Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1652nd meeting held on 26.05.2022.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1652nd meeting held on 26.05.2022 was discussed.

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 July 23, 2018, specific observations were given. The Commission did not accept the concept of the building plan proposal for phase-I (as shown in the submission as phase-I) at its meetings held on February 10, 2022, and April 07, 2022, respectively, specific observations were given.

3. However, no previous record of the approval (formal) taken from the Commission has been found in the available record of the Commission.

4. The building plan proposal for phase II 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-01042227027 dated 13.04.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made for the phase II, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that in one of the replies the architect has indicated that:

“………the current proposal has been uploaded to receive the approval for the construction of the upcoming extension of phase-II……...the current status of the site is that the excavation has been completed of the phase-I…….”

Since, the architect has himself indicated that the construction work is in progress for phase-I and the current proposal is for phase II but submitted no details (plans, elevations, sections, 3D views etc.) whatsoever related to the current proposal (phase II) for consideration of the Commission.

b. The Commission has also taken note of the fact that the architect has submitted the proposal for the fourth time but every time a new set of information is provided for its consideration which is not appreciated.

5. Overall, the proposal submitted at the formal stage is incomplete. The proposal needs to be complete, detailed and comprehensive.

6. Considering the facts enumerated above, a detailed, complete, comprehensive design proposal be submitted for consideration of the Commission adhering to all above observations along with pointwise incorporation & reply.

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 subsequently revised building plan proposals at its meetings held on March 07, 2018, and April 05, 2018, and the proposals for NOC for completion were not accepted in the meetings of the Commission held on January 06, 2022, March 24, 2022, and May 12, 2022, respectively, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted in response to previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-07052249003 dated 19.05.2022. Based on the replies submitted, and revised submissions made, the following observation is to be complied with:

a. The Commission has taken a note that since no formal approval has been taken from the Commission (the last approval was taken on 20.09.2017, and subsequently the proposal was rejected on 07.03.2018, 05.04.2018 respectively, and also the NOC for completion was rejected thrice on 06.01.2022, 24.03.2022, and 12.05.2022 respectively). The Commission opines that since most of the compliances on its previous observations have been complied by the architect, in the interest of work the NOC for completion was accepted.

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

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

2. The proposal is withdrawn at the request of the architect vide ‘saeastpwddelhi’ email dated 03.06.2022.

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

2. The Commission approved the revised layout plan in respect of Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) at its meeting held on July 25, 2012. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on April 28, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The building plan proposal for the Administrative Block (Phase-I) comprising G+5 stories and future expansion for phase-II received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-22042262009 dated 05.05.2022, 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, a detailed discussion held, and the submission made, the following observation is to be complied with:

a. The Commission again reiterated that the requisite parking requirements of the site have been provided on the surface, spoiling the visual, urban aesthetics of the surroundings creating a heat island effect, and also depriving the site of valuable consolidated green spaces.  Also, phase II of the administrative block has been envisaged for future construction. It was, accordingly, suggested to explore alternative options to accommodate all the current and future requirements of parking including the basement. The freed-up spaces are utilised for creating large consolidated greens, recreational spaces etc. for the users.

b. Location of DG Set, DG exhaust pipes etc. should be provided with a screening mechanism. 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, water tanks, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, air-conditioning 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) 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 CPWD (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission approved the Layout/Master Plan in respect of the Indian Agriculture Research Institute (IARI) Campus, Pusa at its meeting held on April 19, 2016. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on April 07, 2022, 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 the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-28032262006 dated 13.04.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission appreciated the provisions made for the Solar Voltic panels on the rooftop to maximise the energy requirements through solar panels and help reduce carbon footprints. It was, accordingly, suggested that the detailing should be such made that the supporting structure for panels be of high quality workmanship and maintain its geometry and that areas underneath are designed for remaining clean and accessible for maintenance where necessary.

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, water tanks, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, air-conditioning 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) are 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 proposal was deferred.

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

2. The Commission did not approve the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on April 28, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The layout and 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-13042222022 dated 05.05.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The work of art is shown on the façade of the building including very bright colours, and the medium selected is not appropriate. Bright colour painting on façade would fade rapidly due to weathering effect etc. It is, accordingly, suggested that an alternate work of art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, be proposed. Pastel colours be considered for large scale paintings on surface. 

b. The entry to the ladies' toilet provided under the Swachh Bharat Mission toilet is visible from the road, appropriate screening mechanisms must be made to screen the entrance to the ladies' toilet for the privacy, safety & security of the users.

c. 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.

d. All service equipment, water tanks, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, air-conditioning 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) 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 did not approve the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on April 28, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The revised layout and 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-13042222023 dated 05.05.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The work of art is shown on the façade of the building including very bright colours, and the medium selected is not appropriate. Bright colour painting on façade would fade away in some time due to weathering effect etc. It is, accordingly, suggested that the 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.

b. The entry to the ladies' toilet provided under the Swachh Bharat Mission toilet is visible from the road, appropriate screening mechanisms must be made to screen the entrance to the ladies' toilet for the privacy, safety & security of the users.

c. 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.

d. All service equipment, water tanks, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, air-conditioning 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) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Layout and Building plan proposal for Residential development in respect of Delhi Transport Corporation at Hari Nagar. (Conceptual stage)

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

2. The Commission did not accept the concept of the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on May 05, 2022, specific observations were given.

3. The layout and the building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage were scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-16042227029 dated 11.05.2022. Based on the replies submitted, and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that the 3D views of the design scheme have been provided without annotations thus making it difficult to understand the materials on the façade clearly, annotated 3D views of every block must be provided with annotations for a better understanding of the materials on the façade etc. Also, 3d views of the rooftops must be provided to understand the arrangements of utilities, solar panels, water tanks, and outdoor air conditioners along with their screening with materials.

b. The design proposal is a residential development with a lot of public interface areas (including drop-off points, entrance lobbies, large landscaped area, restaurant/café areas in the clubhouse, double-height lobby areas, swimming pool side areas, or other areas as well which architect find suitable to elucidate its design scheme better etc.) their detailed views must be submitted to understand the overall design scheme with design elements, material specifications etc. better.

c. Restaurants/café houses, party halls etc. have been provided without indicating their overall capacity, the same needs to be supplemented along with the inter-functional furniture arrangements to understand its overall functioning better along with exhaust shaft screening mechanism.

d. Rooftop terraces have been provided with Solar panels, water tanks etc., but the same are not reflected in the subsequent sections, the same should be provided for a better understanding of the screening mechanisms etc.

e. Location of DG Set, DG exhaust pipes etc. should be provided with a screening mechanism. 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.

f. All service equipment, water tanks, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, air-conditioning 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) 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 in the next submission (formal) and furnish pointwise incorporation & reply.

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.

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

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for (extension) new block (G+2 floors) at its meeting held on August 11, 2018, and specific observations were given.

3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the observations of the Commission communicated at the time of approval (formal) vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-09081855006 dated 14.08.2018. Based on the proposal for NOC for completion submitted and the observations given (at the time of formal approval), the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that while approving the building plan proposal for an extension at its meeting held on 11.08.2018, the following observations were given:

“……(i)   The proposed block-1 was coming too close to the existing block-C (Kinder Garden) which was adversely affecting the natural light ventilation view of this block.  The new block should be proposed along the set back towards 11.00 mt. wide road to overcome the problems.

(ii)   The building should be green building norms compliant.

(iii)  Provision for work of art and public toilets be made as per provisions of Unified Building Bye-laws for Delhi-2016……”

It was observed that compliances with the observations (at the time of formal approval) indicated above have not been furnished by the architect/proponent.

b. The Commission observed that the proposal is at the completion stage, and the architect must provide compliance with the previous observations indicated above at (ii), (iii), and reasons for not complying with the observation indicated at (i).

c. Also, an appropriate number of uncut photographs of the built construction, including car parking provisions made as per norms, must be provided.

4. Overall, the architect has provided insufficient information for the proposal submitted at the completion stage.

5. Considering the facts enumerated above, the proposal for NOC for completion must be submitted complying with the observations indicated above at ‘b’ and ‘c’ along with 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 December 26, 2001, and the NOC for completion was accepted in the meeting held on August 24, 2018.

3. The building plan proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised along with the DDA letter no: F 13(218)2001/Bldg.-OCC dated 09.04.2019, the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission has taken a note of DDA letter no: F 13(218)2001/Bldg.-OCC dated 09.04.2019 specifically mentioning that:

“………plans of F13 (218)2001/Bldg. whose LOP & Bldg. plans were sanctioned vide letter no: 188 dated 29, August 2001 & completion certificate as approved by DUAC/DFS and other statutory bodies….”

b. The Commission also took note of the letter issued to Director (Bldg.), DDA vide DUAC letter no: 48(04)/2022-DUAC dated June 01, 2022, and the request received from the concerned architect vide their letter NIL dated 08.06.2022.

4. Taking into consideration all the facts enumerated above and the fact that NOC for completion has already been accepted by the Commission at its meeting held on August 24, 2018. It was decided to return the proposal to the DDA for taking further necessary action.