1. Action Taken Reports regarding the Minutes of the 1758th meeting held on 02.05.2024 were discussed.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on March 28, 2024, and April 18, 2024 respectively. And the concept of the building plans proposal was not accepted by the Commission at its meeting held on April 25, 2024, specific observations were made.
3. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of first, second, and third floor above an existing ground floor) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Conceptually Unsuitable Letter No.: OL-22042427016 dated April 29, 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 discussion held (online), and 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) In terms of the previous observations of the Commission Communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-22042427016 dated April 29, 2024, unsatisfactory compliances for the same has been given.

c) Discrepancies have been noted in the submission received at the formal stage. The existing 3D views do not align with the ground floor plans; specifically, the right-hand corner of the building is depicted as a flush façade in the 3D views, while the floor plan shows it as recessed, leading to a mismatch in the submission. The floor plans and 3D views need to be coordinated and resubmitted to ensure clarity.

d) Given that the proposal involves additions and alterations (specifically, the addition of the first, second, and third floors) to what appears to be an old ground floor construction, the new structure must be designed to withstand weather effects and impacts from calamities such as earthquakes. As this is an additional structure on an existing superstructure, it must be firmly braced to ensure it does not compromise the safety of the original building.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage lacks adequate compliances on its previous observations. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above, including those communicated via DUAC Observation Letter No.: OL-22042427016 dated April 29, 2024. 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 approved the layout and buildings plan proposal at its meeting held on September 12, 2019.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised, and a detailed discussion was held with the architect, who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission, and also provided additional updated photographs of the complex covering all the areas. Based on the submission made for NOC for completion including drawings/documentations/photographs of the complex, the proposal for NOC for Completion is found to be accepted.

1. The East-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not accept the building plans proposal (Conceptual) at its meeting held on May 15, 1997, where specific observations were made.
3. The building plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The design proposal incorporates provisions for double & triple stack parking arrangements to meet the necessary parking requirements. The architect or proponent to ensure the proper implementation of these arrangements on-site, which will be examined during the proposal's completion stage. It is importance that all parking arrangements adhere to the relevant rules, regulations, guidelines, and other applicable requirements.

b) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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 water tanks, rainwater pipes, plumbing pipes, DG Set, DG exhaust 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 North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on October 29, 2018 and May 02, 2024, respectively, specific observations were made.
3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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, rainwater pipes, plumbing pipes, DG Set, DG exhaust 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 SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the Redevelopment of WHO-SEARO building plans proposal at its meeting held on August 11, 2018 and specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal for the additions and alteration (addition of Service Block) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinized. The Commission intended to discuss the proposal with the architect, but the architect was not available for discussion. Based on the submission made and the absence of online discussion, 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) It was noted that the proposal includes the addition of a service block, but its design scheme is not comprehensible. The proposed service block area should be detailed with large-scale drawings, including plans, elevations, sections, and 3D views (showing the proposed façade materials). These documents need to be coordinated and resubmitted to ensure clarity in the submission.

c) A discrepancy was observed in the submission: the meter and isolator panel room shown on the sheet titled "Site/Landscape Plan" is missing from the ground floor plan.

d) 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.

e) All water tanks, rainwater pipes, plumbing pipes, service equipment, Dg Set, DG exhaust pipes, 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.

4. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above. 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 DDA forwarded the proposal (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal during its meeting on September 23, 1994. Additionally, the proposal for additions and alterations received approval at the meeting held on August 01, 2019, with specific observations provided. However, there is no record of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for completion in the Commission's available records.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on November 16, 2023 and specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the Completion stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: F. No. 48(25)/2023-DUAC, OL-10112348025 dated November 21, 2023 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 submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:  

a) In terms of the previous observations of the Commission Communicated vide DUAC letter no: 48(25)/2023-DUAC, OL-10112348025 dated November 21, 2023, unsatisfactory compliances for the same has been given.

b) The Commission observed that the submission is for NOC for completion, but the site photographs reveal exposed rainwater pipes, outdoor air conditioning units, and temporary coverings that detract from the visual, urban aesthetics of the building façade. It was also observed that only a few building blocks have been photographed, proposal being at the Completion stage need to submit all annotated photographs of the building block from all sides for the review of the Commission.

c) In one of the responses to the Commission's prior observations, the architect has indicated that:

“…….All temporary coverings/extension shall be removed in future…”

Given that the proposal is at the completion stage, the Commission cannot accept the architect's response. The Commission reiterated its earlier observation that:

“……All temporary coverings/extensions must be removed, and exposed rainwater pipes be screened….”

d) The site photographs reveal that balcony railings are missing in many areas, indicating the incomplete state of the site for the proposal received at completion stage.

e) The Commission stressed that in order to obtain the NOC for completion, the building must adequately screen all exposed pipes, designate screened spaces for outdoor air conditioning units, and remove all temporary coverings from the balconies.

5. In view of the inadequate compliances to its previous observations, the proposal for completion could not be appreciated by the Commission. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above including communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: 48(25)/2023-DUAC, OL-10112348025 dated November 21, 2023. 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 DDA forwarded the proposal (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal during its meeting on September 23, 1994. Additionally, the proposal for additions and alterations received approval at the meeting held on August 01, 2019, with specific observations provided. However, there is no record of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for completion in the Commission's available records.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on December 14, 2023 and specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (online) at the Completion stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: F. No. 48(26)/2023-DUAC, OL-05122348026 dated 18.12.2023 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 submission made, the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) In terms of the previous observations of the Commission Communicated vide DUAC letter no: F. No. 48(26)/2023-DUAC, OL-05122348026 dated 18.12.2023, unsatisfactory compliances for the same has been given.

b) The Commission observed that the submission is for NOC for completion, but the site photographs reveal exposed rainwater pipes, outdoor air conditioning units, and temporary coverings that detract from the aesthetics of the building façade. It was also observed that only a few building blocks have been photographed, proposal being at the Completion stage need to submit all annotated photographs of the building block from all sides for the review of the Commission.

c) In one of the responses to the Commission's prior observations, the architect has indicated that:

“…….All temporary coverings/extension shall be removed in future…”

Given that the proposal is at the completion stage, the Commission cannot accept the architect's response. The Commission reiterated its earlier observation that:

“……All temporary coverings/extensions must be removed, and exposed rainwater pipes be screened….”

d) The site photographs reveal that balcony railings are missing in many areas, and construction materials lying scattered all-around indicating the incomplete state of the site for the proposal received at completion stage.

e) The Commission stressed that in order to obtain the NOC for completion, the building must adequately screen all exposed pipes, designate screened spaces for outdoor air conditioning units, and remove all temporary coverings from the balconies.

5. In view of the inadequate compliances to its previous observations, the proposal for completion could not be appreciated by the Commission. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above including communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: 48(26)/2023-DUAC, OL-05122348026 dated 18.12.2023. 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 DDA forwarded the proposal (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting held on May 31, 2002 and subsequently accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting held on February 11, 2009.
3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (extension of bedroom, kitchen and addition of servant room, toilet and balconies) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised 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 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 Commission observed that the proposal involves additions/alterations, including an increase in the FAR, which consequently necessitates additional car parking requirements. However, the architect has not adequately addressed this aspect. A detailed parking plan is required, including the marking of the number of cars, car movement patterns, etc. The layout plan should clearly depict existing parking spaces and proposed additional parking spaces resulting from the increased FAR, with a clear bifurcation between the two.

c) It was noted that all peripheral open/ vehicular movement spaces have been calculated to meet the necessary parking requirements. The Commission advises against considering peripheral open/ vehicular movement spaces as part of ECS calculations for car parking. These areas should remain free from all vehicular parking requirements and reserved for emergency purposes. All parking provisions must comply with all applicable norms, guidelines, regulations, etc.

d) A consolidated scheme for screening of services including exposed rainwater pipes, outdoor air conditioning units and plumbing shaft to be shown in the respective drawings and details to explain the screening mechanism for the review of the Commission.

e) The material composition of the screening mechanism should be elucidated with details with clear annotations regarding the materials used in the grills of the screening on the 3D views to provide a better understanding of the scheme.

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 water tanks, plumbing pipes, rainwater 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.

4. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above. 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.

Building plans proposal in respect of demolition and reconstruction of Nursery school-Nutan Vidya Mandir, A.G.C.R. Enclave, Delhi. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (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 plan proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinized, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The proposal shows absence of elevator or ramp to access the upper floors, which makes the building unfriendly for differently abled students. An elevator to be provided in the design scheme to ensure the building is friendly for all users. The proposal may be resubmitted after incorporating these suggestions for the review of the Commission.

b) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c) 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.

d) 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. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above. 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.
    

Building plans proposal in respect of Commercial/residential building at 4294-95, Gali no. 3, Ansari Road, Daryaganj. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the Commission's available record. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on March 21, 2024 and April 18, 2024 respectively, where specific observations were made. 
3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinized along with the replies submitted by the architect to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No.: F. No. 55(85)/2024-DUAC, OL-12042455085 dated April 23, 2024. Based on the previous observations made, replies submitted, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) In terms of the previous observations of the Commission Communicated vide DUAC letter no: F. No. 55(85)/2024-DUAC, OL-12042455085 dated April 23, 2024, unsatisfactory compliances for the same has been given.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal has undergone review thrice without significant adherence to its previous observations, which is not appreciated. The architect is advised to address all observations and make necessary modifications in the submission to ensure a judicious by the Commission.

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 water tanks, rainwater 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.

4. In view of the inadequate compliances to its previous observations, the proposal could not be appreciated by the Commission. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above including communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: 55(85)/2024-DUAC, OL-12042455085 dated April 23, 2024. 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.
    

Building plans proposal in respect of Commercial building on plot no. 4296-97, Gali no. 3, Ansari Road, Daryaganj. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the Commission's available record. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on March 14, 2024 and April 18, 2024 respectively, where specific observations were made.
3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No.: F. No. 55(84)/2024-DUAC, OL-12042455084 dated April 23, 2024. Based on the previous observations made, replies submitted, and the revised submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) In terms of the previous observations of the Commission Communicated vide DUAC letter no: F. No. 55(84)/2024-DUAC, OL-12042455084 dated April 23, 2024, unsatisfactory compliances for the same has been given.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal has undergone review thrice without significant adherence to its previous observations, which is not appreciated. The architect is advised to address all observations and make necessary modifications in the submission to ensure a judicious by the Commission.

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 water tanks, rainwater 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.

4. In view of the inadequate compliances to its previous observations, the proposal could not be appreciated by the Commission. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above including communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: F. No. 55(84)/2024-DUAC, OL-12042455084 dated April 23, 2024. 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.

Building plans proposal in respect of Residential building at 2793-2794, part, Mohalla Niyaariyan, G.B. Road, Delhi – 110006. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the Commission's available record. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on April 05, 2024 and did not accept the concept of the building plans proposal at its meeting held on April 25, 2024, specific observations were made. 
3. The building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Conceptually Unsuitable Letter No.: OL-20042427017 dated April 29, 2024. Based on the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) In terms of the previous observations of the Commission Communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-20042427017 dated April 29, 2024, unsatisfactory compliances for the same has been given.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal has undergone review thrice without significant adherence to its previous observations, which is not appreciated. The architect is advised to address all observations and make necessary modifications in the submission to ensure a judicious by the Commission.

c) 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.

d) All service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, 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.

4. The Architect is advised to address all the Commission's observations above, including those communicated via DUAC Observation Letter No.: OL-20042427017 dated April 29, 2024. 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.