1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1685th meeting held on 29.12.2022 was discussed.

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 January 17, 2020, and specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on December 15, 2022, December 08, 2022, and November 10, 2022, respectively, specific observations were given.
4. The revised proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the Completion stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-07122248022 dated 21.12.2022 and comments given by the concerned local body i.e., DDA in part ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma. Based on the replies submitted, comments received from the local body and the revised submission made, the following observation is to be complied with:

a) The planters provided with Areca palm inside the periphery of the MLCP parking appear to be temporary construction.  For better durability and to avoid seepage alternative solutions may be explored. Including higher quality waterproofed construction and/or using potted plants.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on November 17, 2022, 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 previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-09112222065 dated 21.11.2022. Based on the replies submitted and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The vehicular path inside the MLCP shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

b) Vertical green climbers of species shall be explored over jaali/grills/terrace areas for enhancing the visual, urban aesthetics of the area.

c) The 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 water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner 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 proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (formal/completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The building plans proposal for additions/alterations received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, and the Commission intended to discuss the proposal with the architect (online) but he was not available. In absence of a discussion held with the architect (online) and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It was observed that the proposal is at the formal stage and no comments from the concerned local body i.e., NDMC were found in the submission submitted for consideration of the Commission. The Commission opines that the proposal is situated in a prominent area of Connaught place, it must be accompanied by detailed comments from NDMC.

b) The Commission was surprised to note that the email credentials of the architect were mentioned as “bheemsen.mishra@softtech-engr.com” which happens to be the credentials of the vendor providing IT services to the NDMC and DUAC, which is not appreciated by the Commission.

c) In future the local body i.e., NDMC must ensure the correctness of the credentials of the architect/proponent before forwarding the proposals for consideration by the Commission so that case of clarifications, if any, related to the proposal discussions can be held online.

d) The Commission opines that since the project is located in the Connaught place area, elevations & façade are suggested to be in harmony with the Connaught place, in terms of form, architectural elements/features etc.

e) As per the photographs submitted, some structures appear to be visible on the site, but the demolition plan was found to be missing in the submission. Similarly, the existing and the proposed design scheme should be differentiated with appropriate mechanisms (including different colour schemes) for judicious consideration by the Commission.

f) 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 in the design to accommodate the outdoor units, at this stage, so as not to mar the aesthetics. A scheme needs to be submitted to show the placement, screening and material of screening for the same in plans/elevations and 3D views, and it shall be ensured that the pipes are appropriately screened so that they are not exposed on the outer façade.

g) 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.

h) All service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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. Overall, an incomprehensible design scheme of the additions/alterations has been submitted without the correctness of the credentials of the architect and detailed comments from NDMC.
5. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise compliance & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on June 04, 2019, and accepted the concept of the revised building plan proposal at its meeting held on September 04, 2020, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on December 22, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-14122250015 dated 28.12.2022 and observations/recommendations given by the concerned local body i.e., NDMC in part ‘B’ & ‘C’ Proforma. Based on the replies submitted, observations/recommendations received and the revised submission made, the proposal for NOC for Completion is found acceptable.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DDA (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout plan of the Mangalam Place District Centre at its meeting held on October 31, 2001.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal in respect of the Commercial Complex at Mangalam Place District Centre at its meeting held on November 03, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plan proposal in respect of the Commercial Complex received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-01112222064 dated 07.11.2022. Based on the replies submitted 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) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

b) All water tanks, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, DG set, DG exhaust pipes, 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.

Building plan proposal in respect of Motel Building on Khasra No. 554, 555, 571/1, 577/2/1, 578/1/1, 578/2/1, 591, 592/1, 592/2, 593/1, 593/2, 565 Min, 577/1/1, 580/1, 580/2, 581, 571/2, 577/1/2, 577/2/2, 578/1/2, 578/2/2, 578/4 at Village Satbari. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not accept the concept of the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on December 29, 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 previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-22122227057 dated 03.01.2023. Based on the replies submitted and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that only two sides of 3D views have been submitted. All four sides of 3D views with better viewing angles (including areas covering ramps to the basement, public interface areas, birds-eye views and night-time views (to understand the lighting mechanism better)) shall be submitted for its judicious consideration.

b) Also, since the proposal is at the conceptual stage, the Commission intended to examine the proposal in conjunction with the surrounding facilities, therefore, 3D views of the site shall be superimposed with the existing context of the surroundings including road networks, structures around the site, for better understanding of the proposal in the actual environment to make it clearer.

c) The quality of elevations and sections provided be presented with clarity and appropriate details showing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms, plumbing details etc. for a better understanding of the proposal.

d) The three huge projections envisaged above at the terrace level of the different blocks shall be elucidated with appropriate detailed drawings including the application of materials it's fixing, maintenance aspects etc. Also, the skin sections (in detail) shall be submitted to understand the elevation of the façade with materials for its judicious consideration by the Commission.

e) The design of the gate and the boundary wall would have a bearing on the overall aesthetics of the complex; thus, it needs to be detailed sufficiently (including 3D views (night time as well), plans, elevations, sections etc.) and complete in all respect shall be provided including gate/grill detail, material applications etc. for the consideration of the Commission.

f) Air-conditioning mechanism of the building is not clear, the same shall be elucidated with its location, and the appropriate treatments used for its concealment & screening. Also, it shall be ensured that there is no leakage from the AC units causing deterioration of spaces (indoor and outdoor).

g) The design scheme to screen the DG set and its exhaust pipes shall be elucidated appropriately with detailed drawings/3D views/other relevant details etc. using suitable architectural mechanisms so as not to remain visible, and mar the aesthetics of the complex.

h) Provisions of F & B, banquets, dining facilities etc., have been envisaged in the Commercial block but their capacity and the functional furniture layout are not submitted to understand their functioning judiciously, the same shall be elucidated with a solid waste management plan for the waste disposal (dry/wet food waste etc.).

i) Considering the area of the plot, provisions of the public toilet etc. shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc. and its detailed drawings (including screening mechanism, elevations, sections, 3D views, etc.) shall be submitted for the consideration of the Commission as these elements could have a bearing on the overall visual, urban, and aesthetic quality of the complex.

j) The roof surfaces shall be utilised to their optimum by installing solar panels which would help reduce carbon footprint. Also, 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.

k) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, solar panels, water tanks 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. In view of the insufficient information provided to the Commission, the proposal could not be appreciated fully by the Commission.
5. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise compliance & reply.

Building plan proposal in respect of Plot no. 2209, Kucha Alam Chand, Kinari Bazar, Chandni Chowk. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration of the Commission.
2. The building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Semi-circular arch in stone design provided over windows shall be replaced with a flat one for better aesthetics.

b) All service equipment, water tanks, 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.

c) The 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.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal (2B+LG+UG+2floors) at its meeting held on July 04, 2005, and specific observations were given. The Commission accepted the proposal for NOC for Completion at its meeting held on January 14, 2009.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on December 29, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations (additions to existing LG+UG+2 floors, proposed third floor and MLCP) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-27122255085 dated 03.01.2023. Based on the replies submitted and the revised 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 and cover the existing built construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) The 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.

c) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, DG set, DG exhaust pipes 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 proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (formal/completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal for addition/alteration at its meeting held on December 01, 2022, specific observations were given.
4. Now, the building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-30112255075 dated 07.12.2022, 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 discussion held (online) 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 no:  OL-30112255075 dated 07.12.2022 has been given.

b) Inconsistencies have been observed in the submission, 3D views of the front setback (especially the porches above the drop-off points, and roads all around the proposed building) do not match with the subsequent plans. Also, the scale, proportion of the layout plan and 3D views submitted do not match. The proposal submitted at the formal stage needs to be correlated with each other and the coordinated submission (plans/elevations/sections/3D views etc.) shall be submitted for judicious consideration of the Commission.

c) The design of the gate and the boundary wall would have a bearing on the overall aesthetics of the complex; thus, it needs to be detailed sufficiently (including 3D views (night time as well), plans, elevations, sections etc.) and complete in all respect shall be provided including gate/grill detail, material applications etc. for the consideration of the Commission.

d) Air-conditioning mechanism of the building is not clear, the same shall be elucidated with its location, and the appropriate treatments used for its concealment & screening. Also, it shall be ensured that there is no leakage from the AC units causing deterioration of spaces (indoor and outdoor).

e) The design scheme to screen the DG set and its exhaust pipes shall be elucidated appropriately with drawings/3D views/other relevant details etc. using suitable architectural mechanisms so as not to remain visible, and mar the aesthetics of the complex.

f) A lot of waste (dry and wet, food items, etc.) is supposed to be generated in the complex, and a detailed solid waste management plan proposal along with its location on the site plan be submitted.

g) 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.

h) The location of the DG Set, DG exhaust pipes etc. shall be provided. All service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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.

5. In view of the insufficient information provided to the Commission, the proposal could not be appreciated judiciously by the Commission.
6. The architect is advised to adhere to the above observations of the Commission and furnish a pointwise compliance & reply.