1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect ( online ) for consideration of the Commission.
2. The Layout and Building plans proposal at conceptual stage received (online) was scrutinised and following observations were given:
A. Site planning/Zoning:
a. The site is connected/surrounded by many important roads and it would draw impact of the surrounding landuses. A detailed survey plan to be submitted showing the existing site conditions, particularly the trees. The same needs to be made and superimposed on the existing site along with the proposed layout for a clear and better understanding of the proposal.
b. The current layout planning seems to portray wastage of spaces and does not consolidate use zones for efficient circulation. All the residential towers shall be such designed that they are not scattered and located close to each other. This would ensure cohesiveness in the design. Also, the cost of services/utilities in the site would decrease due to the close placement of the building footprints. A clear zoning plan is to be shown.
c. Amenities like Clubhouse, which would be shared facilities, can be located centrally in the design to ensure its equitable use by all users. The same to be linked by appropriate pedestrian pathways.
d. An appropriate number of sections through end to end of the proposal scheme be submitted for better understanding of the overall scheme clearly showing the architectural elements, sun shading mechanisms etc.
B. Tower A:
a. Parking in stilts to be removed and relocated elsewhere ( basement or consolidated MLCP for all use zones ). The stilts can then be used as community spaces for residents, and for facilities including toilets for guards and servants.
C. Tower B :
a. Parking in stilts to be removed and relocated elsewhere (basement or consolidated MLCP for all use zones). The stilts can then be used as community spaces for residents, and for facilities including toilets for guards and servants.
b. The uses on 22nd floor are not understood as there is no clear layout plan for furniture. The same needs to be detailed to explain functionality of these spaces.
c. The kitchen on the 23rd to 28th floor is designed away from the servant’s quarters. They both are suggested to be located closely to ensure servicing and functionality.
D. EWS Block:
a. The location of the EWS tower is suggested to be relocated to the future development area (plot area 3381sqm.).
b. No direct ventilation to the rooms, it is borrowed from balcony. This is not appreciable and the dwelling unit to be revised appropriately.
E. Stabling Yard:
a. It was observed that a ramp is provided to access the parking on +227.1 Level. It is suggested that the parking be accommodated in basement or MLCP provisions (wherein all the current and future requirements of the project can be accommodated) shall be explored thereby minimising the need of the ramp. This would ensure economics and effective maintenance of the parking.
F. General Comments:
a. The architectural vocabulary of all the residential towers to be same to maintain harmony and the aesthetics of the complex. Currently, the towers have different vocabulary.
b. The presence of plumbing pipes etc. on the façade would impact the overall aesthetic, environmental, and visual quality of the complex. Location of plumbing shafts, openings, accessibility, screening mechanism for the pipes etc. shall be treated appropriately, along with appropriate means of screening in the design at this stage itself. It needs to be marked on the plans/elevations/3D views etc.as appropriate. A coherent scheme shall be prepared and submitted.
c. The provision of air-conditioning units on the façade is not given in the proposal ( drawings/3d views ). The air-conditioners would be an eye-sore to the building façade. To avoid the same, provision shall be made in the design to accommodate the outdoor units, at this stage, so as not to mar the aesthetics.
d. The balconies need to be screened appropriately along with the provision of screening of drying clothes. Innovative architectural features and materials shall screen dish antennas in the balconies.
e. Skin sections (in detail) shall be submitted to understand the elevation of the façade with materials.
f. It has been observed that a large chunk of space is available on the rooftops, the same can be utilised appropriately for the installation of solar panels above. Utilities to be reflected in the 3D views as well as the drawings wherever provided.
g. The building complex having tall towers should have interesting elements to mark the top and ensure aesthetics and appropriate built form.
h. The parking for Tower A, B, C and D to be consolidated together ( by exploring MLCP etc. ) to ensure space optimisation.
i. Surface and road network to be minimised to reduce heat island effect. Also site to be appropriately landscaped and seamless pedestrian connections to be ensured.
j. North in the drawings seems to be inappropriate at places. It shall be ensured that it is marked correctly for proper orientation.
k. The sustainability features shall be highlighted in the design. Sustainability features in terms of point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on DUAC website at www.duac.org shall also be incorporated appropriately in the design proposal and shown in the relevant drawings.
l. All service equipment at the terrace should be camouflaged appropriately ( in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA ( Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval ) available on DUAC website at www.duac.org. using the same architectural elements/materials used in the elevations.
3. The architect was advised to adhere to the above observations and furnish a pointwise incorporation/reply.