formal approval in entirety.

b) Also, 3d views/approved submission (formal approval) based on which the construction is being executed at the site, shall be submitted to compare the elevational façade in terms of architectural elements, material, form, facade, aesthetics etc.

c) The proposal being at the Completion stage needs to provide an appropriate nos. of uncut/clear photographs (including interior areas, terrace etc.) to substantiate actual work executed at the site including boundary wall, gate, parking, landscape, elevational façade, screening of services, location of DG set, DG exhaust pipes etc. to get in-depth clarity of the site and surroundings. They need to be resubmitted with proper uncut views from all sides to comprehend the proposal judiciously.

d) The proposal being at the Completion stage need to provide an actual Artwork executed at the site. The same shall be provided with an appropriate number of photographs of actual works of public art executed at the site.

4. In absence of sufficient information provided by the architect/proponent, the proposal could not be examined appropriately by the Commission.

5. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission and the proposal for NOC for completion plan approval shall be submitted once all the works including civil, landscape etc. is complete at the site and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

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

2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on March 03, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction 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-28022255009 dated 08.03.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the 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 service equipment, solar panels, water tanks, outdoor air-conditioning units, plumbing pipes 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.

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 March 01, 2017. The Commission did not approve the revised building plan proposal at its meeting held on September 23, 2021, and January 13, 2022, respectively specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal 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-03012222001, 22(1)/2022-DUAC dated 18.01.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Double stack parking arrangements have been shown in the basement and upper floors to achieve the requisite parking requirements. The architect/proponent should ensure its actual execution at the site and the same shall be examined at the time of receiving the proposal at the completion stage.

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 service equipment, solar panels, water tanks, plumbing pipes 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.

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

2. The Commission approved the Master Plan for Gateway & Downtown District for DIAL at IGI Airport at its meeting held on March 16, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal for the Commercial building at Asset LP-1B-04 (Gateway district), Aerocity, IGI Airport received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the observations communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-09032165002, 65(2)/2021-DUAC dated March 18, 2021, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco Web Ex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission related to MLCP provision, benefits claimed for the parking in lieu of the MLCP, utilisation of available spaces for the installation of solar panels etc. Based on the discussion held and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission while approving the Master Plan for Gateway & Downtown District at its meeting held on March 16, 2021, has observed that:

“……..Whilst adequate basement parking is envisaged, MLCPs near the metro stations should be suitably provided so as to cater to some amount of visitor parking, taking into account the safety and security of the users. This is required since basement car parking is perceived as unsafe, as compared to MLCP parking, particularly by women drivers……….

………the above points must be incorporated and clearly indicated when the next stage submission is made for the buildings approval…”   

Also, while submitting the proforma for planning permission/forward to DUAC the architect/proponent has claimed the following for the parking norms:

“………benefit due to MLCP parking (on pro-rata basis of total FAR of Gateway district).”

 Since the overall Master Plan for Gateway & Downtown District was approved on one of the conditions that the MLCPs be provided near the metro stations to cater to the parking requirements, but in the current submission the provision of MLCPs (location and the number of car parking provided) is not mentioned, so the benefits due to MLCPs do not arise. Thus leaving this unanswered as to how the required parking numbers would be accommodated (at plot level and MLCP, which is required to fulfil the surplus which is not fitting at plot level). The status of any MLCP (if being built) in the vicinity, as per the approved master plan, shall be shown clearly in the submission.

b) The pedestrian experience achieved in the site to be explained in terms of the elements used including the design of sidewalks, connections between different parts of the site, seamless and conflict-free connections, pause points etc. shall be clearly marked and highlighted on the respective layout plans.

c) A combined mobility plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement (connecting external areas to various parts of the site) is to be submitted, to understand the circulation within the site.

d) The terrace plan is missing in the submission and being a formal submission, it is imperative to give all level plans/elevations/sections. Also, the provision of sustainability on the terrace shall be clearly mentioned which highlights the reduced carbon footprint achieved at the site level.

e) It is suggested to house the essential utilities (DG set, chiller plant etc.) at one location and make them shared for the entire site. The plumbing/rainwater/sanitary pipes should be screened appropriately using a suitable screening mechanism so as not to mar the urban aesthetics.

f) 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.

g) All service equipment, DG set, chiller plant, solar panels, water tanks, plumbing pipes 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.

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 PWD GNCTD (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal (B+G+4) at its meeting held on June 19, 2004.

3. The  building plan proposal for extension (B+G+5) to the existing building received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal is at the formal stage and the requisite drawing of the elevations have not been submitted. The incomplete submission has been submitted for the consideration of the Commission.

b) The Commission observed that since the submission is incomplete, it is returned to the concerned local body i.e. PWD GNCTD without consideration of the Commission.

4. The architect should ensure that the submission is complete in all respect be submitted for the consideration of the Commission.

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

2. The Commission approved the layout and the building plan proposal for shopping cum multiplex at its meeting held on January 20, 2005, and the revised building plan proposal was considered in the meetings of the Commission held on June 17, 2005, October 17, 2005 (conceptual stage) and May 08, 2006, respectively. The Commission did not approve the revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of the third floor above) at its meeting held on March 15, 2022, specific 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 service equipment, outdoor air conditioner units, DG set, DG exhaust pipes, solar panels, water tanks, plumbing pipes 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.

Building plans proposal in respect of Motel on land bearing khasra no.3/16/2 Min, 3/24 Min, 3/25 Min, 10/4 Min, 10/5 Min, 10/6 Min, 10/7 Min, 3/17/2  at  Village Samalkha Tehsil Mehrauli for Townsend Promoters Private Limited. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission did not accept the concept of the building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 30, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction of a motel building received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised along with the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL- 24122127091 dated 05.01.2022, the following observation is to be complied with:

a) The architect is requested to adhere to all the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-24122127091 dated 05.01.2022 and furnish a pointwise reply to the compliances in the formal submission for the consideration of the Commission.

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.’